The desperate resource: appealing to electoral fraud

Faced with what seems like a probable victory for Claudia Sheinbaum in the next presidential elections and, with it, the extension of six more years of a government in the hands of Morena, there is a recalcitrant opposition that does not seem to be in a position to agree to so “ ominous” result.

Some among them have begun to take heart with a desperate idea: to challenge the elections under the criterion that it is a State election and that, on top of that, it has been violated by drug traffickers.

It is stated that the interventions of the presidency in the campaigns and the social support schemes converted into vote farms, among other factors, would have to lead to invalidating a victory for the ruling party.

They are not the same arguments, but it is a thesis, that of a kind of electoral fraud, that the followers of Bolsonaro in Brazil and Trump in the United States used to ignore the results of the presidential elections in those countries.

In the case of Mexico it would be an

in extremis

approach , because even in the hypothetical case that such an argument were successful, it would not necessarily lead to the victory of its candidate.

The cases of Bolsonaro and Trump were different because they governed on election day;

The invalidation of the electoral result kept them in the command cabin until further notice.

In Mexico, Morena governs in the Chambers and in the National Palace, any impasse of this nature momentarily disrupts the transition, but leaves the same political force in power.

Despite this absurdity, it is surprising how frequently flirtation with this idea is beginning to be heard in some anti-Lopezbradorist circles.

Or perhaps some clueless people have simply taken literally what has until now been used as a campaign argument to dent the image of the official party.

Xóchitl Gálvez has made a “state election” a repeated slogan in public squares and made accusations along those lines during his recent tour to the United States.

But it seems to me, I insist, that this is a mere campaign argument designed to provoke indignation among his own people or to generate concern among those who are undecided.

In short, one of the many oratories to try to get votes, but I would like to believe that it is not a way of preparing the ground for a future challenge.

It is the same case of the enormous campaign that has been mounted on social networks to keep #NarcopresidenteAMLO alive.

It can be understood that this is an electoral tactic, as was “a danger for Mexico” in 2006 and 2012, although it should be noted that in that case the image of an individual and the leader of a political movement was damaged.

Today, however, the reputation of the Mexican State itself is affected and the harmful perception, so convenient to the American right, that a Narco-State prevails in Mexico is fueled.

In this same space I have pointed out the irresponsibility of political actors who, although they present themselves as champions of democracy, have not had any shame in financing a campaign that affects the legitimacy of the presidency itself.

It would be necessary to insist that, if there was any crime or evidence, it would have to be presented, but using it as a propaganda argument against the image of the institutions is delicate.

For the hawks in Washington, always looking for pretexts, the accusation is assumed not as a trait of López Obrador or a specific president, as the opposition claims seeking easy votes, but as a description of the state in which a country finds itself. which, according to them, would already be governed by drug traffickers.

I would put the coverage that is being done on crimes against candidates in some rough regions of the country in the same direction.

Worrying, unacceptable and a powerful call to do something to stop the threat of gangs in some local electoral processes.

Delicate as it is, it should be kept in the proportion it represents in a massive election that involves nearly 20,000 positions throughout the country.

This does not mean ignoring the cases and, if necessary, considering special measures in several dozen vulnerable places;

repeat the choice even where necessary.

But trying to cast doubt on the presidential election, governorships or main capitals of the country, where that is not the issue, is absolutely disproportionate.

It seems to me that there are three elements that reduce the possibility of such a crisis.

First, the notion has become established among political actors and public opinion that electoral processes are imperfect, but have legitimacy.

In 2006, Mexico withstood the incredible test of an election decided by half a percentage point, amid serious and reasonable accusations of fraud, but never violently contested.

Since then, the rulings of the courts and electoral bodies have been regularly complied with.

No matter how tempted defeated political actors are to ignore a result, they know that they will not have the consent of public opinion.

Second, the diverse composition of the INE at this time weakens the notion that the institution could lend itself to favoring an illegitimate result.

The current president is credited with supposed empathy with the ruling party, but not most of the councilors.

It is impossible to think that the INE could operate in favor of a political force without another part of the organization denouncing it.

Third, the greatest disincentive to an electoral challenge is the result itself.

Marcelo Ebrard's protest when he lost the internal election lacked any substance, because he lost by the 13 points that the polls had anticipated for several months.

The first requirement of a credible challenge is that the final result betrays the observed trends.

Today the consensus of voting intention polls, even among journalistic companies critical of the Obradorism, marks a difference of around 20 points.

If Xóchitl Gálvez loses by an amount close to that, there is no way to pretend that his votes were stolen somewhere.

How can we challenge a result that reflects the desire for continuity expressed by the current levels of approval in the government?

There is a lot of polarized passion in the country and we will live through three incessant months of dirty and infamy campaigns, but they should not be a reason to undermine the enormous political stability that Mexico has achieved in electoral matters.

The accusations that are put forward today should be just that, campaign arguments, and not a strategy to prepare a narrative aimed at ignoring the result of the June 2 elections.

Appealing to incendiary resources runs the risk of burning down the house in which we all live.

@jorgezepedap

Subscribe to the EL PAÍS México newsletter

and the

WhatsApp channel

and receive all the key information on current events in this country.

Subscribe to continue reading

Read without limits

Keep reading

I am already a subscriber

_