A presidential election too close to call. Rumors of voting irregularities. Mandated recounts while the populace waits to find out who their next leader will be. A court decision issued to determine the winner. Sound vaguely familiar? Although frequently compared to Bush v. Gore and the 2000 election debacle, the fallout from the 2006 Mexican general election is an attention-grabbing event in its own right.
Since the July 2 vote, millions of people have protested conservative candidate Felipe Calderon’s supposed victory. On several occasions, civil unrest threatened to bring business and government to a halt. For many Mexicans, the future remains uncertain as leftist candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador rejected Tuesday’s court decision awarding Mexico’s presidency to the National Action Party (PAN) and many refuse to recognize Calderon’s legitimacy citing apparent corruption in a number of voting districts.
According to a poll conducted by the conservative newspaper Reforma, 65% of individuals surveyed believed fraud occurred and that there should be a full recount. A full recount did not materialize but a partial one did and Calderon appears to have won by just over half a percentage point (.56%).
Whatever misgivings the citizens of Mexico may have, the rest of the world seems to have at least tacitly accepted Calderon as Mexico’s new president. A White House spokesperson issued a statement congratulating the president-elect and said the US looks forward to “broad, deep and productive” relations with the new administration.
One apt and crucial similarity to America’s situation is that, without question, Mexico’s population is divided down the middle. As a result, Calderon’s immediate goals must include defusing the widespread discontent in order to unify the nation. If he cannot quell tensions, a country deeply in need of progress and reform will remain stuck in a political quagmire.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Just another WordPress weblog