Via the NYT: Leftist Predicts Unrest Without Complete Recount of Mexican Election
While the announced winner of last Sunday’s presidential election, Felipe Calderón, kept a low profile on Saturday, his leftist rival led a rally of at least 150,000 people, charged the polling had been marred by fraud and suggested there would be civil unrest without a vote-by-vote recount.“If there is not democracy, there will be instability,” said the rival, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, at a news conference just hours before he addressed his angry and defiant supporters in Mexico City’s central plaza.
As Matthew Shugart has noted, AMLO has a political need to protest this vote, yet he also has sufficient incentives to not take this too far, as he has to be aware that he will have another shot (and a very good one) at the presidency in 2024. (For those unfamiliar with Mexican politics, the president serves a single six-year term without any chance of re-election).
Still, one would like to think that there is a better rhetorical way to deal with the closeness of the election than to start talking about fraud and unrest. It strikes me as irresponsible to cast doubt on the overall system unless one has very strong evidence to suggest such fraud exists. Further, to suggest unrest in the same speech as the strength of democracy strikes me as incompatible. Of course, to be fair, he did state the following:
“Let it be clear, ” he said. “This is a peaceful movement, and we will never fall for the provocations of our adversaries.”
I remain of the mind that this election underscores the problem with plurality elections for presidents in general, and especially in a situation in which a multi-party system exists. Matthew has suggested in a comment to a post below that he is unconvinced of the wisdom of a move to a two-round system in Mexico, partially on the predicate that it would put the PRI in the position to be a kingmaker. I assume by this he means that even if the PRI is the third-place party, they would be in the position to throw support to either the PAN or PRD in the second round. I suppose that utilizing IRV would diminish the ability of the PRI to influence the process.
I do understand, and share, the concern about anything that would enhance the PRI’s power. Still, it would seem that the problem associated with Presidents who win by bare margins and with small pluralities are more significant than a system that might enhance the influence of the PRI.
One also wonders if some sort of two-round process might not encourage new party formation, hence changing the calculus. Or, at least, adaptation of the existing parties would be expected.
Now, given that Matthew is currently co-editing a book on Mexican elections, he has thought about this issue more than I have, so I await his explanation/prescription.
