|
I don't think but that there's
any question that Lopez Obrador won the
elections and there is now an active effort to steal them.
The reason I know is because I saw the TV
coverage Sunday night. And when the precincts closed and it came time
to announce the results of the exit polls, something bizarre happened.
Unlike in the U.S. where there is only one
exit poll, and all the networks
agree to lie about it and present it as their very own exit poll, the
two
major TV networks and several other large news organizations all
commissioned exit polls by different polling organizations. As did the
major
parties.
So at the appointed time, the bigfoot anchors
went on the air saying they
had the exit poll results in hand and the difference between the two
leading
contenders was too close to call. They reiterated, the numbers obtained
by
the two leading candidates were within the plus/minus 1.6% statistical
error
of these polls, the election was extremely tight, etc.
And I hit the web pages of the others that
sponsored exit polls, only to
find the same response. "Too close to call."
BUT NO ONE WAS OFFERING THE ACTUAL EXIT POLL
NUMBERS OR PERCENTS. Not
for President.
Now, each one of these news and partisan
organizations had spent tens of
thousands of dollars or more doing the exit polls. It at least the case
of
the news organizations, their reasons for doing this were competitive.
Yet
here they are, and they ALL reach the SAME IDENTICAL "civic minded"
position: they're going to flush the exit poll money down the toilet
and
just say too close to call.
What this means is there was a prior arrangement
between the heads of these
news organizations --tacit or explicit-- to withhold the information
from
the people. Because it may be that one exit poll showing a given candidate
ahead, but not with numbers that are statistically significant, and
even
though usually it is right, according to statistical science, you really
can't say more than "too close to call."
However if a candidate comes out ahead in
all four or five independent exit
polls, that is a very strong statement of likelihood that this candidate
had
more people coming out to vote for him. Because statistical science
says
*normally* the poll is right on the money, within a few tenths of a
percent,
and it is only an outlying rare bird, one case out of 20, where the
poll is
off by the "full" margin of error.
Lopez Obrador said, and no one disputed it,
that the majority of exit polls
showed him ahead. If that were the case, that would explain why the
agreement to suppress the numbers stuck. If the results had been pro-PAN
mostly, there would have been no reason or motive to stick with the
agreement to suppress, since the bourgeoisie was pro-PAN and freedom
of the
press belongs to those who own the press.
But if the numbers favored AMLO, it's an
entirely different matter, even if
you *don't* assume, as I do, that of course the media barons are at
the
heart of the election-stealing conspiracy. (I assume that for reasons
too
numerous to mention but mostly because I've been a hack for 35 years,
two
decades of that in major corporate news organizations, and intimately
involved in organizing election coverage. And I'm an intellectually
arrogant
SOB and any other explanation for what I've seen, frankly, insults my
intelligence. And I don't care how much you say it's a chicken with
severe
arthritis and laryngitis: it's a goddamn duck, and any idiot willing
to open
their eyes can see it).
Putting together the non-information from
the exit polls with the data
Yoshie offers via translation on MR zine we have the following picture.
Before the election AMLO was leading. On election day exit polls suggested
AMLO would win. In the counting, Calderon is ahead, but about 10% or
more of
the votes are MIA (that's Missing In Action, not Marxist Internet Archive).
Given how ... phlegmatic AMLO has been about
the whole thing, most people in
Mexico now assume Calderon won. But if he did win these elections, he
did so
the old-fashioned way: he stole them.
Joaquín
|
