Chavismo Is Very Concerned About Capriles’ MUDslide in Sunday’s Primaries

February 14, 2012

While I expected the surprise factor to play a role in how Chavismo reacted to Sunday’s results, I am a little surprised by the fraud slant taken by most Chavista leaders. I mean, you can expect craziness from Mario Silva, but when Diosdado Cabello and Jorge Rodriguez step in to suggest fraud, when the Government controlled Electoral Board ran the election, you know these guys are nervous.

I do not care much for Mario Silva’s rant on Sunday, he clearly went bezerk with the results. But when the man that is trying to succeed Chavez comes out, military fatigue on, saying “It has to be determined whether if those numbers truly exist”, you know something is up.

To say nothing of former CNE President and Mayor of the Libertador Municipality Jorge Rodriguez, who came up with this very unprofessional looking chart, claiming it suggests fraud:

This chart claims to show the number of votes per candidate as a function of time and somehow the non-uniform rates are supposed to be evidence of fraud. And then comes the electoral expert from Chavez’ PSUV party who says it would have been impossible to get 3 million votes in the three hours allocated. Maybe he was the one that told the Government how to limit the number of voting machines in order to limit the number of votes. He obviously failed…

The truth is Capriles’ MUDslide los tiene locos. The total number of votes was an incredible 3.04 million votes, with Capriles getting over the 1.9 million number. When someone told me at 5 PM on Sunday that we could get three million votes, I found the number so incredible, that I dismissed the same person’s number that Capriles had 62% (He got 64.2%)

Meanwhile, the big autocrat has yet to say anything, while I think the MUD has to emphasize that the CNE is controlled by Chavismo. BTW, shame on the CNE Board members, only one of them, the lone non-Chavista has defended their integrity. Lucena, the President of the CNE, was wishy-washy. She did say that the CNE controlled the process in all but 160,000 votes, but she did not want to say much on the controversy. She is probably waiting for instructions from above.

For now, this is fun. When Chavismo does not establish the agenda and reacts to the news, you know they will screw up. So, for now, get the popcorn out and enjoy!

Advertisements

49 Responses to “Chavismo Is Very Concerned About Capriles’ MUDslide in Sunday’s Primaries”

  1. JotaE Says:

    MCM should make a proposal in La Asamblea, even invite Diosdado, to audit the CNE, since there are concerns from both sides.

  2. moctavio Says:

    Yes, it is serial, except that there is one person processing each task, that part seems parallel, no?

    • captainccs Says:

      In computing we call it a pipeline, several jobs getting done along the pipe, just like auto assembly. The car, from start to finish might take 15 minutes but each individual process is done in much less time. But there is more. At my “mesa” there was one machine but two books for checking signatures which were working in true parallel.

      http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/what-is-a-processors-pipeline-20060210/

      • Alvaro Says:

        In this case parallelism only works if they are used to speed up slow steps in the process. Let’s say it takes:

        Start
        60 seconds to verify the identity
        30 seconds walking to machine
        40 seconds to vote
        15 seconds walking to ink your finger
        15 seconds to ink your finger
        END
        Thoughput time: 3 minutes
        Takt (or cycle) time: 60 seconds

        Here it will only make sense to have two parallel process to verify the identity (since we are constraining ourselves to only one voting machine). With two people verifying identity we can reduce the cycle time to 40 seconds (why not 30?, Because cycle time will be the time of the slowest work station). this is the time that should be used for calculations of how many people could vote, not the throughput time the hojilleros like to use

        • captainccs Says:

          In the real world you don’t use the specs to figure throughput, you have to run benchmarks. Suppose one voter uses up his six minutes on the voting machine, everyone else will be put in wait mode until the pipeline can start up again. It’s just like at airports: hurry up and wait, hurry up and wait, hurry up and wait. LOL

          And the benchmark says:

          ¡TRES MILLONES POR EL BUCHE!

  3. Foreign Observer Says:

    I don’t understand this. Somebody, please explain it to me. According to the CNE web site, 7,691 electronic ballot machines were installed the day of the primaries. The vote was held from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. That is nine hours or 520 minutes. If we assume that each voter spent 2 minutes casting his/her vote (very unrealistic), then only 1,999,600 could have cast a vote. And that is assuming that every ballot machine began registering votes on time at 8:00 am. Thus, how come that more than 3 million cast their vote in this election???

    • moctavio Says:

      People could vote in 15-20 seconds if they knew the procedure and believe me, we have practice. My mother is 87, she told me she took less than a minute.

      • captainccs Says:

        You had to push all of four buttons!

        Presidente, gobernador, alcalde, vota!

        Wait for the ticket, read it, drop it in the box.

        • moctavio Says:

          I think the confusion arises from the whole process takes two minutes. You identify yourself, they find you in the notebook, you place the fingerprint and sign, you vote in the machine and you get ink in your finger. All of that takes two minutes. But all of it is going in parallel, while one person is identifying his or herself, another is voting, another is dipping the finger in the ink, etc. All in parallel.

          • Alvaro Says:

            Actually all is in serial, not parallel (since you are already considering each voting machine). However the rest of the argument is valid.

            Using operational terms. 3 minutes could be the maximum throughput time. but the takt time (or cycle time) is what counts here. This is the 20 something second it took to actually vote (assuming this was the step that took most of the time)

            For the layman: Do you remember the cartoons where they show car manufactuing plant with car going out every second? then a second will bbe the cycle time. The Troughput time will be the time it took for each car to go trough all the process (assembly, paint, etc etc etc)

            • Ira Says:

              This is like one of those IQ questions:

              There isn’t only one machine or one worker at each polling station, so the math is neither serial OR parallel.

              If there were 3 million machines and 3 million poll workers, it would take 2 minutes for the entire population to vote.

  4. Alvaro Says:

    My 2 ct, HCF will say slash those criticizing the CNE in a future ALO Presidente, then he wil say that that we all should trust the CNE, making t harder for anyone claiming or hinting fraud in October.

    The MUD should handle this very carefully, as legitimizing the current CNE could be a double edged sword

  5. Dillis Says:

    Sorry for going OT, but how much is Hugo paying this a-hole this time? I am still waiting for him to leave his Hollywood mansion and come and live his socialist/communist dream in Catia or 23 de Enero…..

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2100858/Sean-Penn-blasts-UK-refusing-hand-Falkland-Islands-Argentina.html

  6. Marilu Says:

    TSJ has asked MUD not to destroy ´cuadernos de votación´. Somebody is claiming something about votes…has it started?

    • moctavio Says:

      Mi understanding is they have been incinerated. Bocaranda had hinted this could happen, apparently the MUD took precautions.

  7. moctavio Says:

    Hate like this worries me more, this was the “professional and balanced” reporter asking questions yesterday at Capriles’ press conference:

    http://www.rnv.gob.ve/noticias/index.php?act=ST&f=15&t=176836

  8. moctavio Says:

    So? It was due to a suit by someone in the opposition and I understand the material was destroyed.


  9. These amazing “preliminar” elections coudl become a 2 edged sword:

    On one hand, it shows that most people, say 60%, at least, are fed up with Chavismo.

    As Capriles said, if every one who voted, brings 2 friends to vote in October, that’s 9 millions anti-chavista votes.

    Getting people out to vote is a HUGE issue, since most of those who did not bother to vote in the past were not pro-Chavez.

    But I afraid here’s the problem:

    Chavistas are already talking about “fraud”, statistical manipulations.

    They are scared to death by now, because they could lose their jobs, juicy contracts, la vaca Chavista… corruption is nothing new here. Many of them will do whatever it takes to stay in power, and keep stealing millions every year.

    So, this could have been a wake-up call, for all those Chavista crooks.

    7 months away from the real deal, they are probably already looking into ways of cheating the elections systems. Finding cracks, bribing people. extortion, instigating fear among voters, you name it.

    Thugo and his 99 ladrones will resort to any crooked measure to try to stay in power.

    They won’t let go of “el coroto” legally, you can bet on that.

    Now that they woke up, after this amazing election, they will prepare to cheat and do whatever it takes to beat Capriles.

    The oppositions needs to be extra vigilant now, it’s gonna get nasty.

  10. VJ Says:

    I invite you to take a look at the Aporrea´s chavista forum. It is really fun and interesting of how they view the Primaries and their opinions of the coprofago of channel 8. The chavista forum also shows that they are really worried and for many of them it was a “CAGASTROFE!!!
    The forist “locoman” gives a good explanation about the time required to vote in the Parlamentarias. He concludes that you only needed 37 seconds to vote in the Parlamentarias of 2010.
    Locoman says:

    Repito un post anterior donde coloqué esos datos y los cálculos basándome en esos datos. Ojo, para evitar confusión, cuando digo 38s por votante por mesa no me estoy refiriendo a las primarias de ayer, me estoy refiriendo a las parlamentarias del 2010 basándome en los datos oficiales del CNE:
    Tiempo de votación: 9 horas (promedio de 8 a 5, no se toma en cuenta las mesas que abren tardeo porque también hay mesas que cierran mas tarde)
    Cantidad de votos: 11615590 (tomando los datos del resultado de la elección del parlatino, pues es el único resultado a nivel nacional en esas elecciones)
    Cantidad de maquinas: 36825 mesas (fuente: Según el CNE hubieron 36825 actas, cada máquina de votación da un acta)
    Electores por máquina (votos / máquinas): 315,42
    Tiempo promedio por elector (tiempo en minutos: 540 minutos / electores por mesa): 1,71 minutos (aprox 1 minuto 43 segundos)
    Cantidad promedio de máquinas por mesa: 2.75 (Número de maquinas / 13367 mesas de acuerdo a wikipedia)
    Electores por mesa (votos/mesa): 868,98
    Tiempo promedio de elector por mesa: 0.62 minutos (aprox 37 segundos).

    You can read the whole post in:
    http://www.aporrealos.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=51199&start=120&sid=8bd63d2164583de4532a0480390e6012

    Regards,
    VJ

  11. Syd Says:

    I’m amazed by the bogus claims of chavistas over “normal” times to vote. All of sudden we come across a brand new theory, never once having been mentioned in all the voting procedues, prior to Sunday, and where there were oppo wins.

    Rodríguez opinó que no es “normal” que se alcance el pico de participación a las dos de la tarde.

    I voted around that time (in Toronto), after having some lunch, which is normal.

    Amateur black-swan explanations smell of desperation.

  12. Jerry Says:

    I agree, it’s been really fun watching chavistas fall over each other crying fraud, although it does set a slightly dangerous precedent.
    Even more interesting is the silence of their supreme commander. Is he waiting to see how the country reacts to these announcements before deciding on his strategy, or is he simply still unable to speak, and possibly under sedation somewhere in Miraflores? Are the minions getting their orders from somewhere or are they simply running around saying things like was the case with cancer?

  13. moctavio Says:

    In a few days, the strategists will put order in the drunken party, these guys will be ordered to shut up and the matter will be forgotten. The less coherent Chavismo is, the better. This is gut reaction, not planned strategy.

    BTW, to those that think that 3.04 million is not surprising, recall Manuel Rosales got 4.2 million votes in a Presidential election.

  14. Townie Says:

    I am with Bruni on this, I don’t like it. I’ll add the following: It sets a precedent for the election in October. The reasoning will be, should Chavez “win” in October, by hook or by crook, is that this is a “democracy”…. we exercised our right to challenge the primary results in February, you’re entitled to your challenge come October. Of course, should Chacumbele win and the opposition challenge in October, aside from being labeled “sore losers, we know how that has turned out in the past. My question is how much of a factor will the corrupt electoral rolls play in October should it be a close election? It should be interesting, to say the least.

  15. GeronL Says:

    After these fools calm down and organize a response, I am sure one of the next goals is to keep trying to divide the opposition. Keeping the opposition parties united by one candidate has to be the top priority now.

    Did this system also go for other offices, did they unify down the ballot or just for the Presidency?

    • Bruni Says:

      The unification deal was for all offices. That is precisely what I find more dangerous. I don’t think that any of the Presidential candidates would ever dream that there was a problem with the votes…but once you got at the very local level, in particular in rural areas, it is tempting to claim fraud and decide to break the unity for the general election.

      Jorge Rodríguez is specifically pointing out small voting centers where supposedly the numbers are anomalous and inciting the candidates on those centers to request an investigation.

      He is also saying that the MUD should keep the “cuadernos de votación” to have a database of the sympathizers and that he cannot believe that the MUD would like to get rid of such a great source of information.

      • geha714 Says:

        Today, trusting Jorge Rodriguez on electoral matters is like trusting Bernie Madoff on financial matters.

        • Gold Says:

          Exactly. This is the worst reaction they could have. They are livid, scared, unable to think clearly. It shows in their delivery. WOW. They really weren’t prepared for this landslide.

  16. Bruni Says:

    I don’t find it fun at all. I think they are trying to play the “don’t trust the voting system” card they indirectly played with the captahuellas and the refusal to open the boxes, to scare people away from the voting stations in October.

    They are also planting doubts into the losers mind to create uncertainty with respect to the results of the primary in order to split the unity.

    This is crazy. There can be no democracy if one cannot trust the system, whichever the system. So they are playing that card, for the time being.

    I don’t like it.

    • geha714 Says:

      They want a 100% chavista at the helm. They don’t trust Tibi anymore, so they want to push her out and put Socorro Hernandez, a former Chavez minister, as her replacement.

    • guest Says:

      My guess is that they’re imprinting into the hardcore chavista population the notion that if they lose in October, it was because of a fraud by the opposition.

      Even if it means slinging MUD on the CNE, they need to prepare from now a scape route for when they lose in October.

      • Wanley Says:

        I don’t think so, i think their mouth worked faster than their brains. Ultimas Noticias is saying that the election was clean and the CNE impartial. Backtracking.

  17. moctavio Says:

    The machines and fingerprint operators were all CNE operators.

  18. captainccs Says:

    What I would like to know is: If we are trying to get rid of a military dictatorship, what the hell are the military doing at the polling stations? The foxes guarding the henhouse?

  19. Wanley Says:

    John, the CNE wasn’t counting, they just handed the printed results that came out of the computer. They couldn’t “corroborate” (massage) the numbers. The numbers that came out are raw. That’s why they don’t like them.

  20. Wanley Says:

    Amazing that they are slinging mud at the CNE, their CNE. Somebody is not thinking clearly over there, that is the worst thing they can do. I would love to see people in the barrios thinking that the CNE is favoring the opposition.

    • geha714 Says:

      Tibisay Lucena era la suplente de Jorge Rodriguez. I rest my case.

    • An Interested Observer Says:

      I think the great question to ask, if they stick a microphone in the face of Capriles or anyone else well-known, is: “Are you suggesting we cannot trust the CNE to run a fair election?” Put it out there in a way that doesn’t explicitly cast doubt, but plants that seed and makes them wrestle with the issue.

      By the way, I just don’t get JR’s graph. I think the green line is supposed to be the “bogus” one, representing Sunday’s vote. But if that’s the case, the total number of opposition voters was well below the number in prior elections! And if red/blue/black simply represent all voters from prior elections, then why should we be surprised things look differently when you remove one larg bloc? Talk about grasping at straws.

      And before he talks any more about suspicious graphs, I would like him to spend some time explaining the problems noted by Delfino and Salas. 🙂

  21. Marypuchy Says:

    I love popcorn!!!!!…………… Try it with some Old Bay seafood seasoning on top!

  22. John Barnard Says:

    “If they permit us to do (an auditory) of the voting cards, like we do in all electoral processes, well, then we will do it, but up until now they haven’t asked us to do so,” said Lucena, adding that “where we do not participate, we cannot corroborate the numbers”.

    I don’t understand. What the hell was the CNE doing if they weren’t counting? …and corroborating?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: