Nutter wins Bolivia Election

[ag]

Well that dampened my enthusiasm. But if someone doesn't like Fox, and PRD/Obrador have the problems you mentioned, then isn't the only alternative the PRI? Just b/c someone doesn't like PAN doesn't mean they support the return of decades of corruption. Is PRD a good choice for liberals besides Obrador?

PAN's Calderon is, actually, not much associated with Fox: in fact, Fox fired him from the government when he declared his intentions to run for presidency. Of course, he is simply a more traditional panista than Fox, so if you don't like PAN (in particular, their clericalism), you'd hate Calderon more than you'd hate Fox.  At the very least, he is the only candidate in this campaign who is personally clean (at least, nobody has dug anything on him so far, despite a lifetime in politics). I guess, it helps to be personally well-off  and popular among the equally well-off party rank-and-file: you don't have to steal neither for personal benefit, nor to acquire influence.  Personal disclosure: except for his Catholicism, he fits me ideologically quite nicely, so I won't have much of a problem voting for him (hey, I actually have a friend who has a friend who is a good friend of his - that's how things are done in Mexico!). His (and his party's) problem is: it's bad to be a lilly white organization in a country like Mexico.

As for "liberals", I prefer the international/European definition of the word (as in "neoliberal"), but I understand that you mean something else (I'd call it "leftist" - though, keep in mind, that  comparisons with the US are dangerous: even those you consider to be on the left wing of the Democratic party in the US would be highly uncomfortable among the Latin American left in terms of economic policies, and even some of the Republicans would find many of the Latin American leftists to be strangely socially conservative).  In this sense, the left wing of PRI and the bulk of PRD that derives from the early split in PRI are largely indistinguishable (and, given the demise of the "neo-liberal" wing of the PRI after the last time election loss, the left wing of PRI is the only part of that party that cares about policies and not just about getting rich through government). Further to the left are the elements of the PRD that come from the old Communist Party (like the current acting Mexico City mayor Encinas), but they generally keep their mouths shut, not to embarass their colleagues.  Still, you'd probably find the mainstream PRD (and their "moral leader" Lazaor Cardenas) the most appealing.  In fact, however much I dislike Cardenas's ideology, I wouldn't be afraid to trust him the country of 6 years: he is clean and responsible, and getting through major reforms in any direction in Mexico is impossible anyway.  But he has been outmaneuvred by AMLO and is not running this time (as I mentioned elsewhere, his endorsement of Obrador has been less than ringing: he is said to have told to his son, who happens to be the Governor of Michoacan State, to announce that supports the party candiddate - name not mentioned - and he might have repeated the same in a closed meeting of party activists; he's been careful not to say this in public).

A more interesting candidate could have been Jorge Casta?eda, Fox's former Foreign Secretary. His roots are on the left - the sane (anti-Castro) left - but he was trying to run as a modern candidate for thinking Mexicans (one of my best students in recent years has been active in his campaign). Unfortunately, rather than getting a minor party nomination (when he started, there was still time to create a midget party of his own), he persists in a quixotic campaign to force the Electoral Commission to register himself as an independent, even though the Electoral Code is explicit that only party candidates are allowed. In the process, his credibility has been badly hit, and  even if he is somehow registered, he won't matter.

[the sweetness of chai and the palliative effects of facts]

You make Obrador sound a lot like Helmut Kohl.

I don't think Herr Kohl was going around claiming that every time anyone coughs in his direction it is a "criminal plot against my life", or am I wrong?

No, his paranoia is of a more eccentric type. Anytime somebody breathes in his presence it is an attack on his role in future history books.

On the second count (money problems) - sure.  But the difference is that Mexican institutions are a lot more fragile than German, so they can't handle as much.

That was the point I was referring to ... especially the "doesn't spend any of his dirty money on himself, just uses it for a vast patronage machine" part.

[opebo]

I'll just translate the choice bits...
Bolivia's New President calls Bush "Terrorist"

(...) "The only terrorist I know is Bush. His military interventions, such as in Iraq, that's state terrorism," Morales told Al-Jazeera. "Today in Bolivia and all over Latin America, the people are not fighting* imperialism anymore, but imperialism is still fighting against the people, using military interventions [the US hasn't intervened militarily in Latin America since Haiti, and Panama before that ] and military bases."

* as in, armed fighting. Can't be bothered with a stylish translation.

Well, what is wrong with that statement?  It is quite accurate.

[the sweetness of chai and the palliative effects of facts]

It's not mentioned in polite conversation, Opebo.

[the sweetness of chai and the palliative effects of facts]

Just thought I'd check regional polarization levels.

By the way, the Electoral Commission says 33.4% of precincts have reported and 29.5% of all eligible voters have voted in them - we're either looking at an extremely high turnout, or the city precincts are much larger and have been counted first.

Morales is at 48.3%, the Conservative guy at 34.7%.

Chuquisaqua (214K registered voters) 51.7% - 35.9% with 48.0% of precincts reporting
La Paz (1.18 mio) 66.1 - 19.1 with 31.0
Cochabamba (649K) 47.1 - 39.9 with 32.1
Oruro (194K) 55.1 - 32.2 with 33.0
Potosí (282K) 49.7 - 36.7 with 23.9
Tarija (178K) 28.9 - 49.3 with 65.6
Santa Cruz (811K) 28.9 - 46.3 with 33.5
Beni (135K) 13.1 (coming third) - 56.3 with just 6.8
Pando (26K) 25.1 - 45.6 with 54.1

Update:
Morales at 54.1%, his opponent at 28.6%.
96.8% of precincts have reported, and 82.3% of registered voters have voted in them.

By province-
Chuquisaqua 55.1 - 31.4 (85.1)
La Paz 66.8 - 18.1 (99.5)
Cochabamba 64.8 - 25.1 (complete)
Oruro 62.6 - 25.0 (99.5)
Potosí 57.1 - 26.3 (95.9)
Tarija 31.6 - 45.3 (complete)
Santa Cruz 32.9 - 42.2 (95.7)
Beni 15.7 (third) - 47.4 (81.2). Second place goes to MNR, 30.0% (nationally fourth, 6.2%)
Pando 20.9 (third) - 45.2 (complete). Second place goes to Union Nacional, 23.2% (nationally third, 7.8%)

[YoMartin]

Evo Morales´ victory is certainly a victory for the left, but I would say the main issue there is not ideology but ethnicity. His (long and boring) speech the election night showed Evo is more about non-whites reaching power for the first time than for a particular set of policies. He already said he will include all ethnic groups (aymara, quechua and white) in his cabinet, because he realises there is no way he will stay in power without white-middle class support.

Regarding his policies, I think we will indeed become much more moderate than while he was in opposition. However, that could cause him trouble with the extreme left (and extreme anti-white quechua leader Quispe), so I think we will have a hard time running the country. Still, I think (right wing) Quiroga would have a much harder time. Sometimes only left parties can do (not so) left things in government...

[Kevin]

Can you say Noriega?

[the sweetness of chai and the palliative effects of facts]

Evo Morales´ victory is certainly a victory for the left, but I would say the main issue there is not ideology but ethnicity. His (long and boring) speech the election night showed Evo is more about non-whites reaching power for the first time than for a particular set of policies. He already said he will include all ethnic groups (aymara, quechua and white) in his cabinet, because he realises there is no way he will stay in power without white-middle class support.

Regarding his policies, I think we will indeed become much more moderate than while he was in opposition. However, that could cause him trouble with the extreme left (and extreme anti-white quechua leader Quispe), so I think we will have a hard time running the country. Still, I think (right wing) Quiroga would have a much harder time. Sometimes only left parties can do (not so) left things in government...

Yeah, Quispe is the extremist to Morales' moderate.
I noticed Quispe ran again but fared far far worse than before. He polled 8% last time, something like 1% this time.

[the sweetness of chai and the palliative effects of facts]

Can you say Noriega?

Yes, I can, but I don't see any connection.

Noriega was a US installed dictator who went haywire and was disposed by his masters.
Morales is a democratically elected president who came into office on a wave (among other things) of antiamerican feeling.

[ag]

One thing should be made clear: it is hard to imagine the set of circumstances in which an attempt to depose the guy from the outside would not be a disaster for all sides involved. Remember Guatemala's Arbenz and the decades of civil war that eventually followed.  For now, he is elected for a fixed term and constitutionally constrained. If he tries to remove those constraints through a self-coup, it should still be the matter for the Bolivians to resolve, unless something outright extreme happens (e.g., he invades Chile, or something equally crazy).

[the sweetness of chai and the palliative effects of facts]

Oh yeah right, that issue. I'd totally forgotten about that.
Say, IIRC Peru lost territory to Chile around then as well. Is this still an issue in Peru too?

[ag]

Oh yeah right, that issue. I'd totally forgotten about that.
Say, IIRC Peru lost territory to Chile around then as well. Is this still an issue in Peru too?

Of course it is. Peruvians hate Chileans passionately.  A thoughtless word from any Chilean, in government or otherwise, is enough to cause a nasty international scandal, since in Peru anything will be taken as a  mortal insult which can't be atoned for.  The fact that Chile is now the richest country in the region is enough of an insult by itself.

[YoMartin]

Yes, it´s still an issue in Peru. In fact, just weeks ago the peruvian congress passed a law (unanimously) redrawing its maritime boundary with Chile. I don´t know if that law has any real effect or it´s just a symbolic statement, but it shows that the dispute still exists. Peru also opposes giving Bolivia access to the Pacific. Ecuador, which has its own conflicts with Peru, backs Chile in the issue. As you can see, nationalist claims are starting to get serious...

[the sweetness of chai and the palliative effects of facts]

Peru also opposes giving Bolivia access to the Pacific.

Why is that? Shouldn't they be making joint cause in trying to get the ancient boundaries back?

[Jens]

Peru also opposes giving Bolivia access toPacific.

Why is that? Shouldn't they be making joint cause in trying to get the ancient boundaries back?

Peru and Bolivia also has their boundary disputes and I'm pretty that the Bolivians hasn't forgotten that they where under Peru for a while. - And hey, we've got a better claim for Holstein that Bolivia has for the Atacama area;)