Gay Patriot Header Image

Are Mexico’s Leftists like American Democrats?

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 11:59 pm - September 5, 2006.
Filed under: Bush-hatred,Politics abroad

I wonder if leftists in Mexico will soon be defining themselves by their opposition to President-elect Felipe Calderon — just as many American Democrats (and others on the left) define themselves by their hatred of President Bush. Like our president, Calderon won election by the narrowest of margins, “233,831 votes out of 41.6 million cast in the July 2 elections — a margin of 0.56 percent.” Yesterday, Mexico’s Federal Electoral Tribunal unanimously “rejected allegations of systematic fraud” and certified that election.

Despite that ruling, the man Calderon edged out, leftist Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, has vowed “to lead a parallel leftist government from the streets.” The Mexican president-election has appealed to all opposition parties to meet and come to an understanding after the close election. Yet, the leftists, like their counterparts north of the Rio Grande, are balking at an appeal to national unity.

Sounding like President Bush, Calderon said “We can have different opinions, but we aren’t enemies.” Still, “thousands of radicalized leftists . . . say they will stop at nothing to undermine his presidency.

This doesn’t sound too different than some of the voices I heard when I decided to listen to Air America while stuck in traffic on I-70 in the mountains just east of Denver. They want to undermine the presidency of the man who, now nearly two years ago, won election (to a four-year term) by a convincing margin, pulling in (unlike Calderon) a majority of the popular vote and increasing — by a substantial amount — the number of votes he had won in the tight election of 2000.

Share

16 Comments

  1. The answer is Yes. Except, it appears the Mexican Leftists are more effective than the American Democrats. Surprise? No.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — September 6, 2006 @ 10:28 am - September 6, 2006

  2. Mexican politics are not really comparable to US politics.

    Mexican Leftists are more closer to true hard communists than those on the democratic left side of the spectrum here in the US. Much more so than even groups like A.N.S.W.E.R.

    The Mexican “conservative” government isn’t parallel to the American GOP either. In many ways it probably is closer to the Democrats view of the world than that of the GOP. And in fact its probably to the Left of the Democrats on many issues, like state-owned oil companies for example.

    Comment by Patrick (Gryph) — September 6, 2006 @ 11:18 am - September 6, 2006

  3. Mexican Leftists are more closer to true hard communists than those on the democratic left side of the spectrum here in the US. Much more so than even groups like A.N.S.W.E.R.

    Considering that International ANSWER supports North Korean-style Stalinism, that is a highly dubious assertion. How could anyone be further to the left than ANSWER?

    its probably to the Left of the Democrats on many issues, like state-owned oil companies for example.

    First of all, the new president, Calderon, supports free market reform to the Mexican economy, including increased foreign investment. Second, American democrats want the entire health-care industry state-controlled. So, the only difference is really in which sector of the economy the respective leftist parties want to manifest socialism. The US Health Care Industry is much larger than the Mexican oil industry. In fact, the US health care industry is larger than the entire Mexican GDP.

    Comment by V the K — September 6, 2006 @ 12:10 pm - September 6, 2006

  4. The refusal of Mexico to privatize its energy sector is also little different than Democrat (and Republican) opposition to letting people have the option of managing part of our retirement program instead of having our earnings confiscated and put into a system that will be bankrupt before most of us retire.

    Comment by V the K — September 6, 2006 @ 1:39 pm - September 6, 2006

  5. No wonder Lopez Obrador is referred to as “EL Gore…”

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — September 6, 2006 @ 3:04 pm - September 6, 2006

  6. #5 — Yeah, maybe now that Obragore’s political career is over, he can start a new career complaining about the weather.

    Comment by V the K — September 6, 2006 @ 3:14 pm - September 6, 2006

  7. A friend in Mexico explained it to me this way: the winning party refused to allow a re-count (in order to verify that the numbers on the outside of ballot packets actually corresponded to the numbers of ballots inside the packets). Instead, after much opposition, something like 9% of the ballots were counted and then it was left at that. Not very satisfying–and easy to remedy: just do a re-count, with members of both parties present. Simply saying “Trust us” doesn’t wash.

    Comment by blog responder — September 6, 2006 @ 7:44 pm - September 6, 2006

  8. Elections….should conservatives in the USA begin now to mobilize. If as the MSM predicts, the Republicans may lose the House and even the Senate in November, putting lawyers on alert now may be wise. If they spread out to those districts that appear close now, they will be well positioned to question, litigate, demand recounts, organize street demonstrations, set up “shadow” congressional offices, whine, stomp their feet, and basically undermine the legimacey of any and all Dem winners in close , losing districts. J/K just trying to learn from the leftists in the USA and Mexico.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 6, 2006 @ 8:48 pm - September 6, 2006

  9. #8 Better yet, let’s just stipulate now that if Dems pick up any seats in November it’s a result of fraud. If they disagree, they must prove, per the RajIan Doctrine, absolutely otherwise.

    Comment by BoBo — September 6, 2006 @ 11:50 pm - September 6, 2006

  10. BoBo, perfect answer.

    But the raj/Ian/blah sockpuppet rules would have you take it a step further… in order to take office, any Democrat must prove by a recount of all ballots cast that they won by at least 5% of the total votes cast or it isn’t a “real” win, it’s a stolen election. Any voter may change their vote if so inclined up to the point of the swearing-in ceremony by going on KatieCouric’sLaughHour and crying repeatedly about disenfranchisement or Katrina or the Downing Street Memo or marriage equality.

    The incumbent shall remain in place until all judicial and extra-judicial remedies have been exhausted… including appeals to UN HdQtrs, the Hague, or to the Dean of the raj/Ian/blah School of Sockpuppet Artistry.

    After the appeals have been exhausted, the losers can begin criticizing every move of the winners but the winners shall not criticize the losers’ criticisms or the winners shall immediately forfeit the office because we honor a “tradition of unchecked dissent” in America… it’s in the Constitution, right next to the solid wall of separation between Church and State.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — September 7, 2006 @ 9:07 am - September 7, 2006

  11. I think the demise of the GOP has been greatly exaggerated. Take a look at current “generic” polls as well as the Rasmussen tracking polls between contested seats. It’s not so much the percentage of approve/disapprove, but the rate of momentum in the polls from one cycle to the next.

    A good example is the Casey vs. Santorum race – Casey’s double-digit lead has virtually disappeared. In fact, given his disastrous debate with Rick on Meet the (de)Press(ed), I would not be suprised at all to see them at a statistical tie by the next polling cycle.

    Peter’s predictions: Talent and Santorum get reelected. Both House and Senate remain GOP. You read it here first.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — September 7, 2006 @ 12:01 pm - September 7, 2006

  12. Once again, if the Democrats were a sane, rational alternative to the GOP I wouldn’t mind seeing them win because the GOP has been so awful these last 2-4 yrs. But what exactly is the Democrat response to terrorism? Midnight basketball? Not to mention their calls for tax increases, reparations (John Conyers becomes chairmen of the Judiciary Committee if they take back the House), civil rights for terrorists, socialized medicine, impeachment, and all that and amnesty, amnesty, amnesty!

    I want to see the Republicans lose just enough seats to scare them into pulling their heads out of their butts. End the earmarks. End the reckless spending. Secure the borders. Is that too much to ask?

    Comment by V the K — September 7, 2006 @ 12:13 pm - September 7, 2006

  13. Guys, you know the more I thought about it. If the Republicans lose the House, what exactly are we afraid of? With a one or two vote majority what are the Dems going to get passed? Plus imagine a world of Pelosi, Dingell, Murtha, Conyers, Jackson Lee setting the agenda for the House. If they use the chairmanships to continualy investigate this administration I don’ think the American people will reward them. Other than unleasing the MoveOn fascists I think it hurts them for ’08.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 7, 2006 @ 11:27 pm - September 7, 2006

  14. Since radical left south of the border can’t win at the polls taking to the
    streets is their tactic and they will use any cause as a prestext. Here, in El Salvador on July 5th a supposed protest over a 2 cent increase in bus fares led to open warfare with the police who were there to assure calm.
    The leftest were all uniformed, initiated conflict with rocks then firing AK-47′s using real bullets as opposed to rubber bullets being used by the police. The battle lasted several hours and all televised. The group is domiciled on the campus of the National University where anything communist as espoused by FMLN is posted on bulletin boards. There is
    no equal time for the right. The radical left is morally supported by Fidel and financially supported by the petro dollars of Ugo Chavez in Venezuela, who had bankrolled PRD and the campaign of Obrador Lopez. Chavez now visits Iran, Syria and China.selling petroleum at reduced rates and providing safe haven for terroists while poverty increases in Venezuela from 25% to 75%. I never agree with Pat Robertson, except when he said that Chavez should be taken out . Unfortunately he said over the air instead of a private communique to the CIA. In the meantime, the Dean of the Washington National Cathedral will allow Chavez, Obrador-Lopez, and few other radical leftist to speak at the Cathedral. Shame!!!!!!

    Comment by Roberto — September 8, 2006 @ 11:27 am - September 8, 2006

  15. Basta Chavez y Castro! Ellos son cabrones!

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — September 8, 2006 @ 12:56 pm - September 8, 2006

  16. #14 Damn Roberto, I guess our nutty leftists can get worse.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — September 8, 2006 @ 10:01 pm - September 8, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.