PDA

View Full Version : Mexico Election 7-02-06 - going left?


samsung101
Jun 28th, 2006, 08:44 PM
Mexico will vote for a new President on July 2nd.

The left wing candidate is leading, but, not by much.
The right wing candidate has been gaining.

Calderon v. Obrador.

Obrador is the socialist, but, not as bad as Chaves
dictator style politics. He is the anti-Fox, anti-Salinas,
anti-PRI candidate. Very appealing, charismatic, and
a little loopy. Promising everything under the sun for
the working poor, which is most of Mexico.

Should be interesting.

He has said he thinks illegal immigration to the USA
is a disgrace for Mexico. I agree. But, he's not against
people going to the USA for work. I don't quite figure
how that meshes.

Anyway, I'll assume he'll win.

He'll probably fail like all the other Mexican presidents
have in changing the nation. A nation with oil and
minerals, and a hard working population, beautiful
landscape, should do better than it does.

He is not anti-American.
He is pro-socialism.

He has not embraced Morales or Chaves in his
speeches, so that's good. But,it could just be
he's biding his time until he wins.

Fox and Chaves hate each other.

It will be interesting to see how Americans who live
in Mexico are treated or how their property is treated:
as Americans can't really own property outright there.
Will American companies no longer feel welcome there?
Will they close up their border companies and move to
Central America or Asia?

Personally, I don't think his election will have a huge
shift in American policy with Mexico. We pretty much
bend over backwards to help their govt.'s and illegal
aliens, and they pretty much hate us.

Salinas was a crook. He can't even go back to Mexico.
Fox has been a disappointment.
Unemployment is up. Drug cartels are rampant.
Illegal immigration is way up. What did Fox do?

I can see how they'd vote for a new party and a new
guy. The PRI still controls the nation up and down.

Danči Dementia
Jun 28th, 2006, 10:36 PM
Mexico will vote for a new President on July 2nd.

The left wing candidate is leading, but, not by much.
The right wing candidate has been gaining.

Calderon v. Obrador.

Obrador is the socialist, but, not as bad as Chaves
dictator style politics. He is the anti-Fox, anti-Salinas,
anti-PRI candidate. Very appealing, charismatic, and
a little loopy. Promising everything under the sun for
the working poor, which is most of Mexico.

Should be interesting.

He has said he thinks illegal immigration to the USA
is a disgrace for Mexico. I agree. But, he's not against
people going to the USA for work. I don't quite figure
how that meshes.

Anyway, I'll assume he'll win.

He'll probably fail like all the other Mexican presidents
have in changing the nation. A nation with oil and
minerals, and a hard working population, beautiful
landscape, should do better than it does.
He is not anti-American.
He is pro-socialism.

He has not embraced Morales or Chaves in his
speeches, so that's good. But,it could just be
he's biding his time until he wins.

Fox and Chaves hate each other.

It will be interesting to see how Americans who live
in Mexico are treated or how their property is treated:
as Americans can't really own property outright there.
Will American companies no longer feel welcome there?
Will they close up their border companies and move to
Central America or Asia?
Personally, I don't think his election will have a huge
shift in American policy with Mexico. We pretty much
bend over backwards to help their govt.'s and illegal
aliens, and they pretty much hate us. Salinas was a crook. He can't even go back to Mexico.
Fox has been a disappointment.
Unemployment is up. Drug cartels are rampant.
Illegal immigration is way up. What did Fox do?
I can see how they'd vote for a new party and a new
guy. The PRI still controls the nation up and down.

Fist of all Roberto Madrazo is still in the running.

López Obrador"peje" :lol: has promised lots of things(example. inmediatley he assumes the presidence the salary will raised to all .everydoby is going to win more) and more stuff that I don't think he will be able to do. He has lot of support of the poor people" el pueblo" lets say.

I don't think he will be a good president with him I'm sure that we will ahev another crisis :sad: I don't want that.

Felipe Calderon seems to be the good one first of all he is from PAN (the same as Fox) and to continue under the regime of PAN will be good to see if it really works.

Fox couldn't do much 'cos the fucking senate didn't aloud him to do anything. and also PRI has governated México for 75 years and Fox was the first president that wasn't involved with PRi.
And its hard to change or fix all the shit that PRI did during all those years of goverment and its impossible to do it in 6 years.

México is a country that posseses good oil,minerals(the place where I live is the most important miner center of México) and also in friut, vegetables and trigues etc etc etc,
the problem is we don't use the money correctly.

Fox and Chaves hate each other yeah you are rigth but Chaves is with Z not with S :p its CHAVEZ :p :p :p .

Sálinas de Gortari is a son of a bitch but he still can be in México :p he has been here several times since his goverment ended.

and Finally..........................
Inmigrant alliens :fiery: :lol: chingas a tu madre¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡lacra.

Scotso
Jun 29th, 2006, 03:53 AM
Lopez Obrador wasn't very successful as the mayor of Mexico City. I don't really want him, he's too left and I don't want a rift between the USA and Mexico. But, I can't support Calderon because he's too conservative for me.

I do like Patricia Mercado. I hope she does well.

Conchi Party
Jun 29th, 2006, 08:53 AM
I hope Mexico turns to the left, something has to be done to stop the psychotic dictator George W. Bush.

Here in Canada the perception is that we are moving to the right, but really it isn't. The BQ and the NDP, both leftist parties combined for 30% of the vote in the last election. the liberals, more centrist (although I think their current incarnation is quite right) got about 30% and another centrist party the Greens got 5%,while the Conservatives got 35%. Considering the huge scandal, and the fact that the conservatives still only got a slim minority, and I think the trend in North and South America is to the left.

Scotso
Jun 29th, 2006, 03:04 PM
I agree that things need to go left, but having a person in control of Mexico who is anti-USA would not be a good thing for any of our three countries.

samsung101
Jun 29th, 2006, 03:30 PM
It is a good thing the Mexican people are voting in
an election that has choices. PRI controlled Mexico
for 60 or 70 years. It still controls much of the political
structure in the country. But, the two leading candidates
are not of the PRI party, and that's a big deal. Fox
did open the door to other political choices at the
presidential level. Very unheard of in Mexico.

It's supposed to be too close to call. But, Obrador
has led for the past several months, and he will
likely win. The other guy has been catching up
because he pointed out more and more what a
left wing and erratic figure Obrador is, and will be.

Personally, I think he's more talk than action. Mexico
can't get away doing what Bolivia and Venezuela are
doing, nationalizing industries, and being strongly
anti-American. Too many ties between the two nations.
Without American funds and friendship, it would falter.
Ditto for Canada's relationship with Mexico.

If he gets Mexican citizens to finally look upon illegal
immigration as the disgrace it is, good. Stay home and
fix your own nation. Otherwise it will never change and
get better. Why should it change when it uses illegal
immigration as a means to avoid making improvements.

Fox used illegal immigration as a formal govt. policy.
Charismatic, anti-Chaves, and on good terms with Bush.
His legacy.

However, he didn't do much good while in office.
Chiapas still is cloudy (and bloody), unemployment
is high, birth rate is high, dropout rate is high, illegal
immigration is encouraged to help the nation survive,
and they are the #5 oil producer & still not a world
power w/clout, and their soccer team lost to Argentina
in the World Cup. Not to mention the drug cartels
cutting off heads and hands and legs all around Mexico
in bigger numbers.

samsung101
Jul 5th, 2006, 05:11 PM
Obrador says it was rigged.
3 million votes not counted!
Cheating is rampant!

OK. If you say so.
Sounds like RFK Jr. in Ohio.

Problem with this is the Mexican govt. insisted
on the type of tight identity verification and
registration it regularly tells America not to do
over here, to verify citizenship.

Outside observers say there were areas of
a few problems here and there, a few lines
longer than expected, some places did run out
of ballots due to huge crowds. But, nothing
that smells of intentional fraud to sway an election.

Mexico had several hundred thousand workers
to check for fraud and problems for days.

It is close. Too close to finish it off. But, Calderon
seems to be holding to a 1% or half a million
vote lead after several days.

Today is the first legal count tally. After today,
they will have another legal recount. It's never
happened before, but, they have a set of laws
to see it through.

All in all, Mexico should be proud it had an election
with three candidates, and it ran smoothly. No
riots. No assaults. None of the mayhem that
was predicted. Give them a lot of credit for having
a safe and largely secure election.

I think Calderon will hold on. He came across as the
voice of reason and moderation, as opposed to the very
left wing Obrador. Calderon played on that fact: how
far left do you want Mexico to go? No that far evidently.

Still, neither man got more than 38% of the vote....so,
whoever wins, a lot of people in Mexico did not vote for
him.

SelesFan70
Jul 5th, 2006, 06:02 PM
I hope Mexico turns to the left, something has to be done to stop the psychotic dictator George W. Bush.

Here in Canada the perception is that we are moving to the right, but really it isn't. The BQ and the NDP, both leftist parties combined for 30% of the vote in the last election. the liberals, more centrist (although I think their current incarnation is quite right) got about 30% and another centrist party the Greens got 5%,while the Conservatives got 35%. Considering the huge scandal, and the fact that the conservatives still only got a slim minority, and I think the trend in North and South America is to the left.

Bush is not a dictator. :rolleyes:

Liberals never believe they lose elections. It's always stolen from them by super-secret vast right wing conspiracies. :rolleyes:

égalité
Jul 5th, 2006, 06:27 PM
Bush is not a dictator. :rolleyes:

Liberals never believe they lose elections. It's always stolen from them by super-secret vast right wing conspiracies. :rolleyes:


No, only in the 2000 election. :rolls:

And he's not a dictator. He's like... a watered-down fascist! Makes occasional threats to our civil liberties but usually nothing too serious or credible (or nothing that can't be uncovered by the New York Times). :tape:

dementieva's fan
Jul 5th, 2006, 06:37 PM
I hope Mexico turns to the left, something has to be done to stop the psychotic dictator George W. Bush.

Here in Canada the perception is that we are moving to the right, but really it isn't. The BQ and the NDP, both leftist parties combined for 30% of the vote in the last election. the liberals, more centrist (although I think their current incarnation is quite right) got about 30% and another centrist party the Greens got 5%,while the Conservatives got 35%. Considering the huge scandal, and the fact that the conservatives still only got a slim minority, and I think the trend in North and South America is to the left.
Right now the conservatives are doing well :tape: , if they keep on going like this they are all set for a majority next election :unsure:

samsung101
Jul 5th, 2006, 07:30 PM
The (by law, not requested extra recount) recount
is underway, and the media is very happy, Obrador
has a slight lead with about 35% of precincts counted...
I thought it was supposed to be 3 million!

Oh well...

From what I've seen, Univision and Telemundo are
thrilled with this. They weren't too happy w/the Calderon
lead. Not that they have any bias or anything.

The two menwill probably end up close again in the
official recount.

But, with all laws for a close election followed, it is likely
this will drag out until early August. Each man, ahead
or behind, can ask for more counts and investigations.
I doubt either will give that up if they are behind. Look
for more of the Florida style rants to come out. It should
be fun if nothing else.

Obrador wins, he can't be as liberal as he would like
to have been with a big majority. Nor can Calderon be
as conservative as he'd like to be w/only 37% of the
vote.

If the PRI party had not run a candidate, likely Calderon
would have picked up the votes there. Calderon has more
in common with PRI than Obrador.

I still think Calderon will pull it out. The Obrador had
a huge lead in the polls for months, until the last couple
of months. People started to doubt him and his politics.

Again, no matter who wins, look at the percentage.
Neither man got over 38% of the vote, more like 37%.
Meaning, whoever gets in, does so with about 60% of
the citizenry against him. Neither guy has the personality
of Fox either.

I'm pleased no violence or mayhem either. Mexican
govt. is growing up.

Scotso
Jul 5th, 2006, 07:39 PM
Bush is not a dictator. :rolleyes:

Liberals never believe they lose elections. It's always stolen from them by super-secret vast right wing conspiracies. :rolleyes:

Sorry, but the election was stolen from Gore by the Supreme Court. Gore not only got about 500,000 more votes in the country, but he DID win Florida.

Sorry if that's hard for you to swallow, but you'll get over it.

Scotso
Jul 5th, 2006, 07:41 PM
Lopez Obrador threatening protests if they declare him the loser is so ridiculous. Why did he bother participating in the election? If he wanted to start a revolution he should have done so. What a poor, poor candidate.

samsung101
Jul 5th, 2006, 08:06 PM
This is pretty funny. About 2.5 million ballots
were not counted due to inconsistencies, such
as they were not legible, ballots not marked
correctly, no identification, etc. In other words,
the usual type of thing that keeps a ballot from
being counted the first time, or at all in a recount.

But, they'll go w/the 'count every vote' mantra.
Even though that should be count every legal vote.
I assume some of our best American legal political
campaign teams are down there working with both
men to spin this thing.

Stocks are down with Obrador taking the lead,
in Mexico. That's not good news for workers.
Business will suffer under an Obrador presidency.
That only hurts workers, who will come to the USA
in bigger numbers. Great. More illegal aliens who
hate America,but, want to work here.


I foresee more of the Fox types of policies, lots of
talk, little action. Which is okay with Bush,and any
future president. More of the same in Mexico,
do nothing govt.

With any luck, the House bills will go nowhere on
immigration, and they'll keep holding silly public
hearings. Oh, they look so shocked to hear people
complain about illegal aliens, with good reason, facts,
and pictures of bad results. Gee, you mean, it's
not racism that keeps people from supporting amnesty?
No, it's decline in the quality of schools, neighborhoods,
home prices, job wages for legal citizens, and increases
in crime in high illegal alien neighborhoods. Other than
that, it's just great stuff.

SelesFan70
Jul 5th, 2006, 08:24 PM
Sorry, but the election was stolen from Gore by the Supreme Court. Gore not only got about 500,000 more votes in the country, but he DID win Florida.

Sorry if that's hard for you to swallow, but you'll get over it.

If Algore had won Florida, he would've become president. :) :shrug: And I'm not the one still bitter. :haha:

And we all know that the Electoral College elects the president (based on the popular vote), and this works because the founding fathers didn't want larger states with large populations to be able to control the country. Brilliant I tell ya! :worship:

SelesFan70
Jul 5th, 2006, 09:47 PM
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_070506/content/rush_is_right.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg

:haha:

Rush is too funny with his Algore stuff!

samsung101
Jul 5th, 2006, 09:52 PM
Obrador could very well end up 'winning' this thing.

Will that make Mexico happy? No. It will be a very
divided nation. But, and I'm happy about this...
Mexico has so far, handled this very well. There is
none of the unrest - en masse- that was predicted.

There are pockets of bloodshed and danger to come,
that's just a fact of life in Mexico. But, it is not going to
unsettle the entire nation.

It's only the 2nd real election they've had in 80 years,
after 70+ years of the ruling PRI party. I think they've
done pretty good so far.

Personally, I'd prefer Calderon. But, even if Obrador
in August turns out to be the declared winner, that's
fine too. I expected him to win this from the beginning.

How fair is this? As far as anything can be with so
much at stake, and so much based on 'trust' and paper
ballots and millions of people voting. It's just a fact of
life some ballots will not be valid, some will be done wrong,
and some were used illegally.


As our Congress is in San Diego talking about immigration
reform. The Prez is having donuts with the people at
a border shop. Hey, border enforcement first & foremost,
just enforce our existing laws first, and for a long time, and
then, and only then, talk about amnesty. Stop the flow
of aliens coming over first, do that Mr. President, and
then talk about amnesty.

Lord Nelson
Jul 5th, 2006, 11:22 PM
Sorry, but the election was stolen from Gore by the Supreme Court. Gore not only got about 500,000 more votes in the country, but he DID win Florida.

Sorry if that's hard for you to swallow, but you'll get over it.
The Supreme court is the law. Its decision is final and must be accepted in any democracy. Oh and you think that election was stolen then what about the Kennedy election which was stolen from Nixon without the supreme court having a say. Kennedy's margin was even slimer then Bush over Gore and many people said it was rigged thanks to Pa Kennedy.

darrinbaker00
Jul 5th, 2006, 11:28 PM
It's a shame Vicente Fox can't run for POTUS in 2008, because outside of Barack Obama, he's a whole lot better than any potential candidate I can think of.

darrinbaker00
Jul 5th, 2006, 11:32 PM
Sorry, but the election was stolen from Gore by the Supreme Court. Gore not only got about 500,000 more votes in the country, but he DID win Florida.

Sorry if that's hard for you to swallow, but you'll get over it.
If Al Gore had won his home state of Tennessee, Florida wouldn't have mattered. I mean, if WALTER MONDALE could win at home, ANYBODY should be able to.

jmd
Jul 5th, 2006, 11:33 PM
Fist of all Roberto Madrazo is still in the running.

.



Are you kidding me? :tape:

Cat's Pajamas
Jul 6th, 2006, 01:54 AM
so the conservative won the first time and now they're recounting and his lead is decreasing?

just trying to get the facts straight :)

Scotso
Jul 6th, 2006, 02:18 AM
If Algore had won Florida, he would've become president. :) :shrug: And I'm not the one still bitter. :haha:

And we all know that the Electoral College elects the president (based on the popular vote), and this works because the founding fathers didn't want larger states with large populations to be able to control the country. Brilliant I tell ya! :worship:

I'm not bitter. I think a lot of the people that voted for our sorry excuse for a president are, though.

Scotso
Jul 6th, 2006, 02:20 AM
The Supreme court is the law. Its decision is final and must be accepted in any democracy.

LOL... would you say the same thing if they legalized gay marriage? It's amazing, when conservatives agree with the Supreme Court, it's the end all and be all. When they disagree, they're "activist judges." The Supreme Court is not the law, they interpret the law. They are not supposed to make policy... and they are not supposed to decide elections.

The decision of people that are not elected must be accepted in a democracy? Really?

Scotso
Jul 6th, 2006, 02:21 AM
Are you kidding me? :tape:

S/he posted that before the election, when it was a valid point.

Scotso
Jul 6th, 2006, 02:23 AM
If Al Gore had won his home state of Tennessee, Florida wouldn't have mattered. I mean, if WALTER MONDALE could win at home, ANYBODY should be able to.

A lot of conservatives like to say this, but winning an election isn't about winning your home state. And Al Gore wasn't from Tennessee, he was from D.C. The voters knew that and didn't appreciate it. That doesn't change the fact that you have to win more than one state to win the presidency. Nor does it change the fact that it shouldn't be based on states. It's undemocratic. In a democracy, the person with the most votes should always win.

polishprodigy
Jul 6th, 2006, 02:46 AM
LOL... would you say the same thing if they legalized gay marriage? It's amazing, when conservatives agree with the Supreme Court, it's the end all and be all. When they disagree, they're "activist judges." The Supreme Court is not the law, they interpret the law. They are not supposed to make policy... and they are not supposed to decide elections.

The decision of people that are not elected must be accepted in a democracy? Really?

If we took your argument and logic that you just made, the Supreme Court of Canada's decision to declare a ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional (and therefore force the government to legalize same-sex marriage) would also be a voice from "unelected officials" and therefore wrong. Moves from elected officials to repeal the legalization of same-sex marriage (which are currently underway) would be right in your opinion, but go against your position. Which do you agree with?

Scotso
Jul 6th, 2006, 02:49 AM
If we took your argument and logic that you just made, the Supreme Court of Canada's decision to declare a ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional (and therefore force the government to legalize same-sex marriage) would also be a voice from "unelected officials" and therefore wrong. Moves from elected officials to repeal the legalization of same-sex marriage (which are currently underway) would be right in your opinion, but go against your position. Which do you agree with?

The Supreme Court of Canada declared same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional because your consititution declares that all people should have equal rights. They're within their authority to interpret the constitution, as that is one of their powers. They are not elected, so they can't MAKE laws, if your government banned same-sex marriage in your constitution, there would be nothing the courts could do.

That is why the Republitards in this country want a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage in this country, just a normal law would be quickly struck down.

samsung101
Jul 6th, 2006, 07:46 PM
So, they did count another 2 million or so ballots as
Obrador wanted, and as they would do anyway in the
official Wed. tally. Obrador led for a short time, but,
with almost all ballots counted again, Calderon is now
leading.

Even if he lost all the remaining ballots to be counted,
he'd win.

Calderon will likely maintain the lead. But, it's clear
this will be contested until August.

Obrador does Mexico a disservice if he encourages violence.
Civil disobedience is one thing, but, he shouldn't encourage
unrest...as he is by his tone.

Calderon should call his supporters to counter the Obrador
crowds....peaceful demonstrations. If they can maintain
peaceful demonstrations, for or against either guy, they
will have met a huge milestone in their national history.
Mexico will have become a real democracy. That's a big
deal in my view.



Frankly, this process has been more seamless than ours.
Give Mexico credit for following the procedure it set out.


Obrador sounds like a sore loser at this point. The man
had a big lead in the polls for months. But, he started
to lose it about 2 months ago. It slowly kept disappearing.
The debates helped Calderon, not Obrador. The last minute campaigning helped Calderon, not Obrador. The
guy had to come from behind, and it looks like he did it.
Fox helped too, he pushed for Calderon.

The big loser is the PRI party. 70 years of power, out the
window, again.

samsung101
Jul 6th, 2006, 07:53 PM
Obrador was Mayor of Mexico City.

Has anyone been to Mexico City, or seen or read of
it lately? Not exactly a well run or safe place. Kidnappings
are commonplace for people of all income. Scandals galore,
as with Obrador's administration - the video scandals
of officials collecting cash.

I'm sure he's not the only guy in Mexican politics with
skeletons in his closet.

But, his own previous elections have been questioned, some
for him, some against him.

Obrador is not beyond election scandals of his own, going
back many years.


Again, from all I've read, the debates - those Obrador
boycotted and the one or two he did participate in - did
help Calderon - not Obrador. They were the difference
it seems in the end.

samsung101
Jul 6th, 2006, 09:03 PM
Obrador refused to participate in the first two debates.
That did him in. He did have a big lead, and that very
poor decision hurt him badly. It helped Calderon and
the other 3rd party candidates a lot.

He had the lead, it was his race to lose, and he managed
to lose it. Calderon wins what? A nation in turmoil, a
govt. with various parties vying for party in the congress,
and an unhappy 1/3 of the public from any angle. Not to
mention the illegal alien problem and tensions with the
USA.

Stocks went up with the Calderon win.

Scotso
Jul 6th, 2006, 11:43 PM
Calderon wins. Time for Lopez Obrador to stop bitching and take his loss like a man. :rolleyes: Threatening protests, not accepting the results... ugh.

Hopefully Mexico will recover from his stupidity soon and get back on track with the progress they've enjoyed lately.

Lord Nelson
Jul 7th, 2006, 12:24 AM
LOL... would you say the same thing if they legalized gay marriage? It's amazing, when conservatives agree with the Supreme Court, it's the end all and be all. When they disagree, they're "activist judges." The Supreme Court is not the law, they interpret the law. They are not supposed to make policy... and they are not supposed to decide elections.

The decision of people that are not elected must be accepted in a democracy? Really?
Well the Supreme Court would not have that ruling. The Judges represent both sides of America, left and right. So the right will not have that law voted and I may be wrong but I think that some of the left judges also would be against this.

Scotso
Jul 7th, 2006, 03:10 AM
Well the Supreme Court would not have that ruling. The Judges represent both sides of America, left and right. So the right will not have that law voted and I may be wrong but I think that some of the left judges also would be against this.

Judges are not supposed to be right or left. They are supposed to interpret the constitution without bias.

Lord Nelson
Jul 7th, 2006, 11:57 AM
Judges are not supposed to be right or left. They are supposed to interpret the constitution without bias.
Yes of course. ;) :p

samsung101
Jul 7th, 2006, 03:23 PM
Sadly, neither man is going to make much of a difference
in the one big issue facing the USA with Mexico: illegal
immigration. While Obrador called it a disgrace, he
wasn't offering up anything new to change the flow of
Mexicans into the USA illegally. Nor does Calderon.

They followed the laws of Mexico, never before used
laws for the most part because elections were never
that close. Where's Jimmy Carter to tell us it was all
rigged? Where's the UN telling us it was fake? Where's
CNN to give us the details on the black hawk helicopters
and grassy knoll? It was close, far from perfect, but,
it wasn't illegal. Calderon appears to be the winner, because
he may actually be the winner Mr. Obador.

What will they do about illegal immigration over there?
Not much. What's their incentive? There isn't any.

The USA has to step up and make some changes.

I'm tired of hearing about 'the jobs Americans won't do'.
That's a joke. Jobs Americans won't do for $10.00, $12.00,
$15.00, $20.00 an hour? For the most part these people
are not making minimum wage or less. The guys in front
of Home Depot aren't working for less than $10.00 or $15.00 or more an hour. They don't have to. Add to
that the free benefits one gets for just being here: health
care, education, english classes, etc., why leave? The
worst part of Santa Ana, CA or Houston, TX or Mesa, AZ
overflowing with illegal aliens, is 1000% better than
the mess they left back home.

When either of these two men offer up a real solution
to why so many Mexicans freely leave their home nation to
go to a nation they don't like to make money ,and to
have kids in, and to settle in, illegally...let me know.

Create some jobs back home.
Create a sense of respect for police and military back home.
Create a future for kids at home.
They'll stop coming to the USA.

germex
Jul 7th, 2006, 04:00 PM
Personally I dont think that left wing is a bad thing itself, however Lopez Obrador in my opinion does not have the profile to be a good president, I really hate a few things about him, he is not ashamed of changing his mind (Sometimes with a few hours of difference) to whatever suits him. And his style is of big spending, getting loans to have social programs or to build infrastructure, but thinking of quantity not quality to be able to report a lot of things done (In this regard he is very similar to the old PRI).
Last, please remember that Mexicos right wing (PAN) is positioned a little to the left of the democratic party on the USA, so that is not extreme right at all.
I really think that Mexico is on the right path to be a better country (We need that).

germex
Jul 7th, 2006, 04:15 PM
The
worst part of Santa Ana, CA or Houston, TX or Mesa, AZ
overflowing with illegal aliens, is 1000% better than
the mess they left back home.


These comments are really hard for a Mexican like me to take, however they are mostly true, and what really upsets me is that we as Mexicans and our goverment had not been able or willing to change that. I think that Fox is on the right track trying to educate people on rural and poor areas of the country, that slowly but surely will give them options back home. Also as long as job opportunities expand (And they are growing right now) that will surely help to keep them home.
- - Not all Mexico is worst than the worst parts of an american city. - -

jmd
Jul 7th, 2006, 04:21 PM
buenisimo!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzD5iw4MxrY&search=ahora%20cumpl

Scotso
Jul 7th, 2006, 06:01 PM
I really think that Mexico is on the right path to be a better country (We need that).

I agree. It's a good sign.

Lord Nelson
Jul 7th, 2006, 10:39 PM
Personally I dont think that left wing is a bad thing itself, however Lopez Obrador in my opinion does not have the profile to be a good president, I really hate a few things about him, he is not ashamed of changing his mind (Sometimes with a few hours of difference) to whatever suits him. And his style is of big spending, getting loans to have social programs or to build infrastructure, but thinking of quantity not quality to be able to report a lot of things done (In this regard he is very similar to the old PRI).
Last, please remember that Mexicos right wing (PAN) is positioned a little to the left of the democratic party on the USA, so that is not extreme right at all.I really think that Mexico is on the right path to be a better country (We need that).
Oh don't worry, we don't feel insulted if PAN is really conservative believe me. :p
The problem with Mexico is that the labor unions are too strong. So reforms such as privatization cannot be made and state companies remain rickety. This is all the fault of the PRI. The only way for PAN to make reforms though is to form a coalition eith the PRI.