Obrador defiant: ballots found in garbage dump
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.

Candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, courtesy WaPo

While conservative Calderon's lead has shrunk to less than one half of one percent, his campaign is eager to declare the recount over and Calderon the winner. Obrador, the left's candidate in the race, has issued a statement challenging the validity of the outcome as ballot boxes are being found in garbage dumps, including 10 official ballot boxes found in a dump in a poor area, according to the Mexican paper El Universal. Link

This is Mexico's first real test of election safeguards since they were installed roughly a decade ago -- all other presidential elections up until now under the new election scheme have not been close at all.

Echoing jre's post, Instant Runoff Voting would have likely produced a clear majority winner (neither Obrador or Calderon have more than 40% of the vote!). IRV is gaining some serious traction here in the states, with cities like Takoma Park, San Francisco and Burlington having adopted it, and states like Delaware, Maryland and Vermont considering it statewide. Both IRV and PR (proportional representation) may be exotic here, but to much of the rest of the world it's nothing new -- and it works.

Democrats: easiest way to eliminate the "spoiler" role of Greens and progressive Independents? Implement IRV!

Reader Comments
  
Bad idea...
By Superduperficial Jul 6th 2006 at 7:23 pm EDT

Democrats: easiest way to eliminate the "spoiler" role of Greens and progressive Independents? Implement IRV!



That's the problem - IRV might make third parties somewhat viable in American politics, leading us toward a system more akin to the parliamentary ways of Europe.

America is strong in no small part because third parties really can't succeed here - it gives our government a decisiveness that allows us to throw our weight around better than other nations' constantly-shifting parliaments.

A two-party system where party discipline is relatively weak, the parties are all-encompassing, and the voters are not given excessively stark choices is the best route for America to follow - in large part it's the route we're already on, though some minor tweaking would be nice.
Re: Bad idea...
By ctpvandy07 Jul 7th 2006 at 7:56 pm EDT
I agree. Our system thus far keeps smaller groups who hold views that do not encompass the majority of Americans views, will find themselves gaining major footing and influence in decisions that is to be for the good of majority of AMerica. However, I thought that the method of enhancing 3rd parties' influence was to have proportional representation-where people vote, and based on percentages in the district, the seats available were awarded on the basis of these percentages. I could be wrong, though. I welcome someone else's insight on this one.
Re: Bad idea...
By Superduperficial Jul 8th 2006 at 1:40 am EDT
They both work to increase the potential for third parties to gain a say, though with proportional representation to a much greater degree.

If I were to pick one for America, I'd definitely rather have IRV - it allows people to see how far third parties are coming up, and the major parties to adjust their platforms accordingly.
Re: Bad idea...
By Superduperficial Jul 8th 2006 at 1:42 am EDT
One major fear I have, by the way: If IRV or something like it were adopted in America, you'd see the rise of an explicitly Christian American political party (They'd just vote for the Christian Party candidate and then have the Republican as their backup in case IRV kicks in). I don't think that's good for the overall political climate here.
  
Campus Progress

Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.

Campus Progress