The latest issue of the journal Chasqui already in the network. Elections in Italy and Mexico are of home. Two trials crumble two separate elections. Felipe Gaytan Alcalá
doctoral candidate in social sciences from the College of Mexico, considered in its delivery the Mexican case.
the doctoral work stands out not for the findings, but because of the inadequacies and inaccuracies in which incurred. Let's see.
From the first step, Gaytan encountered. Risk a claim. "The presidential elections in Mexico were one of the closest in modern history." Beyond
syntax error, the statement is far from correct. The 2006 is not one more, is the most competitive choice and closed the process of political liberalization in Mexico.
Facts. 2000: Vicente Fox (PAN), 42%, Francisco Labastida (PRI), 36%, Cuauhtemoc Cardenas (PRD), 16%, six points off between the first and second.
In 1994, Ernesto Zedillo, the PRI won 48% of the vote, Diego Fernandez de Ceballos, the PAN, 25% and Cuauhtemoc Cardenas, the PRD with 16%. The gap between the pointers: 23 percentage points (eight million votes).
From "modern history" therefore there is no trace of an election result similar to this year: 0.56 percent difference between the two main opponents. More
yet. Gaytan collects misinformation. Asserts that political parties were prerogatives "close" to 2 billion dollars for advertising.
IFE divided among the eight parties participating in the election for operating activities: 2 000 068 million pesos. And the same amount for campaign expenses. The figure does not come close, more than 2 billion pesos.
According to the author, during the six months before the election, were disseminated in newspapers, radio and television 270 000 announcements of candidates for elected positions (President, councils, Senate seats and governorships.) Not so.
From 19 January to 28 June, official election period, only radio and television, the candidates tried to persuade the electorate casting 704, 502 spots. TV screens went 142.358. Were transmitted by radio 562.144. In the press, 15.579 inserts. And in the streets, billboards 5.722. Accurate
add the following. Of the three major presidential candidates, López Obrador was the biggest in TV was announced: 16.316 spots. Calderon chose the radio: 106.960 ad. Y Madrazo road and the press: 3.242 7.864 spectacular and insertions, respectively. Three
jewels. First
. Gaytan indicated that surveys each month rose by "polling eight houses in the country." What: Reforma, El Universal, Milenio-Demotecnia, Excelsior-Parametría, Televisa-Consulta Mitofsky, GEA-ISA, Beltrán y Asociados, Ipsos-Bimsa, Covarrubias y Asociados, ARCOPA, Political Marketing, Indemerc?
Of those listed, only seven first made public its work monthly.
II. During the election, Lopez Obrador repeatedly dismissed surveys not installed as a pointer, then asserted he had polls that kept him 10 points above its nearest competitor.
"never openly said the company responsible for it, but it is believed that there were two houses interviewers (sic), a Mexican named Covarrubias y Asociados and other Ecuadorian called Confidential Report," said Gaytan Alcalá. The other house
pollster who worked for Lopez Obrador was the Mexican Institute of Public Opinion (IMO), responsible for supply work in which opinion polls AMLO always appeared later. Third
. To speak of the Other Campaign EZLN Felipe slides. Says that the Zapatistas toured the country in 2002. No. It was the first year of Fox's government: from 24 February to 11 March 2001.
In addition. The best test of Felipe Gaytan Alcalá, the title Media as political and electoral arena. *******
Ø The above information may be verified in the media monitoring Federal Electoral Institute. Ø
Results from pre-election polls on the presidential race broadcast during the first half of the year may be revised in Mexico Review page created by the Association Mexican Research Agency (AMAI ).
doctoral candidate in social sciences from the College of Mexico, considered in its delivery the Mexican case.
the doctoral work stands out not for the findings, but because of the inadequacies and inaccuracies in which incurred. Let's see.
From the first step, Gaytan encountered. Risk a claim. "The presidential elections in Mexico were one of the closest in modern history." Beyond
syntax error, the statement is far from correct. The 2006 is not one more, is the most competitive choice and closed the process of political liberalization in Mexico.
Facts. 2000: Vicente Fox (PAN), 42%, Francisco Labastida (PRI), 36%, Cuauhtemoc Cardenas (PRD), 16%, six points off between the first and second.
In 1994, Ernesto Zedillo, the PRI won 48% of the vote, Diego Fernandez de Ceballos, the PAN, 25% and Cuauhtemoc Cardenas, the PRD with 16%. The gap between the pointers: 23 percentage points (eight million votes).
From "modern history" therefore there is no trace of an election result similar to this year: 0.56 percent difference between the two main opponents. More
yet. Gaytan collects misinformation. Asserts that political parties were prerogatives "close" to 2 billion dollars for advertising.
IFE divided among the eight parties participating in the election for operating activities: 2 000 068 million pesos. And the same amount for campaign expenses. The figure does not come close, more than 2 billion pesos.
According to the author, during the six months before the election, were disseminated in newspapers, radio and television 270 000 announcements of candidates for elected positions (President, councils, Senate seats and governorships.) Not so.
From 19 January to 28 June, official election period, only radio and television, the candidates tried to persuade the electorate casting 704, 502 spots. TV screens went 142.358. Were transmitted by radio 562.144. In the press, 15.579 inserts. And in the streets, billboards 5.722. Accurate
add the following. Of the three major presidential candidates, López Obrador was the biggest in TV was announced: 16.316 spots. Calderon chose the radio: 106.960 ad. Y Madrazo road and the press: 3.242 7.864 spectacular and insertions, respectively. Three
jewels. First
. Gaytan indicated that surveys each month rose by "polling eight houses in the country." What: Reforma, El Universal, Milenio-Demotecnia, Excelsior-Parametría, Televisa-Consulta Mitofsky, GEA-ISA, Beltrán y Asociados, Ipsos-Bimsa, Covarrubias y Asociados, ARCOPA, Political Marketing, Indemerc?
Of those listed, only seven first made public its work monthly.
II. During the election, Lopez Obrador repeatedly dismissed surveys not installed as a pointer, then asserted he had polls that kept him 10 points above its nearest competitor.
"never openly said the company responsible for it, but it is believed that there were two houses interviewers (sic), a Mexican named Covarrubias y Asociados and other Ecuadorian called Confidential Report," said Gaytan Alcalá. The other house
pollster who worked for Lopez Obrador was the Mexican Institute of Public Opinion (IMO), responsible for supply work in which opinion polls AMLO always appeared later. Third
. To speak of the Other Campaign EZLN Felipe slides. Says that the Zapatistas toured the country in 2002. No. It was the first year of Fox's government: from 24 February to 11 March 2001.
In addition. The best test of Felipe Gaytan Alcalá, the title Media as political and electoral arena. *******
Ø The above information may be verified in the media monitoring Federal Electoral Institute. Ø
Results from pre-election polls on the presidential race broadcast during the first half of the year may be revised in Mexico Review page created by the Association Mexican Research Agency (AMAI ).
