Chavez' Allies Win 89 Pct of Congress Votes - Tally

[cal04]

Parties allied to Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez won 89 percent of votes counted in a preliminary tally of nearly 80 percent of the ballots for the National Assembly, electoral authorities said on Sunday. The National Electoral Council said turnout was of 25 percent of registered voters. Main opposition parties boycotted the poll, accusing electoral authorities of favoring the populist leader and manipulating electronic voting machines.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/international/international-venezuela-election-results.html
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's political party, MVR, said on Sunday it won 114 National Assembly seats out of 167 in congressional elections to give it more than two-thirds of the legislature.

Earlier, the National Electoral Council said turnout was about 25 percent of registered voters. The council had yet to give an official voting tally. Main opposition parties boycotted the poll after accusing electoral authorities of favoring the populist leader and manipulating electronic voting machines.

Update from Reuters
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2005-12-05T020344Z_01_KWA504528_RTRUKOC_0_US-VENEZUELA-ELECTION-RESULTS.xml

[Tiggeroshii]

1. What are we going to say now? They cheated by using electronic voting

machines? Hypocrtitical irony, I'll say.

[Toots]

37. Who is we?

It sounds like the ones currently in power increased their position by Democratic election. No machine rigging has been mentioned by either side. I don't believe they use machines. votes are counted by hand..

[Tiggeroshii]

41. I'm only guessing they used machiens because his opposition

accuses him of manipulating them:

"Main opposition parties boycotted the poll after accusing electoral authorities of favoring the populist leader and manipulating electronic voting machines."

Of course, the US wouldn't hesitate for a moment to go against Chavez with his accusers in saying the election was rigged with electronic voting machines.

[Judi Lynn]

43. There's a big difference in the ones used in Venezuela, and ours.

You might want to check Peac Patriot's post. It explains the fact they use open source programming, which is totally transparent. We aren't allowed that decency. Here's Post #32. Very, very helpful:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1966067#1966885

[K-W]

2. Why would someone with his approval ratings rig an election?

Heres to the future of Venezuala!

[fshrink]

3. Although it's relatively good news, 25%...

...turnout is way too low. Something is not right in the system, especially if the % of registered voters to the voting population is also low.

[IndianaGreen]

4. This is the NY Times reporting, I suspect they only polled the Caracas

neighborhoods where those Bush-loving/Chavez-hating elites live.

Galeano: Chavez Doing Well

Rio de Janeiro, Dec 4 (Prensa Latina) "The more Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is attacked, the more he is confirmed as doing good things for Venezuela and Latin America," affirmed Uruguayan writer Eduardo Galeano.

In an interview Published Sunday by Jornal do Brasil and making use of his well known ironic style, Galeano stated "Hugo Chavez is a devil because two million Venezuelans became literate using the world´s most important natural resource: oil."

Venezuela had two million children who could not attend school because they lacked documents, and then "the demon-like government did an essential thing: it accepted children in schools with or without documents," the intellectual recalled.

"The Cuban physicians in the country, paid with oil to assist poor neighborhoods, are another sign that Chavez is on an Earth-visit from hell," he continued ironically.

In today´s world, "Anyone who is Islamic is rated as a potential terrorist. Communists used to be on the target. In the inquisition era, all women were suspected witches," he compared.

Hatred by Chavez´ enemies "is tainted by racial contempt, but if he were carrying out a policy favoring foreign capital and Venezuela´s traditional owners, nobody would ever care about his skin color," the writer pointed out.

http://www.plenglish.com/Article.asp?ID={6078E27D-2681-43DD-B977-042F9CC68377}&language=EN

[fshrink]

30. Would make sense. We'll watch.

[wakeme2008]

5. Well

"Main opposition parties boycotted"

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. Venezuela 'landslide' for Chavez

5 December 2005

Parties allied to President Hugo Chavez say they have won all 167 seats in the country's parliament, after elections boycotted by the opposition.

None of the five main opposition parties took part, accusing the electoral body of bias.

Only about 25% of registered voters cast a ballot.

A two-thirds majority in parliament will allow Mr Chavez to remove the current constitutional limit of two presidential terms in office.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4496586.stm

[Cocoa]

7. all 167 seats?

holy crikes! They were predicting "just" 141 earlier today. :wow:

[regnaD kciN]

8. Quick, George! Time to start recruiting Venezuelan "contras"...

...after all, it worked for your dad in Nicaragua! I wonder if Ollie North is busy...

:puke:

[Pavulon]

9. Lets see if he pulls the dictator trigger(NT)

[DoYouEverWonder]

11. Looks like he doesn't need too

Unlike Bush, Chavez has no problem winning an election without cheating.

[Pavulon]

12. I was talking about the term limit revision

Don't know all that much about Venezuela's politics.

[K-W]

14. And term limits have what to do with dictatorship exactly? EOM

[Solon]

20. Good Point, the Prime Minister of Great Britian has no term limits...

but still has to face his or her party and people if they disapprove of his/her policies.

[Pavulon]

38. I'm sure if the Congress changed term limits for presidents

you would care. I could care less who they elect. Their country their business.

I was commenting on the content of the original post.

[K-W]

40. You still havent explained what term limits have to do with dictatorship.

I'm sure if the Congress changed term limits for presidents you would care.

Im not sure why you are making an assumption like that, but regardless, whether one does or doesnt favor term limits, a lack of term limits is not a sign of a dictatorship.

[bemildred]

39. Mr. Chavez can be President for one more term under present law.

He has stated that he will not stay in office past 2012 (IIRC).
He might well, of course, help select his successor.

Mr. Uribe in Colombia, OTOH, has just had the law changed so that he may run again, as he could not otherwise.

[Psephos]

42. He also now has enough votes in the Assembly to change the constitution

Any ole way he likes. He can be President-For-Life, no problemo.

Chavez's Fifth Republic Movement party has claimed 114 seats in the just-expanded 167-member National Assembly. Allies of the party occupy the remaining 53, which means Chavez has 100% control of the Assembly, and absolute dictat with the >2/3 Fifth Republic majority. Heh heh heh. I wonder who will speak truth to power now?

I'm having a picnic listening to the cult of Chavez trying to make 100% control of the Assembly sound "democratic."

:popcorn:

Especially when 75% of the voters stayed away. Especially when soldiers were ordered to vote, and public employees were told vote or lose your job. Especially when it turns out the government can audit the "open source" Smartmatic voting machines and identify voters and who they cast votes for. Gee, I wonder why no one voted.

Peace.


"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts
absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."
- Lord Acton


edited to break paragraph

[BamaLefty]

10. Bah

I don't like him.

:(

[merwin]

13. "Polling stations in middle class urban areas were almost empty"

Wonder what that means...

[K-W]

15. It means the opposition parties

who represent the uppper and middle classes boycotted the election driving down the participation and giving the parties representing the poor a huge victory (it would have been a victory either way).

[Solon]

17. It perhaps the dumbest thing they ever have done...

"Boycotting" an election is stupid, to say the least. Hell, if you get technical, the "apathetic" majority in this country do the same damn thing, and that's almost half the population here in the states. This is the best way that the opposition had to disarm themselves in politics.

[K-W]

18. They may figure the only way they get back in power is with US force.

So they are just taking every opportunity to claim Chavez is illegitimate. And this way Washington can point to thier non participation as proof that Chavez is up to no good.

[IndianaGreen]

31. The "middle class urban areas" are the Carmel and Fishers of Indiana

which as all Hoosiers know, are upscale communities that always vote for the GOP and Republicans such as Rep. Dan Burton.

We must be careful when we read these stories in the American corporate press, for their owners have sided with the elites of Venezuela.

They do not represent the workers!

[kansasblue]

16. this is not good. It's basically the collapse of the opposition parties.

Not good for any country. The Bush Admin will beat them to death with this.

[Solon]

19. Yeah, but they pulled their own plug...

It was stupid on their part, to make this move, they hurt themselves politically.

[Darranar]

21. No, it wasn't, it was ingenious.

They know very well that if they had remained they would have been crushed, and this way they have the recourse of saying, "but we boycotted the election, so it wasn't legitimate!"

[Solon]

22. That argument wouldn't work, except to the already converted...

The heart of the matter is this, in a Democracy, the parties that choose to participate CAN participate, but that doesn't mean they HAVE to participate. These parties chose to defang themselves, voluntarly, probably to try to get US help to commit treason, but then again, they aren't exactly the most sane people in Venezuela right now.

[Darranar]

23. They seem to have managed to impact the turnout rates

quite significantly.

They are not out of influence, nor out of supporters, and enough paranoia about "authoritarianism" may manage to sway over some of Venezuela's middle class to the cause.

[Solon]

25. True...

However, wouldn't the Repubs or Democrats do the same thing if one of the parties officially boycotted a vote. Hell, if the Repubs boycotted, what is the incentive for me to participate, or any other person that doesn't belong to their party? Hell, the only ones that I can think of that would would be the Greens and other third parties.

[Zhade]

26. I, too, think that's what the oligarchy decided.

VIVA CHAVEZ (but watch your back, these guys are nasty)!

[Zhade]

27. K/R

Good news.

[papau]

24. Here is an original NY Times story - not Reuters - on the election

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/05/international/americas/05venez.html

December 5, 2005
Chávez's Grip Tightens as Rivals Boycott Vote
By JUAN FORERO
BOGOTÁ, Colombia, Dec. 4 - Venezuela's firebrand president, Hugo Chávez, took overwhelming control of the National Assembly on Sunday after five major opposition parties boycotted a national election for all 167 congressional seats.

Venezuela's leftist government increased its slight majority to take nearly all the congressional seats, the ruling party said, as up to 75 percent of eligible voters stayed away from the polls.

The outcome will permit the National Assembly to change the Constitution easily, as well as enact a range of major changes supported by Mr. Chávez, in areas ranging from Venezuela's health system to the criminal code.

The withdrawal of the parties also ensured that Venezuela's opposition has, for all practical purposes, ceased to exist in an organized form, paving the way for an easy victory by Mr. Chávez for another six-year term in the election for president late next year. Mr. Chávez, first elected in 1998, has already served longer than any leader of a major Latin American country, except for Fidel Castro of Cuba.

"Chávez would have annihilated them anyway," Alberto Garrido, a critic of the government and an author of several books about the president, said by phone from Caracas. "Now, they are starting from scratch. There are people in the opposition, but the opposition leadership is in tumult, without a strategy. Tomorrow, Monday, they will not know what to do."<snip>


Of some 5,516 candidates running for office, about 556 dropped out - just over 10 percent but representing a vast majority of candidates from five major anti-Chávez parties. The boycott, coupled with heavy rains, prompted anti-government voters like Ángel Rodríguez, 46, a chauffeur, to decide not to vote.
<snip>
Jens Gould contributed reporting from Caracas, Venezuela, for this article.

[1932]

28. I just started reading Richard Gott's book on Chavez

and one impression I'm getting that is relevant to today's vote is that there's a lot difference of opinion between all the parties. For example, the Communist parties pretty much don't like Chavez and Gott describes them as being an opposition party to Chavez. I wonder if the Times and the US media are not bothering to make this distinction and only count the opposition on the right. In other words, just because all the left parties won definitely does not mean Chavez has a legislature that will do anything that he wants.

[Judi Lynn]

29. Good info. to learn, 1932. Most people don't know this, especially

the nimrods who label Chavez a communist.



They won't give up their Cold War. It still lives in the hearts and "minds" of right-wingers. They haven't found anything powerful enough to replace it, although they're trying.

[Peace Patriot]

32. Venezuela has electronic voting but it's OPEN SOURCE programming--

that is, anyone may review how the votes are tabulated--unlike the United States of America, where Bushite companies own and control the election system using "TRADE SECRET," PROPRIETARY software.

Venezuelan elections are monitored by hundreds of international election monitors from the EU, the OAS, and the Carter Center, and have time and again been declared aboveboard and legitimate, as this one has been (see below). Can we say the same? International election monitors were not permitted to verify the 2004 election here! They were thrown out.

The opposition there is like our wingers here. They will claim ANYTHING, no matter how irrational and insupportable it is. And northern corporate news monopolies play along with this crap, by publishing sentences like the following, WITHOUT VETTING THE OPPOSITION'S CLAIMS: "Main opposition parties boycotted the poll after accusing electoral authorities of favoring the populist leader and manipulating electronic voting machines."

Where is there ANY evidence that the Venezeulan government is "manipulating electronic voting machines"? There is no evidence of this at all. ALL evidence points very strongly in the other direction--repeatedly verified by hundreds of objective observers. But they just let this claim stand, without any effort at factual information or truth. They also blow the low turnout out of proportion, failing to give any reference point. (It was actually a BETTER voter turnout than previous by-elections, despite severe weather. See below.)

The boycott was a desperation move aimed at creating just this sort of slanted coverage. They can't win honest elections, so they go for propaganda points, looking to the Pat Robertson's and John Negroponte's of the Bush junta to destroy democracy in Venezuela and re-install fascist rule.

-------

***I strongly suggest that DUers BE VERY WARY of corporate news coverage of Venezuela, and seek out ALTERNATIVE news sources. Here's one of the best sites:***

-------

WWW.VENEZUELANALYSIS.COM

"Chavez’s Party Wins 68% of Seats in Venezuela’s Parliament"
Sunday, Dec 04, 2005
By: Gregory Wilpert – Venezuelanalysis.com

(My summary: A government spokesman pointed out that there is traditionally low voter turnout in Venezuela by-elections, and that pro-Chavez parties pulled a higher percentage of voters to the polls (17%) that in previous by-elections (11%); and that is the true reference point, for comparison purposes; also, there were severe weather conditions in Venezuela yesterday, keeping some voters home. A spokeswoman for the US-funded Sumate group, which opposes Chavez, complains (--irrationally, given their boycott!) that the National Assembly has been converted from multi-party to mono-party, but another local politico comments that the National Assembly is actually more diverse now, with many independents.)
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1837

Sunday, Dec 04
"Only 10% of Candidates Withdrew from Venezuelan Elections"
By: Venezuelanalysis.com

"Caracas, Venezuela, December 4, 2005—Venezuela’s National Electoral Council announced that by 4pm on Saturday, when the deadline for withdrawing candidacies passed, only 10% of candidates for the National Assembly had withdrawn. That is, out 5,516 candidates, only 516 had requested the Electoral Council (CNE) to remove their names from the contest. Similarly, out of 355 parties and political organizations inscribed in the contest, only 18, or 5%, had withdrawn their candidacies from the contest." (MORE)
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1836

Sunday, Dec 04
"International Observers Ratify Transparency and Legitimacy of Venezuelan Vote"
By: Venezuelanalysis.com

"Caracas, Venezuela, December 4, 2005—Yesterday, international observers from the electoral commissions of El Salvador, Colombia, Panama, Uruguay, and Nicaragua declared their support of the National Assembly vote taking place in Venezuela today. “Democracy is constructed by those who participate, thus the withdrawal … of the opposition parties does not delegitimize the parliamentary elections,” said Eugenio Chicas, a magistrate of the electoral council of El Salvador.//...(Venezuela's vote) is one of the most audited and certified votes in Latin America." (MORE)
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1835

Thursday, Dec 01
"Open Letter to the Journalists Covering the Venezuelan Elections"
By: Mark Weisbrot and Larry Birns

"The decision of four opposition parties in Venezuela to withdraw from elections this weekend raises important questions for the media. It is clear to anyone familiar with the situation that this is an attempt to discredit the election, by parties that (according to opposition polling) were indisputably expected to do very badly in the election. This is despite their control over the majority of the broadcast and print media in Venezuela, as well as most of the country’s national income and wealth." (MORE)
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1618

[IndianaGreen]

33. What the Bush regime and its masters in Wall Street fear the most

is the increasingly red tint of this map:



Latin America's political map could find itself being redrawn as 12 of the region's countries prepare for presidential elections between November 2005 and the end of 2006.

One of the key issues - being closely watched by Washington - is whether the recent left-wing trend in the region will continue. And, if it does, what will be the likely nature of any new left-leaning government. Will newly-elected leaders be of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez variety or of the moderate Brazilian President Lula variety?

Also long-awaited elections will decide the fate of three countries currently ruled by interim governments: Bolivia, Ecuador and Haiti.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/guides/456900/456942/html/nn1page1.stm

[Peace Patriot]

35. Thanks for the map! That explains a lot. (Pix vs 1,000 words.)

There is, in fact, a fabulous democracy movement in Latin America, and, when you have honest elections and democracy, "leftists" always win, because "leftists" represent the interests of the majority, the poor and the "blue collar" and "white collar" working classes, as well as those in the upper classes who are fair-minded, progressive and humane.

We, as a country, should be CELEBRATING this development in Latin America. It is a realization of our own ideals of democracy, with government responsive to the will of the people. But, sadly, our junta unleashes people like Pat (dinner at the White House) Robertson, to threaten assassination against democratically elected presidents, sends death squads into Haiti (and who knows where else, right now) and kidnaps and removes their democratically elected president, and constantly badmouths and undermines any signs of democracy, and funds corporate elites, and interferes in elections, and issues yet more threats.

What's wrong with this picture?

[Peace Patriot]

34. Google provides a fascinating news service: www.news.google.com

They post all 500+ news articles on the Venezuelan election from around the world, featuring 4 or 5 of them on the front page, in apparently randomized order, so that your first read on the story might come from, say, China, or Turkey. They give no preference at all to the "usual suspects" here--NYT, WaPo, etc.

This allows you to immedately plug into a broad overview of the story from different cultures and countries, and different interests groups (i.e., rich vs poor), and makes a new game possible: Who writes the worst headline for stories that favor the poor and the oppressed of the world?

In this case, the NYT takes the prize, with their "Chavez Grip Tightens as Rivals Boycott Vote." Only one or two others follow their lead. All the rest of the 500+ articles--whether from corporate news monopolies or not--give it a much more neutral headline.

Some examples (of the prevailing tone):

Chavez's ruling coalition to win all parliament seats (Xinhua-China)
Chavez lawmakers claim victory after Congress vote (Reuters)
Chavez's Party Gets Big Election Victory (Forbes)
Coalition Party's Triumph in Venezuela Polls (Zaman Online-Turkey
Chavez Allies Winning at Polls Amid Boycott (Los Angeles Times)
Chavez Backers Claim Sweep in Venezuela (Science Daily)
Chavez Allies Are Poised To Solidify Their Majority (Washington Post)
Chavez Expected to Gain Bigger Majority (Miami Herald)

Those who followed the NYT lead about Chavez "tightening" his "grip" take second prize in the Worst Headlines contest. They are the Sidney Morning Herald ("Boycott tightens Chavez's grip on presidency") and Special Broadcast Services-Australia ("Venezuela Leader Tightens Grip"). Bloomberg gets a special prize for not mentioning a Chavez victory at all, in their headline, "Venezuela Turnout About 25 Percent in Congressional Elections."

-----

The NYT article is also full of buzz words and fear words (besides the title's "tightening his grip"), all aimed at making Chavez--the highly popular president of Venezuela, repeatedly elected and supported with big majorities, in highly monitored elections--seem like a menace, a future dictator, a represser of the opposition, when he is nothing of the kind. "Firebrand." "Overwhelming control." "Leftist government." "...already served longer than any leader of a major Latin American country, except for Fidel Castro of Cuba." "A vast majority" of opposition candidates withdrew (in reality, only 10% of candidates overall). They stack it and stack and stack it this way, until you think of the Chavez gov't as a dangerous junta "tightening" its stranglehold on the country, with a "firebrand" "leftist" (read flaming communist) government wielding tanks and machetes in "overwhelming control" of the good people of Venezuela.

I imagine that US journalism schools now have whole classes in how to write corporate propaganda like this, without seeming to do so. (Or, the talented propagandists are the ones who get hired by the likes of the NYT.)

My quick scan of other articles indicates that the other articles are also more neutral in the text (as well as in the title), but all the corporate news sources tend to leave out some important information (such as the Venezuelan gov't minister's data on past by-elections, which reveal that by-elections always have low turnouts, and that this one had a BETTER turnout than the last two, despite the oil elite's boycott and wretched weather. See www.venezuelanalysis.com.)

[Judi Lynn]

36. That's a powerful omission. Without the truth, right-wing propaganda

prevails. Idiots become assertive, hurling insults and threats, like Pat Robertson. They are operating in vacuums from which the truth has been removed.

The record of previous by-elections is a gigantic detail they purposely removed in order to create their spin. They lead you to a completely bogus view of recent Venezuelan history.

Delusion prompts a lot of right-wing posters to hurl themselves at Democratic message boards to fight until their dying breaths against people who have made a point of trying to find out the truth of Latin American events as they develope.