As you may or not know, during the audits of the electoral “notebooks” for the Gubernatorial elections, the opposition discovered that 108 voters were moved from one voting center to the other. In particular, this includes the six candidates for Governor who Chávez anointed with his finger, despite the fact that they do not reside in the State where they are running for Governor. It also includes their relatives and even more curiously, the current Vice-President of the country who ran to register in Carabobo State when Chávez said he would be the candidate there, way back at the beginning of the year, but now does not want the hassle of having to go vote there since he is now the VP.
You see, according to Venezuela’s electoral rules, the electoral registry was open only until April 16th. and the recent Presidential election and the upcoming one, would take place using that registry. It can not be changed, altered, modified, spindled or mutilated. That is why Maduro had to run, he wanted to register so that he would be voting in the State that Chávez had selected for him, until the autocrat changed his mind.
The explanation by CNE’ s Director Socorro Hernandez (shown above) is simply pitiful and a disgrace. Clearly in Venezuela under the autocrat Hugo Chávez some citizens have more rights than others. Said Socorro: “We had to make the changes so that the candidates of PSUV and its teams could exercize their right to vote…so they could go and vote with their mothers, with their family…”
Jeez, Ms. Hernandez seems to have a very short and biased memory, she did not seem to be worried about the right to vote of thousands of people that were arbitrarily moved to vote from Miami to New Orleans, a distance which is from two to ten times larger than that which will separate her PSUV buddies from their voting center. The CNE, including the cynical Ms. Hernandez, never even attempted to find an alternate location to hold the vote in Miami, so that each and everyone of the more than 20,000 voters could “exercize their right to vote”. The same right that Ms. Hernandez posturing this week wants to defend with such an intensity for her buddies of PSUV.
And her posturing is demonstrated precisely because Vice-President Maduro was also allowed to move his registry back to Caracas from Valencia. Maduro was never a candidate. Period. Chávez said he would be a candidate but changed his mind before the deadline came. So, Maduro was moved just because…because the law does not exist for Chavismo, Maduro does not want to take a helicopter and go vote in Valencia, please sign here. Listo! All set!
But heaven forbid that an opposition candidate, relative, cousin or whatever wants similar treatment! In that case, they would shout with outrage at the request. Only Chavistas may apply. Chavistas are first class citizens, the rest are…garbage, not even second class citizens. So much for equality under the Bolivarian revolution!
And I don’t think is a maneuver to discourage voting. If it were, the CNE would have come out immediately and justified the moves the first day. No, this was just a sneaky move, thinking, as usual, that nobody was watching and nobody would notice. But to their credit, the opposition auditors found out very fast and the Chavistas were caught red handed. The posturing came later.
And Socorro looked like the veritable jerk she is.
The Devil's Excrement 
April 16, 2013 at 10:42 pm
woman smothered to death with rice bag
March 24, 2013 at 9:30 pm
Any company can hand out pens at a Longchamp taschentrade show, but novelty pens will truly make a Longchamp taschenlasting impression. A pediatrician or any other business dealing with kids might consider a Longchamp taschencolorful and fun bendy pen. A harness lanyard pen is great for anyone weltgesundheitsorganisation walks around during their work day but always needs a Longchamp taschenwriting utensil close at hand. Longchamp tasche http://www.apsi.com.mx/longchamptaschen.ph
November 8, 2012 at 9:01 pm
Does anybody know who these people are (National Lawyer’s Guild)?
A Fully Transparent System—Investing in Democracy in Venezuela
http://www.nlg.org/node/749
November 9, 2012 at 6:59 pm
Interesting Aristo…never heard of them but I am going to look into it.Thanks!
November 2, 2012 at 8:55 am
Thank you again, Miguel for summarizing what you have repeated before. It’s unfortunate that there will always be some who cry out variations of “fraud!” and “they’ve been bought out!” — most of these people voicing opinions without accounting for their comments, or not pursuing mined data in credible venues.
Hay tanto hablador de paja con poca pericia y falta de experiencia … hasta cuando.
November 2, 2012 at 8:10 am
All I know is what it says there, I dont have a clue as to how and what they did . I had a two hour meeting with them and they have sent me certain reports, that is all.
As I said before, ask them.
November 2, 2012 at 10:00 am
So: you don’t know about the actual physical validation of voters from the total set. That’s all I wanted to know. It’s an acto de fe.
I will ask, again. Apparently Alek did get an answer about that and it was, according to him, they haven’t.
Your contact and I have reached similar conclusions on the found records. As you said “there is plenty of proof that they were cheating, look at the rr model section, a dozen papers that show it, I ahve written posts on that too.”.
November 2, 2012 at 10:04 am
It was also an “acto de fe” that they would have more witnesses than ever and they did. They were doing dozens of different things on the many aspects of the voting processes, they did not tell me techniques, nor did they have to, they described what they were doing.
November 2, 2012 at 4:29 pm
“So: you don’t know about the actual physical validation of voters from the total set. That’s all I wanted to know. It’s an acto de fe.”
There is a big problem in a dictatorship when people have to rely on actos de fe which I why under governments like Chavez, there should be NO voting without significant demands of transparency and a greater sharing of of control by Chavez with the opposition of the electoral process .
November 2, 2012 at 6:48 pm
No it is not an acto de fe, the opposition did not make a point of adding those actas de validacion, but with 90% coverage, we are talking that 54% of mesas was like 20,000, at leasttwo per mesa, we are talking 40,000 witnesses that participated on the counting of the ballots, not one has cone forward saying there were any significant discrepancies. These are all real people who worked twenty hours that day and took their job very,very seriously, dont you think the CNE, MUD or Comando Venezuela would have heard something about it? There is no acto de fe, its looking for something that thereis absolutely no evidence for.
November 7, 2012 at 11:07 am
How much of the entire process did witnesses observe?Couldn’t there have been tampering before and after?
If Chavez knows he has a fair and square voting process, why not allow the opposition to participate in the CNE?
In a country like Venezuela you have to start from the premise that skullduggery is part of the game.
November 7, 2012 at 11:13 am
The whole things, the machines were precinted, the boxes were assembled and empty when the process began, there were two witnesses per table minimum for the oppo. The people involved are not dumb, they really worked hard. Chavez likes to control, but we lost badly, unfair advantages? Of course there were, but we lost by more than a million votes, tricks could have been 100,000.
November 2, 2012 at 7:27 am
Miguel,
Sorry, I am not sure how to interpret this:
“Comando Venezuela did a variety of audits on the registry. The tough part is the old registry, the one made before 2010, that was harder to check. However, after 2010 (We got more votes in that election!) they could check all changes in the registry and they even did random checking of the individuals moved.”
They were apparently able to check individuals moving. We had a talk about that earlier.
Did they also check randomly the physical distinctiveness of people from the big total (whether it was 500 or 1000 or more)?
We have access to registers through the years and we can see who changed when everywhere in Venezuela. I can see that myself in the data I have.
We can do mining on that. But that is one thing and the other is to have an actual face-to-face check, to see whether someone who registered to vote after 2003 is a distinct person or someone with a duplicate ID.
You cannot be sure about that even with a call (and the calls, as far as I know, were to investigate the recent moves).
Has that been done? Actual looking at a random selection from the whole pool and identifying the finger prints of those randomly selected?
November 1, 2012 at 7:13 pm
Here is the full chart, I could not upload it before for some strange reason
http://es.scribd.com/doc/111851793
November 1, 2012 at 7:05 pm
Remember that in 2006 we lost by 26.8% of the votes, we improved a lot, just not enough.
November 1, 2012 at 7:04 pm
One by one, my personal opinion, not before saying we got beat and we got beat badly. yes, there was abuse of power, but we got beat.
Now to the questions:
1) There was only ONE poll saying Capriles was ahead Consultores 21, all other polls said it was tight, but Chavez ahead. All were wrong on abstention. Abstention favors the opposition.
2) Exit polls are private, as far as I know, only one exit poll gave Capriles ahead by the afternoon. Exit polls have never been very good in Venezuela.
3) I am talking about the audit of the paper ballots. 54% of the voting boxes were audited, not one opposition person has come forward to say there was a significant discrepancy. We had witnesses everywhere.
4) Comando Venezuela did a variety of audits on the registry. The tough part is the old registry, the one made before 2010, that was harder to check. However, after 2010 (We got more votes in that election!) they could check all changes in the registry and they even did random checking of the individuals moved.
5) Yes, the fingerprint machines intimidate, no question about it.
6) Yes, I think 54% is more than sufficient. In fact, 3% should be enough based on statistics. The ballot boxes to be audited are selected openly by placing little pieces of paper in a styrofoam cup or similar and the pieces of paper chosen by a hand chosen at random in front of everyone. Do you really believe that process can be manipulated? I dont.
Look, I wrote two weeks before the election that if abstention was below 25%, we would lose. It was 19%, had you given that single number I would have told you it was hopeless.
Finally, the Comando Venezuela had the early Actas, most of them coming from centers that closed at 6 PM (the easy centers) by 7:15 PM and at that time had the following projections, with only 14,2% of the actas in:
14.2% Capriles 46.5% Chavez 53.2% Proyeccion 900,718 vote difference.
That is, with the most covered centers, the easy ones with no lines, no witness problems, all closing at 6 PM, the actas were in by 7 PM and Comando Venezuela was seeing a 900,000 vote difference.
BTW why people of the opposition complain, as I showed earlier, their abstention levels in the pro-opposition centers did not go up very much. Even in opposition centers Chavismo increased their vote more than the oppo and those centers we controlled.
November 1, 2012 at 6:26 pm
Miguel
thanks for an answer, now:
a few thoughts other than Kepler’s excellent input above:
1. polls are not trustworthy in Venezuela, however I would trust more the one that put Capriles as winning because you know that the ones that put Chavez ahead could have an agenda, especially in an authoritarian system
2. in all LA countries they have exit polls….apparently these polls were taken but results not given..this is a lack of transparency and awakens suspicions( not proof) of wrong doing
3 You said : “The audits, they were preformed, again not one person has come out and said there was a large discrepancy anywhere”
Eric was talking about performing an independent audit on the voting registry…was this audit performed and if so when?According to Eric the last one performed was years ago and is not reliable because of the large amount of new voters
As for the problem of fingerprinting this is enough to intimidate, and since when is direct voter intimidation a part of non fraudulent elections ?
Now when Chavez says:” When we audit 54 percent of the voting machines and tables, we guarantee that those results are honest”
I ask you Miguel, do you really think that auditing 54 % in a dictatorship is enough? Do you think Chavez is a rata in everything but elections?Do you think he had the desire for honest elections and would guarantee them?
Clearing up the doubts in a country like Venezuela will be tough, though I think we can demand transparent elections in December without fingerprinting.If Chavez is not able to offer that at this point the opposition could possibly reunite from the division in which it finds itself presently.I would hope it would unite in not going to obviously fraudulent elections.Instead it should make a big to do about Chavez’s lack of cooperation on the matter,
The problem is that people who expected to win the last elections are now super demoralized, and even without fingerprinting people might not show up.
I put the blame on the opposition for much of it.People were thinking that folks wouldn’t go to vote if they thought they would lose their votes because of dirty tricks.But honesty is always the best policy in times like that.People did not know realistically what to expect.
I was told about 6 years ago that the opposition was bought off.The person who told me was very well connected.I thought he was exaggerating, but today I am convinced he was correct.
In a country like Venezuela this is grave because people will wait around for the oppo leaders to give them the green card.But people should think twice at this point about whether to give the green card to the oppo leaders .Let’s look before we leap/ Caramba!!!!!!
November 1, 2012 at 12:39 pm
AIO,
In the animal world a deer who tries to ” debate” a wolf must be living in denial.
A cougar might have a chance
We must be cougars if we want to take on the task.
But let’s not keep pretending to be deer when it comes to confronting the wolves while being cougars with each other.
November 7, 2012 at 9:48 am
IO, not AIO. Please be careful. 🙂
November 1, 2012 at 5:24 am
I feel as if I were observing a small herd of deer discussing how to hold a debate with a pack of wolves. Evidently history doesn’t sink in, and you don’t understand the chavista regime will never give up power. The Venezuela you knew is lost, you are like German Jews in the 1930’s, and yet you don’t seem to realize it.
November 1, 2012 at 10:26 am
You’re partly right, IO. But if that was the attitude of my ancestors and their contemporaries, Venezuela would still be a colony of Spain, Or, democratic opportunities would not have flourished in between military dictatorships. Finally, one cannot forget over 6 million voters who had the courage to say, “I’m against chavismo”.
Perhaps you live in the US, where people have idealized can-do attitudes, and where every four years, a strong segment of the electorate dares to hope for a slight alternative to its political reality.
Anyone else who has lived in Vzla long term knows “como se bate el cobre”. It’s a separate set of circumstances and realities that don’t really compare to Germany in the 1930s.
November 7, 2012 at 9:48 am
Speaking of doppelgangers, I seem to have one. The above comment was NOT written by me. I agree in some ways with the thought behind it (at least the second sentence), but I most certainly wouldn’t have put it that way.
November 7, 2012 at 9:52 am
Indeed, that one came from Spain, not sure if it was on purpose, person did leave what apperas is a real email. Do you want me to remove it or put in a comment?
October 31, 2012 at 5:34 pm
Kepler: This is the presentation I uploaded. My memory was wrong it is 9,000 people not cedulas, but it does not change what I said.You can see all of the work that was done and was being done, they were addressing it and doing tests. I now the guy who did that presentation, I believe he was doing it.
http://es.scribd.com/doc/102648470/Evolucion-del-Registro-Electoral
October 31, 2012 at 8:13 pm
I think it’s time Kepler lost his fear of publication under his own name, or found someone, say at esdata, under whom he could ghost write his properly catagorized and explained presentation of data, updated for today.
It makes no sense to be sitting on presumably updated data and not present it with clarity to the appropriate targets.
November 1, 2012 at 3:30 am
It’s time you cared for your own business.
The point is not whether now there are 40 or 10 thousand Doppelgänger. The point is that their existence (which Miguel can verify by simply looking at those files I sent or the hundreds you yourself can see in my site)
is enough proof of cheating. The parties are not “verifying” the existence of the people but only whether there are more weird patterns in the records, growth, etc.
At this stage you need studies on the REAL people, not “socio economic studies on growth patterns” or the number of elderly
Thus: mind your own business. Just ignore me, go work for http://chepacandela.com/ if you want.
Your attitude is utterly immature.
Miguel,
I will pass you some names from USB teachers who can give you more information.
I read that document you linked to.
They can’t do much more whether they mine the stuff once or a zillion times.
They need to really contact actual people everywhere – not their people but people from a representative number of randomly selected IDs – and they cannot do that now because they do not have the mandate to do so. Alek has explained this problem before.
There is not a public call to do that from the MUD, just isolated declarations every so much time about “still so many people with >100 years”…upon which the CNE “corrects” a couple of them and this seems to satisfy the parties.
November 1, 2012 at 7:39 am
You keep sending me to talk to people, but I am satisfied with what Comando Venezuela told me, you are the one worried, you should talk to Comando Venezuela about it. As to contacting the actual people in the RE they have done some of that and as to the ineffectiveness of what they do, from a recent letter from CE:
“Sí hacemos auditorías sobre el RE. Justamente esa revisión detallada es la que nos permitió identificar esta semana en forma oportuna la reubicación extemporánea de 109 personas, favoreciendo a candidatos del oficialismo y a sus relacionados.”
November 1, 2012 at 10:02 am
Thank you, Miguel. I’ve been the email recipient of Kepler’s alarms, for some time. And whenever I’ve asked what he’s done about it, I get a non-direct answer. What this means, is anyone’s guess. But where I live, the expression is “Either pee or get off the pot.”
November 1, 2012 at 10:03 am
Oh, and having been an email recipient of alarmist information, makes it my business to comment. If you know what I mean, Kepler.
November 1, 2012 at 10:29 am
“email recipient of alarms”?
Oh, yeah, sure.
End of discussion. Ve a trabajar a Chepa Candela.
November 1, 2012 at 11:33 am
Kepler: Your reply is consistent with your inability to assume responsility and your passing the buck. It’s not the first time, I’ve come across this behaviour.
If you want further explanation, I can produce a chapter and verse from the gmails you sent me, over this past year.
Here’s one that encapsulates the alarmism I was referring to, though in this case your alarmism relates to a more general sense:
Kepler dixit on 2012/2/14: “creo que habrá una guerra civil a mediano plazo.”
Should I reproduce this email in full?
October 31, 2012 at 5:24 pm
I guess some people are waiting for their leaders to tell them what to think.
Kepler is doing the opposition a service in finding proof, yet it is so hard to convince people that Chavez the dictator commits fraud.
What an amazing plan Chavez had to turn key people in the opposition against the opposition.
October 31, 2012 at 8:40 pm
Firepigette: Your repeated phoney innocence and unwillingness to understand can only be explained by a lack of intellect or a deep-seated need for attention.
Assuming the latter, let me try to once again answer your cry.
It’s hard to convince people because :
(a) the issues are not only complex, but deliberately convoluted in a militarized, apartheid state
(b) there are those who take advantage of chaos to self-promote themselves on the fly
(c) there are those who have never been trained to demand more than half-assed measures, so any ole thing will do
(d) there are those who have never developed criteria, and are so gullible, they’ll take anyone’s word at face value
(e) there are those who have no clue as to the importance of properly presented data, directed to the appropriate target audience
(f) there are those who get a rise out of denigrating an entire nationality, while showing even worse naiveté.
(g) and so forth, so on.
Get the picture?
November 1, 2012 at 2:50 pm
Yes I do actually, but hardly the emotional picture you represent.As you set yourself up to determine who can or cannot opine, I assume you are a flawless judge, but there of those who have not made a single mistake in predicting events up til now none of whom have been peer reviewed , and you are certainly not one of them either.Thanks.
October 31, 2012 at 5:05 pm
Then write to Comando Venezuela, they told me otherwise in July of this year. I dont have time to check all that. If you saw it last year and they say this year it changed, I have no reason to doubt them.
October 31, 2012 at 5:49 pm
I am not denying what they said about those numbers have been reduced. I am disagreeing on what conclusions to draw. Those “corrected” records are just proof they were cheating. They are not proof of more cheating but they are enough to request the verification of a random sample from the 29 million voters…and you don’t do that by simply looking at the patterns in the records and even the finger prints. You do that by demanding that that random sample comes forward physically. Has that been done?
I believe not.
October 31, 2012 at 5:56 pm
There is plenty of proof that they were cheating, look at the rr model section, a dozen papers that show it, I ahve written posts on that too.. The opposition has requested an audit of the RE and it has never been done, but they have done some checking on their own, using the same lists that Chavismo created, there are no phantom voters that they have been able to determine.
October 31, 2012 at 5:03 pm
By the way: one of those Patricias voted for the first time in 2004, when she was 25. The “second” voted for the first time in 2006, when she was 27.
October 31, 2012 at 5:01 pm
Miguel, am I explaining it so clumsily? Let me try it again.
I found 40000 weird records. The weirdness was that they had the same full name and the same birth date and those names are not José Pérez. Others did the same thing. They denounced this last year.
The CNE response? It has being changing the records. As I said in the previous comment and you repeated in your last comment (as if we were talking about different versions), 1/4 is still unchanged.
1/4 out of 40000 is 10000. I wrote a post in my blog with some of those records. I think I sent you a zip file with all of them. Those are the records of 2011. They have changed but not deleted 3/4 of them.
Now:
1) replacing Doppelgänger for someone else who was not there before and who has an ID that is under 20 million is simply weird. How can you explain that? They did not delete those 3/4, they CHANGED them.
2) the 10000 weird ones still left cannot change an election but they (and in fact the other 30000 that were not “replaced”) are proof of tinkering.
What else do you need for proof? If you are taking an exam and you are found cheating because you got the answer for 2 out of 100 questions, you are out. People cannot trust you. The teacher cannot just say “you get 2 points less”.
3) We found those 40000 records (now “only” 10000 are double only because someone at the CNE was clumsy enough to use the same birth date.
That does NOT mean they are the only ones.
What people like those from Esdata are asking is for a representative sample of the whole voting pool to be checked by physical means by an independent group. Can we ask 10000 people to come forward and prove they exist?
MATTOS VILLANUEVA TATIANA PATRICIA was born on 1979-09-11 and has ID 24897065. MATTOS VILLANUEVA TATIANA PATRICIA was born on 1979-09-11 and has ID 22544583. They both vote in the same school but in different mesas.
There are still 10000 like that, as I said. They are in my zip file, I can send that file to anyone (I sent it once to you).
The fact they exist give us 1) proof there was tampering and thus 2) reason to suspect the CNE thugs could have done more tampering. To do that they just needed to remember to change the birth date.
Can’t we demand that?
could have added
October 31, 2012 at 8:10 am
And I was told by Comando Venezuela that only less than 10,000 were left in July, it is in one of the presentations I gave. As to Esdata, they made charges right after the election that were really off by factors of two.
October 30, 2012 at 6:01 pm
I did not like that interview. Only one pollster was saying that Capriles was ahead, the other at best tied. Then to say the “faces” told you that they were in trouble is a joke. He then goes back on the double ID’s which people know is no more than 10,000, he says there are “dozens” of thousands. The “phantom” voters dont exist, nobody has ever been able to find one. The witnesses did not leave, 90% of them were there and turned over their actas. The audits, they were preformed, again not one person has come out and said there was a large discrepancy anywhere. What he says about the audits is not true. He also mixes terms there, the actas and the constancias de verificacion are different.There was no effort to collect the audit papers. The fingerprint machines were intimidating, that is the only part that is right. But what he says about fingerprints is not true, it has to match your fingerprint form previous elections.
October 30, 2012 at 6:58 pm
Thank you, Miguel, for your thoroughness.
I remember thinking “bamboozler” while hearing Eckvall’s latest attempt to self-promote. And yes, that carómetro business was ridiculous — what serious *electoral analyst* would ever succumb to such a subjective opinion, when trying to measure the level of fraud. Also, saying that many pollsters had determined that Capriles was ahead was irresponsible.
But oh my, doesn’t Eckvall manipulate well — with such aplomb.
He’d be completely discredited in serious venues or peer-review journals. Smashed, actually. Simply put, Eckvall is a flim-flam man, looking for bottom feeders to promote himself.
Sad.
Those who believe him are the reason the Ringling Bros. were so successful. There’s a sucker born every minute.
October 31, 2012 at 1:48 am
Miguel, there were about 40000 double IDs (which means 20000 Doppelgänger). That was reported by Esdata and others months ago. I told you that. There are 10000 double IDs “only” now.
What does that mean? They changed for half of the others the name and location of the person for those IDs. What is that supposed to mean? As one of your USB students (can send the name by mail) told me, that would mean suddenly there is a person with a non-recent ID (stuff like 8 million something) suddenly appearing who was not appearing before.
If anything, one of those doubles should have been deleted.
No explanation whatsoever…
And for the 100th time: those double IDs were discovered because they have the same birth date, for nothing more. If they were able to do that, they could fake IDs with different birth dates as well. We already have proof with that tiny fraction that there was systematic tinkering with the records.
That should be more than enough in any country to call for a whole review of the records
October 30, 2012 at 12:22 pm
Double LOL
There is enough anecdotal evidence to warrant a transparent audit but for those who need a proof that is sanctioned by peer reviewed articles ( which are so often wrong about things ), and under the circumstances of a dictatorship, do not seem to realize, that the anecdotal evidence gathered is enough to demand the very kind of audit we will be sure not to get in Venezuela.
October 30, 2012 at 1:08 pm
Since gaining an audit is a moot point, in Venezuela, then by all means, bring on the clowns to enthrall the naive. By all means, take advantage of flakey *journalistic* platforms and university settings to toot your horn. Don’t bother with a show-and-tell. Don’t bother providing proof. It’s not necessary in the symbiotic relationship of self-promotion and entertainment of dummies who don’t know any better. Your word is paramount as a way to gain credibility and respect.
Sigh.
October 29, 2012 at 10:09 pm
October 30, 2012 at 10:30 am
still no proof from Ekvall. It’s all anecdotal, but stated as though he did have proof. The day I see Ekvall’s article in an appropriate peer-review journal, with examples, is the day I’ll take him a little more seriously. So far his venues have not been chosen with that seriousness in mind, but rather as a way to promote himself and his corpstatwhatever company. I’ll pass, except on the entertainment factor.
October 29, 2012 at 1:27 pm
también vale la pena leer la carta abierta de parte de Daniel Duquenal:
http://daniel-venezuela.blogspot.ca/2012/10/socorro-hernandez-otra-excepcional.html
October 29, 2012 at 10:50 am
Do we know where exactly these guys are voting?
October 29, 2012 at 10:21 am
cuando mientes en la pequenas, mientes en las grandes…
I do not think Miguel it was done thinking it would be unnoticed, it was done because it seemed convenient, period. Should it be discovered it would be deatl with, case in point this lame press conference.
There is no law in Venenezuela and the electoral administrator/ agency is the first on who does not follow the laws in place to control its operation.
its a long list of faults, big and small, that the oposition has allowed to happen in their long failed srategy of playing along and not calling a spade a spade.
Fraude.
The opposition is well aware of its weaknesess and belevies they can not promote a more elaborate two prong strategy of participation in active confrontation against these illegalities and frauds, while keeping the voters willing to go out and vote. Participar no es solo votar.
The point is lost when we discuss whether 108 votes moved from one circuit to another make a material difference in the results! the point is the toal lack of respect for the law and the apparent failure of citizenry of enforcing law abiding institutions.
Sad state our country is, sad indeed.
October 29, 2012 at 1:01 pm
“cuando mientes en la pequenas, mientes en las grandes…”
So, so true. Folks who lie to unsuspecting people are sneaks. Period. Whether they need to feed a narcissistic appetite, or for convenience, they all share a trait in common. They think people are stupid and unworthy of respect.
And right you are again when you point to the total “lack of respect for the law and the apparent failure of citizenry of enforcing law abiding institutions.”
Hopefully, oppo forces will call out the lies of these sneaks. But I, for one, don’t fault them for not producing a harder line before 7O. When building a coalition in a failed apartheid state, oppo leaders have to tread carefully.
October 29, 2012 at 9:57 am
True, but it would be inconvenient and would not look good, to have for example, Aristobulo, vote in Caracas and then have to fly to Anzoategui to keep promoting the vote. I still think they thought nobody would notice and it was ver convenient to do.
October 29, 2012 at 9:52 am
Nobody wins with 108 extra-votes in the whole country. So in my mind, this was not done “to win”. My explanation is that the CNE is doing this to discourage the opposition voters, thinking oppositionist would be so mad at the clear illegality of the move that they would simply not bother to vote.
I hope that it has the opposite effect…
October 30, 2012 at 4:22 am
It’s not about the 108 votes exactly, but rather about the fact that the CNE will stop at nothing when it sees an opportunity to favor chavismo. This isn’t something big enough to sway an election, but it’s one more in a long list of blatant abuses that demolish the illusion of neutrality, for those who care to look beyond the surface. To paraphrase a famous quote, a hundred votes here, a hundred votes there, and pretty soon you’re talking about real numbers.
October 30, 2012 at 8:01 am
Death by a thousand cuts
October 30, 2012 at 7:09 pm
My point is that is exactly what the CNE wants us to think, so that in the end, we get so mad at them that decide not to vote.
As we say in italian, “tutto fa brodo” (everything makes broth).
October 31, 2012 at 5:37 am
Getting a numerical advantage through blatant cheating, and convincing opposing voters to stay home – one is the purpose, and the other a bonus, but I sure can’t tell which is which.
October 29, 2012 at 4:45 am
Similar flaunting of electoral laws ‘won’ the presidential elections. How do you call an election in which the ruling side fails to follow it’s own laws in order to win?