|
by the numbers, and by shrewd analysis. Congress will likely vote to restore Zelaya. And it is in the Nationalist Party candidate's interest to facilitate the deal so that the election will receive international approval. Giordano says the Nationalist candidate is ahead in the polls and wants the election to be accepted. He says that where the problem may come--and the golpistas are already lying about this!--is this business of the Supreme Court 'permitting' the Congress to restore Zelaya. Giordano (and Zelaya spokespeople) are saying that there is no such requirement in the deal they signed. The golpistas say there is. This could hold up restoring Zelaya for months--to the end of the term that they have robbed him of.
Regarding the polls...
As I understand it, the Nationalists are to the right, the Liberal Party (Zelaya's party) to the left, but (except for Zelaya himself), it's a Tweedle-Dee/Tweedle-Dum political spectrum, as here. One puzzle I have is, WHY would the Honduran people favor the right--after they just did this brutal coup? The answer may be that it was the Liberal Party (Zelaya's own party) that led the coup. People may want to punish them for it. It will purge the government of Liberal Party traitors (coup supporters). With a clean slate, maybe they will be able to reform the Liberal Party--make it into a truly representative party. (This would be a good project for Zelaya, when his term is over in January.)
On the other hand, will they be likely to retain or restore Zelaya reforms, such as raising the minimum wage, with the rightwing party in office? And why wouldn't Honduran voters be shunning both of these wretched "ten families" political tools (the Pukes and the Blue Dogs) and flock to the lesser known leftist candidates (I think there is at least one running for president, and he is anti-coup and aligned with Zelaya, whereas T-Dee and T-Dum both toadied to the Junta)? How does a violent military coup result in a rightwing candidate winning? Are the opinion polls inaccurate (because of conditions of severe repression), or rigged? Is this Supreme Court ploy--a further delay--an election-rigging delay?
Also, I wonder if Zelaya has endorsed--or will endorse--the Liberal candidate. Media and civil rights conditions have been such that he can only communicate to the people by word of mouth. If things go well, he will now have a bigger trumpet. Will he use it to support his party's candidate (and let bygones be bygones regarding the coup, in that respect). Zelaya is hugely popular in Honduras (stratospheric numbers--nearly 70%), so what he says and does about the election will carry considerable weight. He could "save" the Liberal candidate. Maybe that would be a smart thing to do. Or maybe he's too fed up, and will form a new party.
This election should have been put off for four months--and Zelaya restored to office during that time--the time that was lost--for people to be able to absorb what has happened in conditions of freedom and a free press, for the left to be able to recover after severe repression, and for new candidates to emerge and be nominated. As always, the right has money and the people have time. With time, the people can overcome the power of money. (That's why at least two presidential terms are important, and unlimited terms is the most democratic--as with our own FDR.) John McCain has poured $43 million US taxpayer dollars into rightwing political groups in Honduras. Only rightwing TV/radio has been allowed to broadcast. These are NOT fair conditions. If Obama/Clinton could turn things around so quickly--with economic hammers--why didn't they turn things around toward better fairness? And sooner?
|