The editor of Le Monde diplomatique complains because international observers are not accusing Mexican officials of vote fraud. Normally, when international observers watch an election and don't protest, then one is left with the impression they didn't find anything major to protest about. But for Mr. Ramonet and the Mexican Left, the existence of massive fraud must not be questioned. Foreigners' silence only means that they are part of the American hegemony that gives victories to "the ruling Catholic rightwing National Action party (PAN)" (boo, hiss).
That article is risibly false. PAN isn't a "Catholic" party, it's secular, although it's markedly more friendly toward religion than the anti-Catholic elites that have run Mexico for the last century. But I guess when you're writing for Le Monde, if a party isn't explictly against the Church, it's a "Catholic" party.
As for the 0.56% margin of victory, if anything, one would think that militates against the "massive fraud" accusation. After all, if you're going to commit massive fraud, why not win by a more convincing 5%? Why make the vote so close as to invite scrutiny?
Besides, in an American presidential election, that's the equivalent of a winning margin of 600,000 votes, give or take. Even in Chicago, it's tough to fake 600,000 votes when the elections are closely monitored.
What is it with the North American left. They did a flood of hate over Florida after the 2000 election, but the liberal media's own survey showed Bush won--besides virtually all the serious ballot and voting messes were in Dem. run areas as I remember. Is it total arrogance on their part-or massive self-righteousness that makes them always seeming to trash democracy-EXCEPT when they win. I can see them sticking to their beliefs, morals, etc. and planning to convince the people their values are right, but when they lose, they immediately attack the independent institutions that work to guarantee- as best as possible- honest elections.