---
I don't think but that there's any question that Lopez Obrador won the elections and there is now an active effort to steal them.
The reason I know is because I saw the TV coverage Sunday night. And when the precincts closed and it came time to announce the results of the exit polls, something bizarre happened.
Unlike in the U.S. where there is only one exit poll, and all the networks agree to lie about it and present it as their very own exit poll, the two major TV networks and several other large news organizations all commissioned exit polls by different polling organizations. As did the major parties.
So at the appointed time, the bigfoot anchors went on the air saying they had the exit poll results in hand and the difference between the two leading contenders was too close to call. They reiterated, the numbers obtained by the two leading candidates were within the plus/minus 1.6% statistical error of these polls, the election was extremely tight, etc.
And I hit the web pages of the others that sponsored exit polls, only to find the same response. "Too close to call."
BUT NO ONE WAS OFFERING THE ACTUAL EXIT POLL NUMBERS OR PERCENTS. Not for President.
Now, each one of these news and partisan organizations had spent tens of thousands of dollars or more doing the exit polls. It at least the case of the news organizations, their reasons for doing this were competitive. Yet here they are, and they ALL reach the SAME IDENTICAL "civic minded" position: they're going to flush the exit poll money down the toilet and just say too close to call.
What this means is there was a prior arrangement between the heads of these news organizations --tacit or explicit-- to withhold the information from the people. Because it may be that one exit poll showing a given candidate ahead, but not with numbers that are statistically significant, and even though usually it is right, according to statistical science, you really can't say more than "too close to call."
However if a candidate comes out ahead in all four or five independent exit polls, that is a very strong statement of likelihood that this candidate had more people coming out to vote for him. Because statistical science says *normally* the poll is right on the money, within a few tenths of a percent, and it is only an outlying rare bird, one case out of 20, where the poll is off by the "full" margin of error.
Lopez Obrador said, and no one disputed it, that the majority of exit polls showed him ahead. If that were the case, that would explain why the agreement to suppress the numbers stuck. If the results had been pro-PAN mostly, there would have been no reason or motive to stick with the agreement to suppress, since the bourgeoisie was pro-PAN and freedom of the press belongs to those who own the press.
But if the numbers favored AMLO, it's an entirely different matter, even if you *don't* assume, as I do, that of course the media barons are at the heart of the election-stealing conspiracy. (I assume that for reasons too numerous to mention but mostly because I've been a hack for 35 years, two decades of that in major corporate news organizations, and intimately involved in organizing election coverage. And I'm an intellectually arrogant SOB and any other explanation for what I've seen, frankly, insults my intelligence. And I don't care how much you say it's a chicken with severe arthritis and laryngitis: it's a goddamn duck, and any idiot willing to open their eyes can see it).
Putting together the non-information from the exit polls with the data Yoshie offers via translation on MR zine we have the following picture. Before the election AMLO was leading. On election day exit polls suggested AMLO would win. In the counting, Calderon is ahead, but about 10% or more of the votes are MIA (that's Missing In Action, not Marxist Internet Archive).
Given how ... phlegmatic AMLO has been about the whole thing, most people in Mexico now assume Calderon won. But if he did win these elections, he did so the old-fashioned way: he stole them.