HomeInternationalMoral of the elections |

Moral of the elections |

- Advertisment -

Moral of the elections |

The main message of these elections is that the ruling party won more positions, but lost the election: The opposition obtained 54% of the votes. This contradiction is explained because, in almost all jurisdictions, the ruling party presented only one candidate while the opposition presented several. Had the opposition been a candidate for each pole, the opposition would have won most of the governorships and mayors, as happened in the election of deputies in 2015. The proof of this hypothesis is that if the non-Chavista votes in each jurisdiction are added, in the majority these add up to more than the votes for the official candidate.

Abstention it harmed the opponents more than the ruling party. While 85% of the self-described Chavistas said in the National Omnibus Survey of Datanalisis that they were “willing” or “very willing” to vote, only an average of 35% of the self-defined opponents and ni-nis said the same. Three factors played against electoral participation: Previous calls for abstention; Seeing a large number of candidates demotivates opponents and they don’t even vote because they reject divisionism, and the fact that this multiplicity of candidates see it as a prelude to certain defeat. The government won based on negative strategies: the abstention and division of the opposition; not because of its connection to the majority, receiving its lowest vote in this election: 3.7 million votes.

The calls electoral conditions, that the opposition insists so much, they must not only be offered by the ruling party but also by the opposition itself; For example, the loss of the opposition by presenting several candidates for office had much more weight in this experience than any conditions that may be required of the government.

All the chosen ones are the product of a minority preference; no winner represents 30% of those of legal age in any jurisdiction. This syndrome is due to abstention, to the divisiveness of the opposition, since the ruling party also became a minority party with only 12% party identification (Chávez left it 40%).

What the government achieved It was having to face the challenges of recovering the economy through the reactivation of private companies and re-founding public services through decentralization in the hands of newly elected mayors and governors and agreements with private companies, national or foreign.

What the opposition leadership achieved It was to take on the challenge of being renewed, this is what 82% of those interviewed by the Datanalisis National Omnibus Survey want it last October. These parties would also have to change their political offer, ceasing to offer to change the government in order to organize and accompany the population and its organized sectors in solving daily needs. Parties that achieve this shift in focus would reconnect with the population, grow more than parties that do not, thus reducing the challenge of coordinating many very small parties. A prelude to this renewal was observed in the victories obtained by opposition or independent candidates in smaller municipalities. In these cases, the permanent social work carried out by the newly elected opposition mayors stands out. On the other hand, in the big cities, the opposition parties fell into the trap of insisting on placing great leaders as candidates as an expression of their “acquired right”, but without said leaders having a history of social work. Almost all the big cities were lost to the opposition.

On this election day, the emergence of three additional oppositions to the MUD: The judicialized parties, whose leadership was appointed by the TSJ, and not by their bases; the new parties, such as the Neighborhood Alliance, which emerged from the mayors who were expelled from the MUD parties for insisting on electoral participation, and now they have won again; and the “Independientes”, who, whether or not they belong to a party, emerged with significant potential by being the first option against the ruling party in Caracas (El Lapiz) and in other jurisdictions.

If these conditions were repeated, Chavismo would win the Presidency in 2024. Regarding the presidential recall referendumDespite the fact that in a referendum it is not necessary to choose single candidates, the opposition would have to choose, prior to the convocation of the referendum, a single very attractive candidate for the majorities because the Constitution establishes that within 30 days after the mandate is revoked the choice of his substitute must be made. Can you imagine the mess of dozens of opposition leaders contesting the candidacy, while the ruling party once again presents a single candidate and encourages others to register?

@joseagilyepes

in details

The main message of these elections is that the ruling party won more positions, but lost the election: The opposition obtained 54% of the votes. This contradiction is explained because, in almost all jurisdictions, the ruling party presented only one candidate while the opposition presented several. Had the opposition been a candidate for each pole, the opposition would have won most of the governorships and mayors, as happened in the election of deputies in 2015. The proof of this hypothesis is that if the non-Chavista votes in each jurisdiction are added, in the majority these add up to more than the votes for the official candidate.

Abstention it harmed the opponents more than the ruling party. While 85% of the self-described Chavistas said in the National Omnibus Survey of Datanalisis that they were “willing” or “very willing” to vote, only an average of 35% of the self-defined opponents and ni-nis said the same. Three factors played against electoral participation: Previous calls for abstention; Seeing a large number of candidates demotivates opponents and they don’t even vote because they reject divisionism, and the fact that this multiplicity of candidates see it as a prelude to certain defeat. The government won based on negative strategies: the abstention and division of the opposition; not because of its connection to the majority, receiving its lowest vote in this election: 3.7 million votes.

The calls electoral conditions, that the opposition insists so much, they must not only be offered by the ruling party but also by the opposition itself; For example, the loss of the opposition by presenting several candidates for office had much more weight in this experience than any conditions that may be required of the government.

All the chosen ones are the product of a minority preference; no winner represents 30% of those of legal age in any jurisdiction. This syndrome is due to abstention, to the divisiveness of the opposition, since the ruling party also became a minority party with only 12% party identification (Chávez left it 40%).

What the government achieved It was having to face the challenges of recovering the economy through the reactivation of private companies and re-founding public services through decentralization in the hands of newly elected mayors and governors and agreements with private companies, national or foreign.

What the opposition leadership achieved It was to take on the challenge of being renewed, this is what 82% of those interviewed by the Datanalisis National Omnibus Survey want it last October. These parties would also have to change their political offer, ceasing to offer to change the government in order to organize and accompany the population and its organized sectors in solving daily needs. Parties that achieve this shift in focus would reconnect with the population, grow more than parties that do not, thus reducing the challenge of coordinating many very small parties. A prelude to this renewal was observed in the victories obtained by opposition or independent candidates in smaller municipalities. In these cases, the permanent social work carried out by the newly elected opposition mayors stands out. On the other hand, in the big cities, the opposition parties fell into the trap of insisting on placing great leaders as candidates as an expression of their “acquired right”, but without said leaders having a history of social work. Almost all the big cities were lost to the opposition.

On this election day, the emergence of three additional oppositions to the MUD: The judicialized parties, whose leadership was appointed by the TSJ, and not by their bases; the new parties, such as the Neighborhood Alliance, which emerged from the mayors who were expelled from the MUD parties for insisting on electoral participation, and now they have won again; and the “Independientes”, who, whether or not they belong to a party, emerged with significant potential by being the first option against the ruling party in Caracas (El Lapiz) and in other jurisdictions.

If these conditions were repeated, Chavismo would win the Presidency in 2024. Regarding the presidential recall referendumDespite the fact that in a referendum it is not necessary to choose single candidates, the opposition would have to choose, prior to the convocation of the referendum, a single very attractive candidate for the majorities because the Constitution establishes that within 30 days after the mandate is revoked the choice of his substitute must be made. Can you imagine the mess of dozens of opposition leaders contesting the candidacy, while the ruling party once again presents a single candidate and encourages others to register?

@joseagilyepes

, for more latest world update’s, scroll down page
#Moral #elections

- Advertisment -

Most Popular

- Advertisment -

Recent Comments