Elections

Subterms

    More stories

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      México y la decadencia de la política

      by

      La política cayó al terreno del freak show en México. El mercado electoral del país es un espectáculo que nada más parece necesitar los personajes rimbombantes de Federico Fellini.Ahí está Lucía Pino, una modelo apodada la Grosera, que promete implantes de senos si la eligen diputada. O Samuel García, un muchacho que dice haber sufrido la mano dura de su padre cuando lo despertaba de madrugada para ir al campo de golf y ahora ha reclutado a roqueros avejentados para que oficien de claque musical de su candidatura a gobernador del estado de Nuevo León. Y luego está el Tinieblas, el luchador de la máscara dorada, otro ejemplo del ridículo normalizado. Su partido, Redes Sociales Progresistas, el mismo que promueve a La Grosera, dice defender los derechos de las minorías, pero cuando le preguntaron cómo integraría a la comunidad LGTBIQ+ a su gobierno en la delegación Venustiano Carranza de Ciudad de México, el Tinieblas no supo qué responder. Después de que le repitieron la pregunta, dijo que protegería a las mujeres.Una panoplia de outsiders —actores, luchadores, cantantes o influencers en las listas de candidatos— se ofrece en las elecciones del 6 de junio en México como alternativa a la omnipotencia del presidente Andrés Manuel López Obrador y a una oposición sospechosa de casi todo. Ese circo prefigura un futuro desastroso para México. El nihilismo, combinado con la dinámica de las redes sociales, está creando un escenario desalentador y degradante. Más que democracia, vodevil electoral.Internet ha permitido la movilización de causas loables como el activismo de justicia racial, pero también, como decía Umberto Eco, le dio una audiencia a idiotas e imbéciles, y al vecino enojado. Su impulso a la rabia social y apatía general podría alimentar un voto suicida: elegir a quien sea con tal de acabar con la clase política tradicional.Estas candidaturas silvestres, posibles en buena medida por las redes —dice mucho que un partido se llame Redes Sociales Progresistas— han banalizado la política cuando más se necesita vigilancia democrática, debates programáticos y planes concretos para resolver los problemas de fondo de México.Claro, si esa oferta electoral está ahí es porque alguien ha sospechado —quizás con certeza— que el absurdo suma votos. No hay nada consolador en eso: México se apresta a definir una elección crítica —que dé la mayoría absoluta a AMLO en el Congreso o introduzca resistencia a su determinación hegemónica— con votantes agobiados de una clase política decadente y una degradación general de la discusión pública. La campaña electoral mexicana, además de sangrienta e insegura (han sido asesinados más de una decena de candidatos) es un programa de televisión de variedades largo y malo. Y mientras la política del show atrae la atención y el morbo, López Obrador avanza sus ataques contra sus críticos y los organismos de control.La mismísima política creó las condiciones para que la antipolítica se apropie de la política. Partidos que por décadas abusaron del poder para entronizar una casta autorrenovable (el PRI), formaciones incapaces de ofrecer un cambio sostenible (el PAN) y opositores que fracasaron en crear una vía progresista (el PRD), lanzaron al electorado hacia Morena, un movimiento personalista creado por López Obrador, quien cree ser un padre fundador.Suele suceder: cuando la oferta electoral tradicional defrauda sin cesar, las sociedades se corren al margen, y hasta 2018, AMLO era el outsider. Pero cuando también falla esa opción limítrofe, la gente puede saltar los límites. Entonces brota el freak show de la Grosera y su oferta de cirugías, golfistas roqueros, luchadores desinformados. Poco se discute de ideas. La conversación gira alrededor de lo estrambótico y febril; estéril para el debate pero productivo para la distracción.El Tinieblas, un luchador que está en la contienda por la alcaldía de la delegación Venustiano Carranza en Ciudad de MéxicoMario Guzman/EPA vía ShutterstockEl nihilismo preinternet se agotaba en las discusiones de los cafés, pero ahora las redes sociales le han dado un amplificador inigualable. No las demonizaré, porque sus costados positivos son significativos, pero Twitter, Facebook e Instagram han facilitado tanto la aparición de figuras escasas de planes y motivadas por los likes como la propagación del ciudadano desencantado, ese elector al que le da igual votar a cualquiera nuevo porque lo viejo está podrido.No es nuevo. En 2001, miles de indignados desafiaron a la clase política en Argentina con su grito “Que se vayan todos”. Pero el fenómeno es todavía más antiguo. En los años cuarenta del siglo pasado, el periodista romano Guglielmo Giannini creó la publicación L’Uomo Qualunque (El hombre común), una usina contra las élites políticas. Su lenguaje era sencillo y su eslogan, un canto al nihilismo: “Abajo todos”. El movimiento que engendró el semanario de Giannini legó un término que se sigue usando, el qualunquismo, que se convirtió en sinónimo de apatía política.La apatía y el enojo siempre buscan un camino y cuando no hay canales, se hará uno. Las candidaturas más o menos espontáneas son buenas para vehiculizar el hartazgo del momento pero no para resolver la gestión de la cosa pública. Candidatos milagreros siempre hubo; hoy son más porque la crisis de representatividad es extendida y son más visibles porque la posibilidad de hacerse oír es ubicua gracias a internet.Es una situación arriesgada. Manejar un Estado requiere burocracias entrenadas y capacidad de generar consensos. El qualunquista no ofrece eso; nada más acabar con lo conocido. Un eslogan, no un plan. Implantes, rocanrol, máscaras vacías.Cacarear en las redes para obtener votos no es difícil, pero ofrecerse como candidato antisistema, ganar y luego decepcionar en el poder por incapacidad o conveniencia —siendo cooptado o absorbido por las viejas dinámicas sistémicas— llevará la desazón social mucho más lejos. Si los candidatos outsiders potencializados por las redes sociales, como la Grosera, el Tinieblas o García, representan ya saltarse los márgenes del sistema, ¿qué queda?: ¿Autócratas francos? ¿Militares? ¿O una vuelta a partidos renovados?México no tiene una salida fácil en la elección de junio. La apatía política y el voto suicida llevados al extremo con el freak show de la política del espectáculo no es la solución a la rabia de los ciudadanos. Es apenas un escalón más para un “que se vayan todos” aún más nocivo.Diego Fonseca (@DiegoFonsecaDF) es escritor y editor. Es director del Seminario Iberoamericano de Periodismo Emprendedor en CIDE-México y maestro de la Fundación Gabo. Voyeur es su libro más reciente. More

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      ¿Qué pasa en Bielorrusia? Una guía básica

      by

      Un avión que no llegó a su destino planeado, un periodista disidente detenido y todo lo que pasó antes del “secuestro de Estado” del que todos hablan.El aterrizaje forzoso de un vuelo comercial el domingo, considerado por varios países como un secuestro de Estado, ha puesto a Bielorrusia y a su presidente, Alexander Lukashenko, de nuevo en primer plano a nivel mundial.Se produjo a menos de un año de que los bielorrusos se enfrentaron a una violenta represión policial al protestar por los resultados de unas elecciones que muchos gobiernos occidentales tacharon de farsa.Según los gobiernos occidentales, el vuelo de Ryanair procedente de Atenas y con destino a Vilna, Lituania, fue desviado a Minsk con la excusa de una amenaza de bomba, con el objetivo de detener a Roman Protasevich, un periodista disidente de 26 años. En un video publicado por el gobierno, confesó haber participado en la organización de “disturbios masivos” el año pasado, pero sus amigos dicen que la confesión se hizo bajo amenaza.Para quienes intentan ponerse al día, he aquí el contexto que los ayudará a seguir a la par de la historia en curso. More

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in Elections

      What’s Happening in Belarus? Here Are the Basics.

      by

      For those trying to catch up on the “state hijacking” of an airplane, the arrest of a dissident and what preceded it.The forced landing of a commercial flight on Sunday, seen by several countries as a state hijacking, has put Belarus and its strongman president, Alexander G. Lukashenko, in a new global spotlight.It came less than a year after Belarusians were met with a violent police crackdown when they protested the results of an election that many Western governments derided as a sham.The Ryanair flight from Athens to Vilnius, Lithuania, was diverted to Minsk using the ruse of a bomb threat, according to Western governments, with the goal of detaining Roman Protasevich, a 26-year-old dissident journalist. In a video released by the government, he confessed to taking part in organizing “mass unrest” last year, but friends say the confession was made under duress.For those trying to catch up, here’s the background that will help you follow along with the ongoing story. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      She Was Supposed to Become Prime Minister but Was Locked Out of Parliament

      by

      A constitutional crisis deepened in the Pacific Island nation of Samoa, which now has two competing governments and two claimants to the prime ministership.Fiame Naomi Mata’afa walked toward Samoa’s beehive-shaped Parliament House on Monday morning intending to be sworn in as the first female prime minister in the Pacific Island nation’s 56-year history.What she and her fellow party members found instead were locked doors. The speaker of Parliament had issued orders to keep them out. And so deepened a constitutional crisis that has convulsed this long-stable nation and thrown into doubt whether Ms. Mata’afa, whose party won the April 9 election, would actually take office.Still shut out of Parliament by Monday evening, Ms. Mata’afa’s party held its own swearing-in under a tent erected right outside. As the sun set, she took the oath of office, flanked by members of her party dressed in cardinal-red blazers and traditional men’s wraparound skirts known as ie faitaga.With the party’s defiant act, the country now has two competing governments and two claimants to the prime ministership. Each side has accused the other of carrying out a coup.The incumbent prime minister, Tuilaepa Aiono Sailele Malielegaoi, who has led Samoa for 23 years, and members of his political party were nowhere in sight during Ms. Mata’afa’s ceremony. He emerged afterward, delivering a speech in which he said he would not recognize her appointment and called her swearing-in an act of “treason.”“Leave it to us to handle this situation,” he said, vowing to take action against what he called “the highest form of illegal conduct.”The turmoil is a stark departure from Samoa’s ordinarily peaceful political history. Mr. Tuilaepa, 76, has been leader since 1998, and his party has held power for nearly four uninterrupted decades.While its neighbor Fiji has been rocked by a series of coups since the 1980s, Samoa — a country of about 200,000 people with no military and a largely unarmed police force — has had stability, although at the cost of being a virtual one-party state. Samoa’s incumbent prime minister, Tuilaepa Aiono Sailele Malielegaoi, right, has refused to resign, preventing the peaceful transition of power.Kena Betancur/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThose costs have become clear as Mr. Tuilaepa has made no secret of the fact that he would not recognize a government led by Ms. Mata’afa and her party, known as FAST. The party was formed last year in response to what it saw as the erosion of rule of law under Mr. Tuilaepa, the world’s second-longest-serving prime minister.A tortuous seven weeks have followed the April election as Ms. Mata’afa has grappled with Mr. Tuilaepa, the leader of the Human Rights Protection Party.A coalition led by FAST won 26 of the 51 seats in the election. After a legal challenge appeared to give the H.R.P.P. an additional seat, leaving both parties with 26, the appointed head of state called for a rerun. The judiciary rejected the request and ejected the 26th H.R.P.P. member of Parliament. Some 28 legal challenges to the election result have yet to be determined.Over the weekend, the machinations reached a head. Late on Saturday night, the head of state, an ordinarily ceremonial position, issued a proclamation suspending Parliament “until such time as to be announced and for reasons that I will make known in due course.”The proclamation, Ms. Mata’afa, 64, told The New York Times, was tantamount to a coup.The suspension would have made it impossible for Parliament to convene within a mandated 45-day window after the election. But Samoa’s Supreme Court, in an extraordinary session on Sunday, dismissed the proclamation as unlawful and cleared the way for Parliament to convene. That was followed by a notice from the Parliament speaker, who said he would not abide by the court’s ruling.On Monday morning, Ms. Mata’afa and her party members approached Parliament House as police officers stood outside. The clerk of Parliament refused to open the doors, leaving them stranded and preventing the peaceful transition of power. The chief justice of the Supreme Court, dressed in his red robe and powdered wig, also walked to the Parliament building, confirming with a pull on the door that it was locked.The ceremony held on Monday was a last-ditch attempt to comply with the 45-day constitutional requirement. It was a high-stakes gamble, said Michael Field, a journalist and expert on the region, warning that the ultimate loser risked going to jail. “It’s winner takes all,” he wrote on Twitter.Samoa’s chief justice, Satiu Simativa Perese, arriving at Parliament in Apia on Monday to find the doors closed.Keni Lesa/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA statement issued on Monday evening by the country’s attorney general seemed to bear out that assessment. The official, Savalenoa Mareva Betham Annandale, an ally of Mr. Tuilaepa’s, declared the swearing-in unlawful and said everyone involved was subject to civil and criminal prosecution.The delays could put Mr. Tuilaepa closer to his goal of a return to the polls.“A second election would be an absolute farce,” said Patricia O’Brien, an expert on the region at the Australian National University. “You can’t trust any of these officials anymore to run a clean election because Tuilaepa wants a foregone conclusion — which is that he wins.”For Samoans on either side of the political divide, seeing Ms. Mata’afa, a respected veteran of Samoan politics, locked outside Parliament House was a highly emotional moment, said Lagipoiva Cherelle Jackson, a scholar and journalist based in Samoa. Feelings ran especially high as people there began to sing historical Samoan protest songs, she said.“People were singing songs about our Mau movement,” she said, referring to Samoa’s peaceful movement for independence. “One of the leaders of the Mau movement was Fiame’s grandfather. No matter which side you’re on, that is just a very, very emotional thing to witness.”For the most part, she said, supporters of both parties have remained loyal to their side throughout the process, though some H.R.P.P. voters appeared to be deterred by what seemed to many to be a power grab by Mr. Tuilaepa.Around the region, governments encouraged Samoan officials to follow the will of the people.Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern of New Zealand voiced her support for Samoa’s judiciary. “Here in New Zealand, we have complete faith in Samoa’s institutions, and that includes its judiciary,” she told reporters. “Our call would be to maintain and uphold the rule of law and that democratic outcome.”In a Twitter post, Australia’s foreign minister, Marise Payne, echoed her sentiments. “Australia values our close friendship with Samoa,” she wrote. “It is important that all parties respect the rule of law and democratic processes. We have faith in Samoa’s institutions including the judiciary.” More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      A Late-Night Proclamation Blocks a Woman From Leading Samoa

      by

      Fiame Naomi Mata’afa was set to be sworn in Monday as the country’s first new prime minister in 22 years, until the head of state suspended Parliament.AUCKLAND, New Zealand — The Pacific island nation of Samoa hurtled toward a constitutional crisis on Saturday, when the country’s head of state announced that he was suspending Parliament just two days before it was scheduled to swear in the country’s first new prime minister in more than two decades.In a single-page letter posted to Facebook, Va’aletoa Sualauvi II, Samoa’s appointed head of state, announced that Parliament would be suspended “until such time as to be announced and for reasons that I will make known in due course.”Samoa’s Parliament had been scheduled to officially reopen on Monday, fulfilling a constitutional requirement to convene within a 45-day window of the April 9 election. Fiame Naomi Mata’afa, the leader of the newcomer party FAST, was to be sworn in as prime minister, ending Prime Minister Tuilaepa Aiono Sailele Malielegaoi’s 22-year tenure.Speaking by phone from Samoa early Sunday, Ms. Mata’afa said the proclamation was an attempt to prevent her party from taking power. “This is a coup,” she said. Mr. Tuilaepa could not be reached for comment.Ms. Mata’afa and her party, which campaigned on a platform of upholding the rule of law, have not yet given up hope of a legal resolution. Anticipating a roadblock before the proclamation was issued, the party’s lawyers had prepared paperwork to challenge it. They want the country’s Supreme Court to issue a ruling that would allow Parliament to convene on Monday as scheduled.“They’re going to have a meeting with the chief justice tomorrow,” Ms. Mata’afa said. “We’ll be filing for the revoking of this new proclamation.”It is unclear whether Mr. Sualauvi, whose role is ordinarily ceremonial, has the legal authority to suspend Parliament indefinitely or prevent it from meeting within the 45 day window. The latest uproar comes after weeks of breakneck events. A surprise dead heat in the electoral contest resulted in more than 20 legal challenges, including an attempt to block Ms. Mata’afa’s appointment by using a law meant to ensure that more women serve in Parliament.To comply with the law, Mr. Tuilaepa had argued, Parliament needed to add another seat, appointing an additional woman from his party, an act that would have given his party enough seats to hold onto the premiership. The argument and a call for a second election were ultimately rejected by the courts.Elections in Samoa, a country of 200,000 people, are not generally so explosive. Over the past four decades, Mr. Tuilaepa’s Human Rights Protection Party has consistently won a comfortable majority, helped by legal changes that have made dissent increasingly difficult and have blocked fledgling opposition parties from gaining traction.Prime Minister Tuilaepa Aiono Sailele Malielegaoi in 2018.Chang W. Lee/The New York TimesBut this year has been different. Three highly divisive bills that were widely seen as overreach on the part of the government led to Ms. Mata’afa’s defection from the Human Rights Protection Party last year.A seasoned and well-liked politician, Ms. Mata’afa has been in politics for more than 30 years and is the daughter of Samoa’s first prime minister. Her defection to FAST helped propel it to electoral success, eventually inspiring an influential independent candidate to throw his weight behind the party, breaking a tie.“Everything about this election — people have talked about it being unprecedented, but now we’re entering a truly unprecedented state,” said Kerryn Baker, an expert on the region at the Australian National University. “Things could be sorted out through alternate channels, but we’re essentially beyond the Constitution now.”Mr. Tuilaepa has made it clear that he will not vacate his position without a fight. Despite Ms. Mata’afa’s party holding 26 of the 51 available seats, Mr. Tuilaepa and his party had rejected multiple calls to concede.“They do not want to relinquish power,” said Patricia O’Brien, an expert on autocracy in the Pacific at the Australian National University. “Before, it was a veneer of democracy, but now, this is real democracy in action — where power has to be relinquished and where the voice of the people is not to Tuilaepa’s liking. He’s not doing what he should be doing, and that’s conceding.”Addressing the country in a live Facebook broadcast late Saturday, a serene but tired-looking Ms. Mata’afa urged Samoans to keep the peace. “We just need to try and find a rational way to get through this, and keep people calm,” she said afterward. “There are still some sensible people around, and we can work through this.”But she acknowledged that Mr. Tuilaepa and his supporters could still resist the transition of power: “We had been expecting that some other effort would be made, and I expect even more to come along.” More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Florida Republican Byron Donalds on Election Integrity and Trump’s Fraud Claims

      by

      Byron Donalds, a newly elected congressman, says Republicans are trying to secure elections, not suppress votes. And he disputes Donald Trump’s influence on trust.In the wake of the 2020 presidential election, Republicans have pushed sweeping changes to voting laws across the country, using false claims of voter fraud as their justification. Even in Florida, a state Donald J. Trump won easily, Republicans enacted a more targeted overhaul of elections law in lock step with Mr. Trump’s allegations. Several voting rights groups have sued the state, claiming that the new measures disenfranchise voters in the name of appeasing the former president.Representative Byron Donalds, a newly elected Florida Republican, believes the reaction to the new law is misguided and overblown. In an interview with The New York Times, he sought to explain Republican actions as distinct from Mr. Trump’s false claims, and in line with voter concerns. He argued that his state’s new law, and similar ones across the country, would inspire renewed confidence in the election process.Mr. Donalds won his House seat after serving in the Florida Legislature. He grew up in Brooklyn and worked in finance and banking before entering politics.The interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.What did you think of how the 2020 election went in Florida? Did you think it was administered properly, with no evidence of fraud?It was administered very properly. We had the best election laws in the country. Our secretary of state or local officials follow the law, as you know, as it’s written, to a T, and we were pretty much done by 10 o’clock that night.Do you believe the false claims by former President Trump that the 2020 election was rigged?I think what happened is that in several key counties and key states, election law was not followed. That’s clear. It’s crystal clear. You have a federal judge in Michigan that said as much. You have two counties in Wisconsin where the local election officials chose not to follow election laws and cited Covid-19 as the reason. You have a State Supreme Court of Pennsylvania that did not follow election law written by the state legislature there. You had the issues in Arizona, you had the consent decree in Georgia — that’s clear violations of the Constitution.Do you think, as former President Trump states, this amounts to widespread fraud that would have changed the outcome of the election?When you violate election law, and you have other bodies or other positions in our governmental apparatus that do not follow the written law, that leads to problems.So I just want to make sure I have this straight. You think that those problems happened elsewhere in the country, but not in Florida?Because in Florida, we followed our law.The Florida Legislature, where you once served, just passed an election reform measure. Why was that necessary if there was no fraud?The right to vote is sacrosanct. We all believe that. And the security of that ballot is also sacrosanct.And there should not be some other party that comes in between the voter casting their ballot and the election officer receiving that ballot and counting it. So I think getting rid of ballot harvesting is a great thing that we did. The other thing was that we tightened up the process of our people getting mail-in ballots.You know, I think the process we have now going forward in our state is actually a good one. Everybody’s free to request their ballot. They prove who they are, that’s a good thing. They receive their ballot, they vote. It’s all about security.Ballot harvesting was already outlawed in parts of the state. And new lawsuits claim that the real impact of the identification measures will be another barrier suppressing Black and Latino voters. What’s your response to that?I don’t pay any attention to those claims. I think the state will win in court. Voter ID claims — about how it disenfranchises minority communities — have been widely debunked. It is actually quite simple to get an ID. You’re talking to somebody who’s had a photo ID since he was 13 years old, when I grew up in Brooklyn, New York. It’s not the issue that it’s always made up to be, you know, by my friends on the other side of the aisle.In Florida, Republicans have taken advantage of things like ballot harvesting. They’ve made inroads with Black and Latino voters to win elections. Is there any risk this new law hurts your own party?No, I haven’t heard that.It was Republicans who brought back ballot harvesting in Florida under former Governor Bush and embraced widespread mail-in voting. What changed from then to now?I mean, OK, but that doesn’t mean I have to support it.I understand. I’m interested in what you think changed in the party from then to now, for a whole community of Republicans to say that’s something that they don’t support?I think the premise of your question is wrong. It’s not about what changed in the party. Political parties are made up of people, individuals who vote and politicians and candidates who run for office. That’s the basis of a political party. There’s no monolithic line of thinking that shifts every two to four years. That’s not the case. I can’t speak to what happened when former people were elected. I can speak to myself and what I’ve done..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-w739ur{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-w739ur{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-w739ur{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-9s9ecg{margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}.css-1jiwgt1{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-box-pack:justify;-webkit-justify-content:space-between;-ms-flex-pack:justify;justify-content:space-between;margin-bottom:1.25rem;}.css-8o2i8v{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:column;-ms-flex-direction:column;flex-direction:column;-webkit-align-self:flex-end;-ms-flex-item-align:end;align-self:flex-end;}.css-8o2i8v p{margin-bottom:0;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-1rh1sk1{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-1rh1sk1 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-1rh1sk1 em{font-style:italic;}.css-1rh1sk1 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;text-decoration-color:#ccd9e3;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#ccc;text-decoration-color:#ccc;}.css-1rh1sk1 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Do you think that those laws would have happened without the false claims from former President Trump about a rigged election? It does seem to stretch belief to say none of these new laws are related to politics and Trump. Is that what we’re saying?Looking at our election process is something, specifically in Florida, we continuously do. We passed an election law before 2020. We passed it in 2018 and 2019. We have reforms, I believe, in 2014 or 2015. So Florida, we’ve always been looking at our election laws, doing everything we can to make sure it’s a better law going forward.So as the supposition of your question, that we anticipated what Donald Trump might say, in the winter of 2020. And that’s why we made election law changes in 2019 and 2018. Come on, seriously?Have you followed any of the new election laws in other states?Yes, I think Georgia actually has a very good law. And frankly, it’s sad and, in my view, disgusting that the president referred to it as Jim Crow. It cheapens the history in our country with respect to actual Jim Crow, a disgusting relic of our past. And to try to equate that to what Georgia did, to me, is just completely illogical. It reeks of just the nastiest politics that you could ever want to bring up, to try to divide Americans and divide Georgians.How can you be so sure that these laws are strong enough to stop voter fraud but weak enough to not create new barriers for communities who have had it hard to vote?Those are not on the same playing field, they simply are not.When it comes to these extended lines that have happened in the past in Georgia — I’ve watched the news, too — you have to go look at the local official, what did they do and what did they not do to prepare for people wanting to cast ballots. The one thing we have to acknowledge, and you have to be honest about this, you have seen a rise in Black voting in our country in the last 15 years. And that is a great thing — as a Black man, I’m 100 percent behind that. But it is the responsibility of local officials to make sure that they have the additional polling places they need or that their equipment is sound. And I will tell you, Georgia’s law, or Florida’s law, provides so much access to the ballots, far more than in the state of New York, far more than the state of Delaware.You’re framing these new measures as a way to restore confidence in the democratic process and system. But what I don’t hear you saying — or any Republican, really — is that they think the former president impacted trust in that system. Do you think that his words have negatively impacted trust in the democratic system?No. No, I don’t. I think if you look at what the president has talked about, the president has talked about wanting to make sure that the elections are secure. That’s what he’s talked about more than anything else.I think we both know the former president has said a lot more than that.Four years ago, this time, what were we talking about? About how the Russians tamper with our elections, and that went on for two and a half years. I don’t have a problem with these political debates. Let’s have them. That’s great. But all I’m saying is, let’s — let’s understand the entire history.I was asking about Trump’s impact on trust.All that matters: Is it easier for white people or Black people, whether they are rich, middle income or poor, to cast ballots in the state of Georgia? And Florida? Yes or no? Is it easier? The answer is yes. Is it less easy for them to cast the same ballot in Delaware or New York? The answer is yes.Last question: Do you see the former president’s rhetoric as at least connected to the events that happened on January 6, even if you don’t see them affecting trust in the democratic system overall?No, I don’t. More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Daniel Ortega impedirá elecciones libres en Nicaragua

      by

      MANAGUA — Los procesos electorales en América Latina se dan de manera más o menos imperfecta, pero se dan; y, salvo pocas excepciones, los votos de los ciudadanos se cuentan de manera transparente. Son sistemas democráticos que aún no logran resolver problemas de fondo en nuestras sociedades, y en algunos países la credibilidad de las instituciones se ha deteriorado, pero los electores pueden corregir el rumbo. No es el caso de Nicaragua.En noviembre de este año se celebran elecciones para presidente y vicepresidente, y para renovar el total de los asientos de la Asamblea Nacional. La decisión cerrada de Daniel Ortega, quien llegó por segunda vez a la presidencia en 2007, es reelegirse una vez más, junto con su esposa, la vicepresidenta Rosario Murillo. Así alcanzaría veinte años consecutivos de mando, sin contar los diez que gobernó en el periodo de la revolución en los años ochenta, con lo que superaría con creces a cualquier miembro de la familia Somoza, que gobernó el país directa o indirectamente entre 1937 y 1979.En las últimas semanas, el plan maestro fraguado para impedir unas elecciones democráticas se ha echado a andar, y sus resultados empiezan a ser palpables.¿Se puede hablar de elecciones justas, libres y transparentes en Nicaragua? Los hechos lo niegan.La rebelión cívica iniciada en abril de 2018, con un saldo de al menos 328 asesinados, principalmente jóvenes, fue dominada por medio de la represión violenta, de acuerdo con la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Ahora toca el turno de actuar a la maquinaria política. Estas elecciones están orquestadas para anular la participación de las fuerzas que representen un riesgo real de cambio político, apartar a los candidatos que verdaderamente sean un desafío a la continuidad de Ortega e impedir el derecho de la ciudadanía al voto libre y secreto.La Asamblea Nacional, dominada por la aplanadora orteguista, aprobó en enero una reforma a la Constitución que impone la cadena perpetua por “delitos de odio”. Pero no busca castigar el odio racial o contra las minorías, sino a quienes adversan al régimen. También una ley de ciberdelitos, destinada a mantener bajo control a las redes sociales, y otra que impide presentarse como candidatos a cargos públicos a quienes caigan bajo la calificación de “agentes extranjeros”. Las causales son tantas, que resulta imposible librarse de algunas de ellas.La Ley de Defensa de los Derechos del Pueblo a la Independencia, la Soberanía y Autodeterminación para la Paz, pena con cárcel y despoja del derecho de ejercer cargos públicos a quienes, entre otros delitos antipatrióticos, “exalten y aplaudan sanciones contra el Estado de Nicaragua”. Es la única ley en el mundo que castiga los aplausos.Una de las protestas de 2018, en ManaguaEsteban Biba/Epa-Efe vía RexEn diciembre de 2018, la policía allanó las oficinas de El ConfidencialMeridith Kohut para The New York TimesEn octubre del año pasado, una resolución votada por la Asamblea General de la Organización de los Estados Americanos advierte que deben darse negociaciones “incluyentes y oportunas” entre el gobierno y la oposición para acordar reformas electorales “significativas y coherentes con las normas internacionales”; modernización y reestructuración del Consejo Supremo Electoral para garantizar que funcione de manera “totalmente independiente, transparente y responsable”; actualización del registro de votantes; y, entre otras medidas, observación electoral nacional e internacional.Hace pocas semanas, al abrirse formalmente el periodo electoral, Ortega hizo todo lo contrario: copó la totalidad de los cargos de magistrados del Consejo Supremo Electoral con leales partidarios suyos; e introdujo una serie de reformas a la Ley Electoral que establecen aún mayores restricciones a los partidos. En estas decisiones no hubo ninguna clase de negociación con las fuerzas de la oposición.Muy recientemente, fue despojado de su personería jurídica el Partido de Restauración Democrática, bajo cuya bandera participaría una amplia gama de organizaciones de oposición agrupadas en la Coalición Nacional, varias de ellas formadas a raíz de los sucesos de abril de 2018. Igual pasó con el Partido Conservador.Ahora mismo, el Ministerio Público, obediente también, levanta cargos de lavado de dinero, bienes y activos en contra de Cristiana Chamorro Barrios, hasta hace poco presidenta de la Fundación Violeta Barrios, que lleva el nombre de su madre, expresidenta de Nicaragua. A la cabeza de las encuestas entre los candidatos presidenciales, la acusación contra Chamorro Barrios busca inhabilitarla.Al mismo tiempo, esta semana los estudios de grabación de los programas de televisión de su hermano, el periodista Carlos Fernando Chamorro, que se transmiten a través de las redes sociales, fueron allanados por segunda vez por la policía, y sus equipos y archivos confiscados. Nada parece indicar que la persecución contra los medios independientes de comunicación vaya a detenerse.En medio de estas condiciones adversas, que tienden a empeorar, permanece en la contienda la Alianza Ciudadanos por la Libertad, hasta ahora con su personería en regla. Aún debe escoger a sus candidatos, pero Ortega se ha arrogado, mediante diversos mecanismos y estratagemas, una especie de derecho de veto sobre quienes pueden competir contra él, y quienes no.El aparato electoral es fiel a Ortega en sus distintos niveles, y en las mesas de votación, las papeletas y las actas estarán bajo el control mayoritario de sus partidarios. No existe a la fecha ningún organismo independiente, nacional o internacional, involucrado en la observación electoral.En una protesta de 2018, una manifestante llevó una pancarta con los rostros de Daniel Ortega y Anastasio Somoza.ReutersBajo un estado policial como el presente, no es posible imaginar ninguna actividad proselitista electoral en plazas o calles. El régimen no las permitirá, porque teme un desborde popular como el de hace tres años. Y la policía impide a los candidatos, de manera arbitraria, salir de sus domicilios. Se tratará entonces de unas elecciones donde, por lo visto, la campaña electoral se haría desde la cárcel, o con la casa por cárcel.Una resolución del Consejo de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas en marzo manda que se deje de acosar y asediar a los opositores y disidentes políticos en Nicaragua, y que cesen las detenciones arbitrarias, las amenazas y otras formas de intimidación como método para reprimir la crítica; y pide, además, “liberar a todos aquellos arrestados ilegal o arbitrariamente”. Pero todas las demandas y censuras de los organismos internaciones son papel mojado para Ortega. Más de cien prisioneros políticos permanecen en las cárceles.Mientras algún partido esté dispuesto a apañar el fraude, aceptando los escaños que le asignen como segunda fuerza en la Asamblea Nacional; y mientras su reelección sea reconocida diplomáticamente por los países occidentales una vez consumada, considerará que tiene la legitimidad que necesita.Y como en las viejas historias de los dictadores latinoamericanos, algún subalterno le preguntará antes de abrir las urnas: ¿Con cuántos votos quiere ganar, Su Excelencia?Sergio Ramírez es novelista y ensayista. Fue vicepresidente de Nicaragua entre 1985 y 1990. En 2017 fue galardonado con el premio Cervantes. More