. Hat tip: Callingallcomets.
Obrador:
One of the most popular politicians in Mexico … It ended in a triumph for him … As mayor of Mexico City, he won respect as much for his reputation for honesty, a gruelling work schedule and his humble lifestyle as for his ambitious public works and social programmes targeting the poor and disadvantaged … He often draws on his humble origins – growing up in a village of 600 in Tabasco State, the son of a store owner… recognition of indigenous people’s rights, scholarships for the handicapped and improving healthcare and education … He says he will pay for social spending, higher pensions and wages by wiping out corruption, cutting down on government waste and cracking down on tax evasion … His anti-capitalist speeches have sent jitters through the business community and his main rival has said he will bankrupt the country. Mr Lopez Obrador, however, insists he will respect private property and foreign business investment.
Calderon:
A Harvard educated lawyer, Mr Calderon, 44, is favoured by the business community ,,,
Since the election result is too close to call it looks like he is favoured by more than just businessmen.
…A career politician … He has run a negative campaign against his left-wing rival, linking him to Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez in TV ads proclaiming: “Lopez Obrador is a danger to Mexico”.
The Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) eventually banned the ad, despite Mr Calderon’s claim that the move constituted censorship. But Mr Calderon’s showing at the polls has been dented by counter-accusations from Mr Lopez Obrador that he gave contracts to a company part-owned by his brother-in-law while he was energy secretary. Mr Calderon has strongly denied the allegations.
… While Mr Lopez Obrador has pledged to fight crime through social programmes, Mr Calderon has pledged an iron fist approach, with life sentences for kidnappers.
“He often draws on his humble origins – growing up in a village of 600 in Tabasco State, the son of a store owner”
If this humble son of a shopkeeper had been the right-wing candidate, he would be portrayed as a rough-and-tumble wideboy chancer, a bit like Alan Sugar. An unculture market trader rather than a salt-of-the-earth community shopkeeper. “Far from leading a normal childhood, Obrador dedicated his early years to the pursuit of money”, that kind of thing.
At least Calderon looks like a respectable (if there is such a thing) politician who doesn’t dress like a spiv and looks as though he would fit in to a photo op of world leaders. And Calderon wants Mexico to participate in the global economy. He is far sighted and wants to see President Fox’s programmes through.
Obrador would bankrupt Mexico with his vast,fanciful “social” programmes (kickbacks for the boys being the least of it). This “beloved” former mayor of Mexico City didn’t show much sympathy for the poor when he was mayor. The very, very poor traders used to be allowed to set up trading stalls just about anywhere. Because they had no overheads except what they carried on their backs,they could sell food very, very cheaply. Their customers were the very, very poor who did not have the money to walk through the doors of a store and had probably never been in one in their lives. Obrador chased them off the streets. Result: they have no way to earn their meagre living because there are no jobs, and the very poor who used to buy from them now cannot afford food.
And now he wants to be compassion czar of Mexico. And of course the BBC loves him to bits. Give me a break! The trouble is, no matter who is declared the winner, it is close enough so that even if it is “Harvard-educated” Calderon, he will have to trade endless compromises for getting programmes through.
Why does the beeb disparage the right-winger with “Harvard” – isn’t Harvard full of lefty Liberal types and where a number of Beebies spent time at?
Matt Drudge is reporting that Calderon is claiming victory
http://www.drudgereport.com
archduke – They have both claimed victory. It is apparently very,very close. We will know on Wednesday.
Anonymous – Harvard is “elite”. That is enough to bring any leftie to the boil.
Anon “Why does the beeb disparage the right-winger with “Harvard” – isn’t Harvard full of lefty Liberal types and where a number of Beebies spent time at?”
I don’t think that the BBC were using the term “Harvard” in a negative way.
Verity: “Harvard is “elite”. That is enough to bring any leftie to the boil.”
I’m sure that I’ve heard lefties (and the BBC in particular) described here as elitist. In fact a quick Google search confirms it:
Posted by Kerry B on 8/11/03:
“Bernard Goldberg, 28 years with the American TV network, CBS, explains why elitist news organisations like the BBC need help seeing their bias.”
(Side point: I for one find B-BBC’s output very muddled, and this is just an example of that).
I think there’s a difference between being elite and being elitist. An elitist is someone who thinks that a) he knows everything and b) because of this he deserves to be praised and honoured for it. A elite institution (to take an example) is a place that produces ltos of people who are very good at what they do. Some of them will be elitists – more than likely the ones who didn’t do so well – while others will be simply an elite.
Remember that the term “elite” is often used in a sneering sort of way about the BBC. It has placed itself in a position where it essentially claims to be elite, yet it isn’t particularly good at what it does. Same with politicians. They’re called “the elite” in a sarcastic way, not because they are elite, but because they think they are, and act as if they should be treated that way. It’s a sad corruption of the word, especially considering the left likes to complain about elitists a lot; but in that case, an elitist is someone who wants people to be the very best at what they do, which would create all kinds of “unfair” imbalances in intelligence and income.
Apart from the points Natalie has noted, I also noticed these points.
BBC re Obrador : One of the most popular politicians in Mexico
versus
BBC re Calderon : A career politician
Looking at the wiki entries Obrador seems to be just as much a career politician as Calderon. Neither of them seems ever to have had a proper job, and both were political hacks in their twenties.
BBC re Calderon : He has run a negative campaign against his left-wing rival
OK, but strangely this accusation is not levelled at Mr Obrador, despite
BBC re Calderon : Mr Calderon’s showing at the polls has been dented by counter-accusations from Mr Lopez Obrador that he gave contracts to a company part-owned by his brother-in-law while he was energy secretary
In short, Natalie’s got the Beebies bang to rights on this one.
LM: “In short, Natalie’s got the Beebies bang to rights on this one.”
I have to agree on that.
Thanks, but credit for spotting it goes to “Callingallcommets”
MisterMinit:
The key jab in “Harvard” is that Harvard is in the US.
Obrador is proud of not having a passport (which the BBC doesn’t note because the BBC is not proud that its candidate is an ignorant hick).
Still, for the charges of elitism- I think that education is an area where the BBC tends to side with elites (since a lot of academics like academia and a lot of ’em work for the BBC). The context of this statment makes it sound more like class-based elitism. Poor, honest, working class lad against superficial “career politician”.
These are common biases across the left. Take, for instance, the Equal Rights Amendment in the US, prevailing wage laws in the US and EU, and other areas where the left demands that skilled worker’s premuiums are increased (as befits a movement backed by unions). Education based snobbery is good.
The values of the progressive cultural elites are to be approved, since those are generally amongst the most progressive in society.
Class based snobbery must always be reverse snobbery. Fox hunting is not the BBC’s mandate.
I agree that it reads as if it is inconsistent, since “elitist” and “snobbery” are terms with multiple meanings, some applying, some not. I think that this is a less clear example of the flaw than it appears, however.
When I get more time on this I’ll try to dig up a better record of the BBC’s consistent and lengthy record of dishonesty and propaganda on the issues in the Mexican election. It’s been pissing me off since their lie about the Summit of the Americas last year (“No Trade Deal At Americas Summit” was their headline for the summit that gave the US a Bilateral Investment Treaty with Uruguay).
Interesting,James.
Not only does Obrador not have a passport,but he doesn’t speak any English. (That’s OK for the moment as Mr Bush speaks fluent Spanish.) But a rejection of the English language! What more could the BBC want!
Sadly, even if Calderon makes it in, the election was so close, he’ll have to live with an endless series of compromises. As President Fox did.
But whichever way it tips, it says something that somewhere around half the Mexican voters voted for “a Harvard-educated career politician” who does not do that Latino pose of “man of the people” but tells the voters he wants to get Mexico involved in the global economy.
Yep. This is an astoundingly biased article that almost defies comment.
James of England: “The key jab in “Harvard” is that Harvard is in the US.”
But is there any reason to believe that the BBC were using “Harvard” in a negative way (other than typical B-BBC speculation)?
Verity: “That’s OK for the moment as Mr Bush speaks fluent Spanish.”
But not English unfortunately…
MisterMinit, my chief basis is that I read a lot of left wing Latin American news, I often find that the BBC paraphrases that material rather than doing independent research (hence, assumadely, the “no trade deal” lie). The BBC’s sources regularly make a big deal out of Calderon’s cultural connection to El Norte.
Sorry, borrowed computer, forgot to put my name.
Hanging chads time…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5148552.stm
.
BBC:
“…the victory will halt the rise of the so-called left in Latin America…”
It seems that “the BBC’s Duncan Kennedy in Mexico City” is either a clairvoyant or an idiot. Given his description of the left as the “so-called left”, one is inclined toward the latter option.
.
Obrador is claiming there are “three million votes missing”. On what does he base this extraordinarily exact statement? The papers had “projected a turnout of 39m to 42m” – and three million fewer turned out,so Obrador is now claiming they turned out but their votes are “missing”. Yes, hanging chad time, I fear. The left are such sore losers.
By the way, a Mexican-American friend who lives here tells me that Obrador doesn’t believe in elections and is strangely drawn to the Castro method of government. He is a horrible man. No wonder the BBC adores him. Have they ever had a bad word to say about Castro?
Only B-BBC contributors could see the neutral reporting of the fact that someone went to Harvard as some sort of smear. I’m a leftie but I just see that he went to Harvard, that despite any issues around elitism, is still a prestigious university with high academic standards. After all the Beeb is full of Oxbridge types who are hardly going to be snearing at those who went to Havard. Just another example of the B-BBC folk seeing ghosts where there are none.
You may have a better argument if you just stuck to the general tenor of the two descriptions of the two candidates (and I think you do) but contriving arguments abut a sytatement of fact about the University someone went to just makes you look silly.
Lurker has a point about the Harvard topic.
A group of lefty Jeremy-Hardy types would probably see it as a sneer.
A group of right-wingers would see it as very positive.
But the article is unbalanced – they make no mention at all of Obrador’s education or lack of education.
And to introduce Calderon as “a Harvard-educated lawyer” is a bit of a spin – as though this is his most important attribute.
GREAT NEWS FROM MEXICO………
The BBC has LOST…..AGAIN!!!!!!
First Bush beat them…TWICE…..
Then Blair Ignored them……….
Then the Germans and Canadians ignored their crybaby whingebag worldwide lefty propaganda
The UK Ignored them and voted for the bloody BNP for Christs sake………
And now, Mexico, has ingored the bleatings of the left…..and voted with vision and clarirty…….
You would have thought that the pinheads at the BBC would have realised by now….their constant lies and manipualtions do NOTHING but make the BBC look bad…..LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!
In fact, in the case of the UK..you could say their constant arse licking around Muslims has driven up the vote of the BNP…and it certainly hurt the vote of “the Left” as the locals prooved…..
Well done Mexico……and BBC? Ignored again…..lolol…….better get used ot it….your day was decades ago…the world has no need for just another left wing TV compant that makes up the news and makes crap soaps……..
The world needs leaders with Vision liike Blair and Bush……not whinging “celebs” that do nothing for anyone but themselves……
HAHAHA…in your face BBC…
A lurker:
“Only B-BBC contributors could see the neutral reporting of the fact that someone went to Harvard as some sort of smear.”
Actually, I think the reason the Harvard statement is discussed is that it isn’t clear if it is a smear or not. The more obvious smears don’t invite as much speculation.
So what? Calderon won.
Calderon, who doesn’t admire Castro or Chavez. Who wants Mexico to join the world economy and get on with making itself rich.
And weepy Obrador, who has admitted he doesn’t even believe in the electorate having a vote,is going to rally “the people” – in an old-fashioned revolutionary sense – in the Socalo in Mexico City tomorrow. Why are the left such poor losers?
Oh, come the revolution! Meanwhile, today’s Mexico, under a mere six years of President Fox, has left the Obradors well behind.
Example, I had to go to the Procurator General today, to report something. It is sparkling clean. There are pleasant, open areas for sitting in. Inside, offices are air-conditioned and have cubicles so each person reporting something has his own individual officer.
There’s a big sign on the wall: ALL OUR SERVICES ARE FREE. In other words, if anyone tries to charge you, report that person. There is also a poster of a man with a 200 peso note in his handcuffed hands reading, “Corruption has its consequences”.
I hold mission statements in the same regard I hold John Prescott, but the fact that they had one on the wall was a strong statement in itself. It was quite short, and among its points was “courtesy and sympathy with the public we serve”.
We walked in the door of the office and immediately a young man behind a desk said, “Good morning. How may I help you?”
We looked at one another in a panic. Had we come to the wrong building? We advanced cautiously, hugging the walls. My statement was treated with efficiency, courtesy and friendliness. When we left with my copy of my statement, our thought was, “Let’s get out of here fast before they find out we’re not really the King and Queen of Spain.”
I cannot speak highly enough of what President Fox has accomplished bringing Mexico forward in his six years in office – despite all the compromises he has had to make because of his slender majority. Sr Calderon will have to make even more compromises. But it is still interesting to everyone but the BBC that just over half of Mexico’s electorate voted not for the “revolutionary friend of the people”, but for the “Harvard graduate” who wants to take Mexico forward into the global economy.
.
Verity said:
“But it is still interesting to everyone but the BBC that just over half of Mexico’s electorate voted not for the “revolutionary friend of the people”, but for the “Harvard graduate” who wants to take Mexico forward into the global economy.”
The vote was split closer to three ways, with Calderon and Obrador being very close at just over a third each. The candidate from the somewhat oxymoronic Institutional Revolutionary Party got just over 22% (6.5% going to others).
The Institutional Revolutionary Party (held power for most of 20th Century) is a centre-left outfit, so it’s reasonable to conclude that the candidate representing the country’s minority persuasion (right-wing) won due to the majority persuasion (left-wing) being split.
I see nothing wrong with the result (such a split is a natural occurence of failings within the majority persuasion) but it shouldn’t be misrepresented.
.
PJF – “somewhat oxymoronic Institutional Revolutionary Party”. That is funny!
Agree with your point, but rather than go into turgid detail about an election hardly anyone outside N and Latin America cares about, I just wanted to paint a clear picture of the two major contenders. The Institutional Revolutionary Party didn’t stand a chance in hell, and all that “fighting for the people” crap is now out the window in Mexico, I think you’ll agree.
Nice to see the left keeping up its international time-honoured tradition of being a poor loser. They just can’t believe that people don’t want socialism.
What I find interesting is the difference in coverage between this close election, and the recent close election in Italy.