Mexican Conservitive Wins Election

[theraven]

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle....C1-ArticlePage1 (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-07-03T162603Z_01_N28358335_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEXICO-ELECTION.xml&pageNumber=1&imageid=&cap=&sz=13&WTModLoc=NewsArt-C1-ArticlePage1)



Mexico conservative claims win as chaos fears ease
Mon Jul 3, 2006 12:26pm ET162

The official returns and Lopez Obrador's softer tone reduced the risk of a major political crisis of a contested election, and Mexico's financial markets jumped on a wave of investor optimism.

CONGRESS GAINS

Legislative election results from Sunday showed Calderon's party made major gains and would be the largest single party in the next Congress, although it fell short of a majority.

The stock market jumped 3.8 percent in early trade and Mexico's peso currency rose about 1.5 percent.

Mexico's top election official said late on Sunday the race was too close to declare a winner and a recount was needed, but Calderon insisted that was no longer necessary.

With returns in from 96.6 percent of polling stations, the conservative had 36.4 percent support, 1 percentage point ahead of his rival. Lopez Obrador would have to see a dramatic swing in the remaining polling stations to catch up.

what do you think

[chaval]

results arent in till wednesday but Obrador is bad news bear

[R_P_A_S]

this is bullshit. by one fucking present? you kidding me? no way.

[black magick hustla]

the official results arent until wednesday.

also both candidates are fuckfaces

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Agreed. Who cares which representative of the bourgeoisie wins?

[Dean]

I thnk that it's a good step towards freedom to elect somebody who promises to help the poor. A more leftist government will release more leftist propaganda, and encourage more leftism among the populace. A revolution doesn't need to be bloody.

Unfortunately, 1 percent can mean a lot unless this is just a poll.

I of course would have voted Zapatista if I was Mexican... I think they're participating in this election.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

No, they're not. They're calling for a boycott of the vote.

A revolution is a life or death struggle. The capitalists will not give up their control of society peacefuly.

[Guerrilla22]

Calderon hasn't won yet.

[theraven]

not offically he hasn't, but its getting so that few doubt it.

[Guerrilla22]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 04:24 AM
not offically he hasn't, but its getting so that few doubt it.
He can claim what ever he wants, but the results stilll aren't in. My fear is that Obrador will in fact win, but Washington and PAN supporters will try to pull an orange revolution in Mexico.

[theraven]

Originally posted by Guerrilla22+Jul 4 2006, 04:31 AM--> (Guerrilla22 @ Jul 4 2006, 04:31 AM)
[email protected] 4 2006, 04:24 AM
not offically he hasn't, but its getting so that few doubt it.
He can claim what ever he wants, but the results stilll aren't in. My fear is that Obrador will in fact win, but Washington and PAN supporters will try to pull an orange revolution in Mexico. [/b]
well the orange revolution was a good thing....ukraine had its election rigged by the ruskies. but anyway the reason i believe he won is because the election committee had 96% reporting and he was winning by a wide enough margin that it was highly unlikely that orbadar could come back. MY biggest worry is that caludron wins but orbador doesnt' take the hint.

[Guerrilla22]

The orange revolution was the US intervening in the politics of another country yet again. As for the election results, I can't find much about it on US news sites, last I heard it was too close to call.

[theraven]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 05:05 AM
The orange revolution was the US intervening in the politics of another country yet again. As for the election results, I can't find much about it on US news sites, last I heard it was too close to call.
1) the orange revolution was ukrianins protesting a clearly tampered with election. even if the US did do it, they were merely helping democracy a long

2) i posted an article...

[Guerrilla22]

Originally posted by theraven+Jul 4 2006, 05:11 AM--> (theraven @ Jul 4 2006, 05:11 AM)
[email protected] 4 2006, 05:05 AM
The orange revolution was the US intervening in the politics of another country yet again. As for the election results, I can't find much about it on US news sites, last I heard it was too close to call.
1) the orange revolution was ukrianins protesting a clearly tampered with election. even if the US did do it, they were merely helping democracy a long

2) i posted an article... [/b]
Yes, the US has a long history of promoting democracy in other countries, why wouldn't the Ukraine be an exception.

[theraven]

Originally posted by Guerrilla22+Jul 4 2006, 05:21 AM--> (Guerrilla22 @ Jul 4 2006, 05:21 AM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2006, 05:11 AM

[email protected] 4 2006, 05:05 AM
The orange revolution was the US intervening in the politics of another country yet again. As for the election results, I can't find much about it on US news sites, last I heard it was too close to call.
1) the orange revolution was ukrianins protesting a clearly tampered with election. even if the US did do it, they were merely helping democracy a long

2) i posted an article...
Yes, the US has a long history of promoting democracy in other countries, why wouldn't the Ukraine be an exception. [/b]
we have a better one then russia.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

yeah they promote "democracy" when it's convient to them.. but when it's not no problem (ie. criticizing Russia for "lack of democracy" while praising the dictator of Kazakhstan days later: source (http://freepeoplesmovement.org/fp23c.html)).

When it goes against their interests (ie. elections of Ho Chi Minh, Chavez, etc.) look out!

[theraven]

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 4 2006, 06:06 AM
yeah they promote "democracy" when it's convient to them.. but when it's not no problem (ie. criticizing Russia for "lack of democracy" while praising the dictator of Kazakhstan days later: source (http://freepeoplesmovement.org/fp23c.html)).

When it goes against their interests (ie. elections of Ho Chi Minh, Chavez, etc.) look out!
right, but dont' freak out when they do it.

[Zapata]

i dont think you can really say that the orange revolution was an american event. ukrainians protested against elections rigged against yushchenko. but it is clearly true that the us government has intervened for its own interests against democracies. it happened in vietnam, preventing unification and plunging the country into further war, because the us didnt want ho chi minh to be elected. in guatemala, jacobo arbenz was ousted in a cia coup d'etat to be replaced with a miltary junta.
but anyways, much as i love the zapatistas, i think obrador is an excellent candidate. the last thing the impovershed mexicans need is a servant of the rich like calderon. i do not think that obrador is bourgeoisie: "for the good of everyone; the poor come first" he may very well be held back by the upper classes when it comes to actually making reforms, but the fact is hes for the poor, and thats what mexico needs

[theraven]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 07:26 PM
i dont think you can really say that the orange revolution was an american event. ukrainians protested against elections rigged against yushchenko. but it is clearly true that the us government has intervened for its own interests against democracies. it happened in vietnam, preventing unification and plunging the country into further war, because the us didnt want ho chi minh to be elected. in guatemala, jacobo arbenz was ousted in a cia coup d'etat to be replaced with a miltary junta.
but anyways, much as i love the zapatistas, i think obrador is an excellent candidate. the last thing the impovershed mexicans need is a servant of the rich like calderon. i do not think that obrador is bourgeoisie: "for the good of everyone; the poor come first" he may very well be held back by the upper classes when it comes to actually making reforms, but the fact is hes for the poor, and thats what mexico needs
what mexico needs is somebdoy who knows how to encourage buissnes, so they can stop exporting there workers to the US.

[Leo]

"We don't care who gets elected because whoever gets elected will be overthrown" -Subcommandante Marcos

I think it is too soon for you to be happy theraven, you cappy scum...

[theraven]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 6 2006, 08:13 PM
"We don't care who gets elected because whoever gets elected will be overthrown" -Subcommandante Marcos

I think it is too soon for you to be happy theraven, you cappy scum...
yea because that guy has had a lot of succes and overthrowing people:lol:

[Dean]

Originally posted by theraven+Jul 6 2006, 08:21 PM--> (theraven @ Jul 6 2006, 08:21 PM)
Leo [email protected] 6 2006, 08:13 PM
"We don't care who gets elected because whoever gets elected will be overthrown" -Subcommandante Marcos

I think it is too soon for you to be happy theraven, you cappy scum...
yea because that guy has had a lot of succes and overthrowing people:lol: [/b]
Libertarianism and neo-conservatism are incompatible - unless you call yourself a capitalist libertarian, but that's still an oxymoron.

[Delta]

A lot of people misunderstand what libertarianism really developed from. It didn't come from the preschoolish idea of "limited government", but actually came from more of a general freedom for man to realize his true potential. Early libertarian thought often sounds a lot like Marx, ranting against the problems of work being "external to the worker" and such.

[theraven]

Originally posted by Dean+Jul 7 2006, 11:15 PM--> (Dean @ Jul 7 2006, 11:15 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 08:21 PM

Leo [email protected] 6 2006, 08:13 PM
"We don't care who gets elected because whoever gets elected will be overthrown" -Subcommandante Marcos

I think it is too soon for you to be happy theraven, you cappy scum...
yea because that guy has had a lot of succes and overthrowing people:lol:
Libertarianism and neo-conservatism are incompatible - unless you call yourself a capitalist libertarian, but that's still an oxymoron. [/b]
um ok if you say so. it means I have some liberterain ideas..and some neocon ideas.

and delta thats pleseant what libertaieranms started out as, but now its exactly that-minimal governmen.

[Delta]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 03:35 PM

and delta thats pleseant what libertaieranms started out as, but now its exactly that-minimal governmen.
Does it also stand for horrific spelling? :P

Well, the point being that true libertarian thought is very leftist. The point of limited government is that libertarianism is about the true freedom of people, rather than what most people who call themselves libertarian today are- shameless supporters of capitalism and the wealthy at the expense of the people.

[theraven]

Originally posted by Delta+Jul 7 2006, 11:40 PM--> (Delta @ Jul 7 2006, 11:40 PM)
[email protected] 7 2006, 03:35 PM

and delta thats pleseant what libertaieranms started out as, but now its exactly that-minimal governmen.
Does it also stand for horrific spelling? :P

Well, the point being that true libertarian thought is very leftist. The point of limited government is that libertarianism is about the true freedom of people, rather than what most people who call themselves libertarian today are- shameless supporters of capitalism and the wealthy at the expense of the people. [/b]
well if most people today believe it means one thing, rather then its old idea, than thats called evolutiom my dear

[Delta]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 03:43 PM

well if most people today believe it means one thing, rather then its old idea, than thats called evolutiom my dear
So the fact that creationists call themselves creation scientists shows an evolution in the meaning of scientist? Or is it a misapplication of the term?

[Dean]

Actually there are self proclaimed leftist libertarians i\on these forums, and in the EU libertarianism is understood to mean real freedom - that is, communist libertarianism of some sort.

EDIT: Delta, the right to realize man's full potential is exactly what it is. I'm glad you said this because I haven't seen many marxists or communists refer to communism or freedom as such since I read it in the works of Erich Fromm. I think its important to recognize this because it shows that the emancipation of mankind lies also in shruggng off the chains of dogmatism, from religions to cults of personalities.

[theraven]

Originally posted by Delta+Jul 7 2006, 11:51 PM--> (Delta @ Jul 7 2006, 11:51 PM)
[email protected] 7 2006, 03:43 PM

well if most people today believe it means one thing, rather then its old idea, than thats called evolutiom my dear
So the fact that creationists call themselves creation scientists shows an evolution in the meaning of scientist? Or is it a misapplication of the term? [/b]
worst.comparison.ever.