Mexican recount and local spin

As edited by the letters troll at the TNT, here is a letter on the ongoing crisis of the Mexican elections. On the plus side, the standoff in one of our closest trading partners has gotten a bit coverage from the paper in recent days, first a paragraph on page three, then an editorial (which was the raison d'etre for the paragraph), then a highly edited letter (mine) published Friday.

On the minus side,the most accurate account of the situation appeared in the letter. And better than the one they published was the one I wrote. You judge.

Original:

Dear Editor,

We've been having quite a few disputed elections in recent years, and every once in awhile one of them makes the pages of the News Tribune.

This one was the July 2 presidential election in Mexico. It got more ink in Wednesday's editorial column than it has on the news pages, but at least you acknowledged it. You made much of Lopez Obrador's similarity to Hugo Chavez, and didn't spare any vitriol in denouncing Obrador as a whiner and a sore loser, but in your editorial he somehow becomes the cause of the emigration into the US, although he is trying to oust the ruling party and the policies that are emptying out Mexican villages.

Missing from your pages is any account of the largest peaceful mass action since Corazon Aquino and the people of the Philippines toppled Ferdinand Marcos decades ago. Former mayor Lopez Obrador and millions of his closest friends have occupied Mexico City for six weeks.

Also missing is an explicit statement of what Obrador and his partisans are calling for: a vote by vote recount of the very close, and in spite of your assurances, far from fraud-free election. Why not a complete recount? If Calderon wins, case closed. He has legitimacy. What is the rationale against a recount? Opposing a total recount means either you're either afraid Calderon will lose or you're afraid massive fraud will be uncovered, or both.

TNT version:

What'’s to fear by holding a true election recount?

ALAN HARVEY; Tacoma
Re: "Lopez Obrador: Sore loser or worse"” (editorial, 8-30).

The July 2 presidential election in Mexico got more ink in the editorial column than it has on the news pages, but at least it was acknowledged.

The editorial made much of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador'’s similarity to Hugo Chavez and didn'’t spare any vitriol in denouncing Obrador as a whiner and a sore loser. But in your editorial he somehow becomes the cause of the emigration into the U.S., although he is trying to oust the ruling party and the policies that are emptying out Mexican villages.

Missing is any account of the largest peaceful mass action since Corazon Aquino and the people of the Philippines toppled Ferdinand Marcos decades ago. Former mayor Lopez Obrador and millions of his closest friends have occupied Mexico City for six weeks.

Also missing is an explicit statement of what Obrador and his partisans are calling for: a vote-by-vote recount of the very close, and in spite of your assurances, far from fraud-free election.

Why not a complete recount? If Calderon wins, case closed. He has legitimacy. What is the rationale against a recount? Opposing a total recount means either you're either afraid Calderon will lose or you're afraid massive fraud will be uncovered, or both.