Archive for June, 2006
Ollanta Humala: Una Victoria Social y Politica
Electorate Outside Peru Voted for Alan Garcia
Interview with Carlos Reyna: The Rise of the “Sólido Sur”
Issac & Elena Humala in Local & International Media
Transparencia y la OEA: Proceso fue normal
APRA: Armando un gabinete de concentración, díalogo y apertura
Discrepancies on Chavez among Observers
MVLL: “Con Humala se acaba la democracia”
El pasado viernes el escritor peruano Mario Vargas Llosa volvio a criticar duramente a Humala en una entrevista para el diario Clarin de Argentina. Vargas Llosa sentencio: “Con Humala se acaba la democracia”. El dia de hoy el diario Pagina 12 (tambien de Argentina) publico una respuesta a Vargas Llosa por Atilio Boron (Profesor de Teoria Politica y Social de la Universidad de Buenos Aires)
22:10 pm Ollanta Humala Conceded
In a very brief speech (no more than five minutes), Ollanta Humala conceded to a crowd of followers and supporters this evening. He recognized all the political parties that competed in this election and said to the crowd that he was looking forward to starting the great transformation of Peru.
Here is the downloadble video of his speech:
21:15 pm ONPE Results at 77.331% : Garcia in Irreversible Lead
Alan García: 5,750,148 votos validos 55.458%
Ollanta Humala 4,618,301 votos válidos 44.542%
21:00 pm Humala Does not Accept Defeat…Yet
Ollanta Humala is delivering a speech with a different tone this time. While his earlier speech was measured, this time he attacked Alan Garcia for giving a winning speech prior to knowing the results from ONPE. He has not accepted defeat yet. Humala is also stressing his victory in 15 departments. Broadcasting of Humala’s speech was been interrupted to give space to ONPE results.
19:40 pm Alan Garcia’s Speech
En un mensaje no triunfalista, Alan García reconoció la alta votación que alcanzó en Lima, antes esquiva al partido aprista, y propuso un gobierno de concentración, díalogo y apertura. Se refirió expresamente al electorado del sur y aseguró que buscará compensar las desigualdades existentes convocando a peruanos dentro del orden democrático.
Expresó que el país ha dado un mensaje mayoritario en favor de la soberanía nacional y no ser parte del modelo militarista retrógrado del presidente Hugo Chávez.
Alertó que a pesar de la bonanza internacional nos amenza el déficit como lo demuestran los créditos suplementarios adquiridos. Expresó su confianza de que los peruanos apoyarán y brindarán propuestas y acciones para que el país siga avanzando.
Coincidió con Ollanta Humala de que la esperanza ha ganado sobre el miedo. Finalizó diciendo que si los datos de la ONPE confirman la tendencia, que trabajará junto con todos los peruanos por el futuro de nuestros hijos.
19:30 pm Transparencia Quick Count
Alan Garcia: 52.4%
Ollanta Humala: 47.6 %
votos blancos, viciados y nulos: 8.6%
954 mesas
19:15 pm Ollanta Humala Speech
Ollanta Humala expresó su agradecimiento al pueblo peruano y aquellos que han trabajado en el proyecto nacionalista. Para Humala ésta ha sido una victoria para todos porque la esperanza se ha impuesto al miedo. Anunció que hoy día empieza la gran transformación del país y que en solo un año se ha cambiado la agenda política y se ha logrado despertar la conciencia del pueblo peruano. Hizo un llamado a todas las fuerzas de izquierda, empresarios y frentes regionales para iniciar la gran transformación nacional. Su compromiso es no defraudar la esperanza del pueblo peruano. Anunció haber ganado, hasta ahora, en la mayoría de departamentos del Perú y que esperará los resultados de la ONPE.
Quick Count APOYO (91.5%) & DATUM (50%)
APOYO (100%)
Alan García 52.7%
Ollanta Humala 47.3%
DATUM (50%)
Alan García 55.4%
Ollanta Humala 44.6%
17:10 pm Carlos Torres Caro: We will Respect the Results
Comment on APOYO Exit Poll: Election Decided in Lima
If there is a single fact that jumps out of the APOYO exit poll it is the low level of support for Ollanta Humala in Lima. In the first round, Humala won 24 percent of the vote in Lima. According to this exit poll, he has only improved his vote by 13 points to 36.9 percent. By contrast, Garcia has improved his vote almost threefold, from 22 to 63.1 percent. Lima represents 5 million voters. The only department where Humala did worse was La Libertad in the “solid north.”
4:00 pm FLASH – Exit Poll Results: Alan Garcia in First Place
U de Lima, APOYO and CPI National Pre-Election Polls
President Chavez prayed to God for Peru during his Speech at Alo President
Real Time Coverage
El Comercio (Spanish) : Minuto a Minuto: Elecciones 2006
Transparencia: Resúmenes informativos
Journal Peru (English): A Day of Destiny
10:50 am UPP Press conference
Eduardo Garibotto of the Unión por el Perú (UPP) alleged that Jaime Brossard has been working with APRA as a national vote scrutinizer. He was part of the National Office of Electoral Processes (ONPE) under José Portillo, the Fujimori official responsible for the fraudulent elections of 2000. Brossard is a computer specialist, and he was singled out by congress for responsibility in adulterating the vote count.
En conferencia de prensa el vocero de Unión por el Perú, Eduardo Garibotto, anunció que el partido aprista peruano nombró anoche como personero técnico nacional a Jaime Brossard. Brossard fué gerente de informática de la ONPE bajo José Portillo en el 2000. El 4 de julio de ese mismo año Brossard fué hallado responsable de adulteración de votos preferenciales, según el informe de la Mayoría del Congreso peruano que investigó el caso.
09:55 am Alan Garcia Voted
The National Election Board will consider whether to sanction Alan Garcia for statements he made this morning before voting. The Organic Law of Elections prohibits candidates from proselytizing on election day. Garcia spoke of casting a “useful vote.”
The classroom where Garcia voted was well attended by local and foreign media. A group of female supporters cheered for Garcia as he left the school in Miraflores that served as a polling station. Pilar Nores voted in another voting center.
Up to the minute coverage of the election in English in: Journal Peru
Comments by other fellow bloggers: ¿García y Humala violan ley electoral?
9:00 am Ollanta Humala & Nadine Heredia Voted
Ollanta Humala and Nadine Heredia went to vote this morning. Humala was surrounded by police and his own security. Fortunately no incidents were reported beyond local media complaining that Humala’s personal security was aggressive.
Alan Garcia is offering a press conference during his now traditional breakfast with his family in the APRA party office in San Isidro.
To read about April 9th incident against Humala read: Coverage of Yesterday’s Incident with Ollanta Humala
Interview with Enrique Mendoza (JNE)
A press conference with Enrique Mendoza, president of the National Electoral Board (JNE), will take place at noon.
Coverage of the June 4 Election
We will provide continuous coverage of the election as the results come in tomorrow. The ONPE has said that it will provide 95 percent of the results by Monday, and official results within a week. It is expected that more than 50 percent of the results will be known by tomorrow evening. There will be exit polls after 4 pm, and quick count results in the evening to report as well (probably between 7 and 9 pm, but possibly later). Whether we know by tomorrow who will be the next president will depend on the margin of victory.
Blank Voters and Humala Voters
Matthew Singer
June 3, 2006
As the election arrives, one question is how to interpret the large proportion of voters who have been reporting in polls that they intend to null their votes or vote blank instead of supporting one of the two candidates. For example, 19% of respondents in the Universidad Catolica poll conducted immediately prior to the debate and published last week said they would not vote for either candidate, three times the number of voters who were undecided (6%) and almost three times larger than the margin between the two candidates in the entire electorate (7%). The challenge for pollsters in interpreting these numbers in to determine (or guess) which of these blank votes will actually nullify their vote instead of supporting one of those candidates and which of these are “hidden votes” who simply prefer to not declare their support for one of the candidates.
In recent fieldwork, I was able to obtain a portion of the results of the before mentioned survey as part of an ongoing project on economic voting. I do not have measures of voters’ policy preferences at this time, only measures of voters’ demographic characteristics and employment status. However, this
data also allow us to perform a simple analysis of the choice between voting for Humala or Garcia or in blank. I should emphasize, however, that these statistical results are very preliminary and should be read with some caution but they do seem to be robust to model specification.
First, the model of support for Humala does not yield many surprising results that go against popular wisdom or commentary. All else equal, Humala supporters tend to be pessimistic with respect to their personal economic situation in the upcoming year, lower class, on the left of the ideological
scale, male, and (surprisingly to me at least) better educated than Garcia supporters. Evaluations of the national economy and employment status (whether or not the voter is unemployed or employed in the informal sector) do not have an independent effect on voter choices.
Interestingly, however, many of the factors that predict support for Humala also predict that voters will vote in blank. Specifically, the model predicts that voters who have negative evaluations of the nation economy or of their own economic prospects, who are leftist in ideological orientation, and who are
better educated are more likely to vote in blank than to support either candidate. More specifically, voters on the middle-left of the ideological spectrum are more likely to nullify their vote than to support either candidate. In addition, those with the most negative economic evaluations are substantially more likely to cast a blank vote. Finally, the most educated voters also tended to nullify their vote.
These three results suggest that a large number of voters who otherwise might have been part of Humala’s block, according to this preliminary analysis, have declared their intention to instead nullify their vote. The question is whether these results reflect 1) the failure of Humala to animate a substantial proportion of votes that were available to him, resulting perhaps even in blank votes costing him the presidency or 2) the existence of a large hidden vote for his candidacy who are identifying themselves as blank voters. The first possibility is especially interesting as Humala’s campaign between rounds has been to focus on mobilizing his base instead of reaching out to swing voters in the middle of the spectrum but his campaign appears (if the polling data is accurate) to still be losing ideological moderates that he has not targeted and also the economically pessimistic voters that his campaign claims to represent. This question of interpretation cannot be answered by statistics, however, but
will be resolved over the next few days as votes are counted.
List of Elected Members of Congress
5 parties passed the electoral threshold necessary to win a seat in congress. They are:
UPP 45
Apra 36
UN 17
Alianza por el Futuro 13
Frente de Centro 5
Perú Posible 2
Restauración Nacional 2
Read on for the list of the new members of congress.
Mirko Lauer on the Second Round
Mirko Lauer is clearly expecting APRA to win tomorrow.
Top Ten Issues at Stake in the Election Tomorrow
Maxwell A. Cameron
June 3, 2006
Much is at stake in the second round of the presidential election to be held in Peru on June 4. How will analysts interpret a victory by one or another of the two candidates?
A victory for Alan Garcia would mean:
1. The polling companies are doing their job
2. The median voter theorem works in Peru
3. Political parties matter
4. Responsible opposition is rewarded
5. The public has partially rejected the economic model, but wishes to retain some elements
6. The south will be governed by the north and Lima
7. The congress will be closed legally
8. Peru-Chile relations will be based on competition
9. Peru will be closer to Brazil, and this will favor Lula
10. The existing electoral democracy has a chance of consolidation
A victory for Ollanta Humala would mean:
1. The polling companies got it wrong
2. The median voter does not like the candidate who occupied the center
3. Voters prefer “outsiders”
4. Voters want change in the economic model
5. The public could not forgive Garcia
6. The north and Lima have lost their gravity
7. A constituent assembly will be convened
8. Peru-Chile relations will be based on rivalry
9. Peru will be closer to Venezuela, which will favor Chavez
10. The existing electoral democracy will undergo rapid transformation
The Polls: All publishable polls (Peruvian law prohibits the publication of polls one week before the election, and we respect this law) have pointed to an APRA victory, albeit by a narrow margin in some cases. A victory for Humala would mean that the polling companies failed to detect the hidden vote, and that the roughly 20 percent of the electorate that the polling companies rarely reach went overwhelmingly for Humala. Alternatively, a large shift in public opinion—probably driven by last-minute considerations by undecided voters or voters who had been planning to cast blank or spoiled ballots—altered the outcome at the very end of the campaign.
The Median Voter: Garcia occupied the center of the spectrum, while Humala failed to shift decisively toward the center in the second round. His message did not become significantly more radical, but he did not moderate his tone either. If the candidate closest to the average voter loses, this means that the average voter repudiated the candidate whose policy preferences are most similar to her own. The most obvious reason for this to happen would be a repudiation of the candidate for other reasons—in this case, negative views of Garcia would be the most obvious explanation.
Parties: A victory by Garcia would mean a victory for the party system. Alan Garcia campaigned as the leader of a political party with seven decades of history behind it. Moreover, the APRA party has acted like a responsible opposition for the past five years. It could have tried to overthrow Toledo, or otherwise obstructed his government as opposition parties have done in the past. Legislative opposition is a proving ground for leaders, and APRA has shown discipline in opposition. By contrast, Humala’s opposition has been anti-systemic. He adopted the Union for Peru after failing to register his own party. His most significant acts of opposition have been the uprisings in Locumba (and in Andahuaylas, though Humala has distanced himself from this rebellion). In the first round he hinted that a victory by Lourdes Flores would result in democratic instability, and suggested she would be removed from office before completing her term. If Humala loses, he will have to decide what kind of opponent he wants to be. His immediate reaction to defeat could be decisive in shaping his career in opposition, and a narrow margin of victory could set him on a course of confrontation.
Radical versus “responsible” change: It has been said that the winner of this election will be the candidate who is most able to voice discontent with the status quo. Lourdes Flores’ failure to hold onto her early lead in the first round campaign largely reflected her inability to tap into the angry mood among voters. The question is: how deep is the anger? Garcia casts himself as a harbinger of change, but he is still an insider. His campaign lemma was “responsible change.” A victory for Garcia will be read as a partial repudiation of the current economic model, and a move toward a more populist alternative. A victory for Humala would be a more forceful repudiation of the economic model.
Governing the South: A Garcia government will need to overcome its northern and Limeno roots and find ways of governing and including the south. This election has pitted north against south, with the central battle ground being Lima. Garcia has done a better job of appealing to Lima for votes, but it is not clear that he has made inroads into the south. Someone said that in the debate Garcia talked to Lima; Humala to the rest of the country. If Humala wins, this will confirm the old rule that whoever wins Cusco wins in the rest of the country. If he loses, the rules have changed.
Congress: Neither APRA nor UPP control the congress alone. Humala has announced plans to introduce a constituent assembly. There are no guarantees that he will do so according to established constitutional practices, which are precarious in Peru. Garcia has also announced plans to close congress should he fail to get a mandate to implement his program. When politicians talk about closing congress on the campaign trail, especially given the nation’s recent history, they should be taken seriously. APRA and UPP could always try to work together for constitutional change, but there are political logics of competition and fragmentation that may militate against this.
Chile: Whereas Garcia treats Chile as a competitor to be bested, Humala regards Chile as a threat to be deterred. Chileans will sleep more peacefully if Garcia is elected; they will be alarmed if Humala wins.
Chavez: The idea of “axes” of left-wing alternatives (one radical populist, the other social democratic) is not particularly helpful for understanding the current choices facing Peruvians. Humala is not as radical as Chavez; Garcia is not as social democratic as Lula. A victory for Humala would, however, contribute to an expansion of influence for Chavez, who has become increasingly assertive. If Garcia is elected, Peru will balance Venezuela and swing closer to Brazil. It is ironic that Garcia is now seen as a counter-weight to radical change, given that his first term in office was characterized by strongly anti-imperialist and anti-oligarchic rhetoric and policy. Populism has its many “moments,” as Marxists are wont to say.
Democracy: In a democracy, there are winners and losers. In a consolidated democracy, the losers accept defeat, knowing they will have another chance to win in the future. Both APRA and UPP have to think about the possibility of defeat in terms of future elections. For APRA, a defeat would mean the extinction of the current generation of Aprista leaders. Alan Garcia would become APRA’s “historic” leader, and the next five years would need to be devoted to cultivating new blood. There are good reasons to expect APRA would do this well. Many observers believe that Humala entered the campaign without expecting to do as well has he has. His movement has been alluvial, not incremental, in growth. A presidential defeat would probably result in a splintering of the UPP, at least after the regional and municipal elections in the fall if not before. Not only will Humala need to struggle to hold his party together in congress, he will have to find a way of channeling the frustration of his supporters—voters in the south, reservists—into the democratic system. He may well look to Evo Morales for inspiration. Morales won the presidency after a prolonged struggle, not only in the electoral arena, but also on the terrain of social movement struggles for control over land, water, and natural resources.
BBC International News Reports on Peruvian Election
Peru’s presidential election report (4:25)
The World, June 2, 2006
Correspondent Chip Mitchell reports on this weekend’s runoff round in Peru’s presidential election. Today international observers urged the two candidates — former president Alan Garcia and retired army officer Ollanta Humala — to moderate the tone of their campaigns.
Audio: Download file
OAS Mission: Adequate Organization and Administration in place for Election Day
The OAS Mission is confident that the results of the election will be respected. Chief of Mission Lloyd Axworthy met with Alan Garcia after which he said there have been severe confrontations in the second round of the presidential election and he called for the period of calm before election day to be observed.
Misión de observación electoral del Parlamento Europeo
La misión de observación electoral del Parlamento Europeo inició oficialmente su visita al Perú el 2 de junio. Comunicado: Download file
A dos dias de las elecciones la prensa internacional mira a Perú
A sólo dos días de las elecciones la prensa del mundo vuelve a poner los ojos sobre Perú. Los diarios de diferentes países remarcaron el tono duro que tomo la campaña en estos últimos días, con los fuertes ataques que se arrojaron Humala y García. El diario La Nación (Argentina) menciona que “pasado mañana los peruanos no sólo elegirán a quien rija sus destinos durante los próximos cinco años, sino que también comenzarán a definir una batalla que se está expandiendo por América latina y que podría afectar el actual equilibrio político de la región.” Las citas son en inglés y en castellano.
El Cusco de Humala
Hugo Passarello Luna
Cusco, 1 de junio del 2006
Ayer por la noche el candidato Ollanta Humala cerró su campaña en Cusco. La decisión de terminar allí es acorde con el leitmotiv de su campaña: Cusco es la antigua capital del imperio inca, del tahuantinsuyo, del cual Humala flamea sus banderas redefiniendo el nacionalismo.
Además, Cusco fue tierra humalista en la primera vuelta obteniendo 57% de votos válidos (43 puntos por arriba del segundo ganador, el APRA).
A diferencia de lo sucedido en el anterior evento, antes de la primera vuelta, la Plaza de Armas de Cusco no estaba llena, alrededor de un 60% del lugar estuvo copado por los simpatizantes de Humala.
La fiesta nacionalista empezó temprano, a las cinco de la tarde, casi tres horas y media antes de que llegara Humala. Lentamente llegaban las delegaciones desde los distintos puntos del departamento.
Los maestros de ceremonias arengaban a la gente cambiando indistintamente entre el castellano y el quechua, ante la mirada confusa de los turistas que hacían un esfuerzo enorme por entender lo que ellos pensaban era ‘spanish.’
La música folklórica peruana mantuvo el entusiasmo de los asistentes mientras esperaban la llegada de su comandante.
Un curioso grupo que estuvo presente fueron los reservistas, que vestían polos que los identificaban como tales e incluían el nombre de Antauro (por Antauro Humala, hermano del candidato actualmente preso por su trágico levantamiento en Andahuaylas). De vez en cuando gritaban: ¡Se siente, se siente, Antauro esta presente!
Cuando finalmente llegó Humala, lo hizo con su tradicional corrida, que esta vez no sólo sirvió como show de virilidad sino para escapar de la marea humana que se le arrojó (logrando un record político no visto en el debate al hacer los últimos cien metros hacia el escenario en apenas unos segundos).
Nadine Heredia llegó unos minutos después y permaneció junto a su marido sobre el escenario pero se remitió sólo a entregar sonrisas y saludar a la gente.
Humala retornó a su discurso de la primera vuelta, siendo más incisivo, lleno de promesas y con ataques directos a Alan García. Volvió a mencionar sus caballos de batalla: la prometida rebaja de un 30% de todos los combustibles; la revisión de todos los contratos con las empresas transnacionales; la investigación y castigo de todos los funcionarios corruptos y la erradicación de las planillas doradas. Cada anuncio fue acompañado con fuertes aplausos y convenientes fuegos artificiales.
Al condenar la política económica de su rival, Ollanta atacó al posible candidato al ministerio de economía en una posible victoria aprista. Pero tropezó al decir: “¡Quien seguramente será el ministro de economía!” para luego corregirse “¡Quien posiblemente sea el ministro de economía!” si ganara Alan.
Humala hizo un tímido llamado a no caer en las provocaciones y actuar violentamente, quizás refiriéndose a como deben actuar los nacionalistas luego del 4 de junio. Humala dijo: “¡Estamos cansados de la violencia, queremos vivir en paz!” tratando de espantar los fantasmas que se arrojaron sobre ellos sobre una posible reacción violenta si es que pierden este domingo.
El discurso continuó con el mismo tono fuerte y punzante, gritándole al micrófono, durante la hora que duró.
Al final Humala se retiró sobre los hombres de sus simpatizantes que lo llevaron en una parcial vuelta olímpica por la plaza. La euforia, el entusiasmo y el sabor de una victoria se hicieron presentes.
Luego la gente se dispersó tranquilamente y la plaza fue invadida por policías y personal municipal que rápidamente se abocó a limpiar la plaza. Unas horas después no había rastros nacionalistas.
Más allá de la campaña política esta noche tuvo algo especial. Rompiendo con la rutina nocturna de turistas pululando por las calles, por una noche la plaza de armas fue nuevamente una fiesta de los cusqueños
Images from Alan Garcia’s Campaign Closing
Alan Garcia during his speech
Cierre de Campaña de Alan García
Source: La República, 02 de junio del 2006
Commenys by other fellow bloggers: Garcia closes campaign in Lima
Instituto de Estudios Peruanos – Argumentos #4
Argumentos #4 incluye:
Martín Tanaka, Reflexiones antes del día D
Alberto Vergara, Alan y sus circunstancias
Víctor Caballero, ¿Y si pierde Humala?
Roxana Barrantes, Entre lo privado y lo público
Carolina Trivelli, La valla queda alta: una mirada a los cambios en la pobreza
Ramón Pajuelo, “La gente se ha pasado la voz”: un vistazo a la primera vuelta electoral desde las alturas de Huanta
Tania Vásquez, El comportamiento electoral de los peruanos en el exterior: ¿una emergente ciudadanía política transnacional?
Julio Vargas, Línea de tiempo
Números anteriores de Argumentos Electoral. Argumentos #4 Download file
Local Analysts: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly of the Campaign
Cierre de Campaña de Ollanta Humala en Cusco
Source: La República, 02 de junio del 2006
Comments by other fellow bloggers: Humala closes campaign in Cusco
Comentarios al informe preliminar de la misión observadora de la OEA
Interview with Pilar Nores de García
Interview with Ricardo Portocarrero (Historian)
Humberto Lay & Martha Chavez Give their Vote to Alan Garcia
Analysis of Congressional results at 99.904%
Thanks again to Rici for his excelent analysis!
The Impact of the Second Round Campaign
Maxwell A. Cameron
June 1, 2006
Political scientists often debate whether campaigns matter. A lot of campaign activity seems to have little impact, but some political scientists insist that candidates can prime voters and frame issues in ways that influence how people vote.
The election in Peru this year offers an example of when campaigns matter, and when they do not. The first round showed how a front-running candidate, Lourdes Flores, could lose her lead and ultimately fail to place in a runoff as a result of her inability to respond to campaign dynamics such as the rise of an outsider candidate, Ollanta Humala, and the polarization that produced. Alan Garcia proved more able to exploit the rise of Humala, offering himself as a better opponent to challenge Humala in the second round.
The second round has demonstrated the limits of campaign activity. As soon as it became clear that Flores was out of contention, the bulk of her vote went to Garcia. In spatial terms, the reason is obvious: Garcia is located near the median voter, while Humala is closer to the left. Most of Flores’ voters are in the center of the right of the spectrum. In geographical terms, the reason is equally obvious: Garcia took the north while Humala took the south. This biggest block of voters up for grabs were in Lima, on the coast. In the north-south cleavage that divides Peru, Lima is closer to the north than the south.
As a consequence, the polls have shown no movement in the candidates’ support for most of May. According to APOYO, Garcia has hovered around 55 percent; Humala is around 45 percent. That said, a recent APOYO vote simulation poll placed the two candidates in a technical tie. It would seem that there are a lot of hidden supporters of Humala, voters who are not telling pollsters for whom they will vote.
The stability of voter preferences has not been altered by the main campaign events. The main events have been:
– Flores accepted defeat saying she had lost not in the ballot boxes but in the vote scrutinizing and counting process.
– The campaign has been internationalized by comments by Hugo Chavez who has criticized Alan Garcia and offered support for Humala.
– Polemical comments have been made by elected officials—including the president and former president Alberto Fujimori—as well as by Vladimiro Montesinos.
The campaign has been dirty rather than polarized, with constant “counter-campaign” activity, a bout of violence in Cusco and bitter personal attacks between the candidates. Humala seeks to dislodge Garcia by attacking his credibility while Garcia seeks to cast Humala as a dangerous and violent threat to Peru’s stability. It is hard to know whether these attacks will have an impact on the large number of voters who plan to cast blank or null ballots, or will win over undecided voters. There seems to be a growing mood of disenchantment with both candidates, and this will probably benefit Humala. While Garcia is still the most likely candidate to win, the growing sense seems to be that the race will be tighter than anticipated.
MOE de la OEA: Informe de observación preelectoral
Interview with Michael Shifter
Salomon Lerner (CVR) Responds to Santiago Pedraglio
in this op-ed., Salomon Lerner, former president of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission explains his electoral dilemma for Sunday.
Read also: Este Salomón Lerner quiere votar por Alan