I was checking out the Wiki entry on the Mexican election and I noticed something: beyond the PAN and PRD, which received about 35% of the votes, there was the PRI (Mexico's version of the Union Nationale), the Social Democrats, and the PNA - Partido Nueva Alianza. In other words, the New Alliance Party.
Would you get a load of their logo?
Is that not a spitting image of the CA?
Their party principles are pretty interesting, too. I'm trying to decide where they fall in the political spectrum. Consider (I'm translating here):
New Alliance asserts that the Market Economy is the most efficient means of organizing economic relations. We recognize the existence of imperfections in the practice of this mode of exchange, even if they must be corrected by action from the State, which is in charge of guaranteeing social development with equal opportunities, full employment, the battle against poverty and marginalization, with the end of securing access to education, health and life for Mexicans.Then they talk about lots of equalization - equalizing the benefits of development across all regions of the country and so-forth. Their big thing in social policy is the use of education to diversity and equalize opportunities, not surprising given that the party was formed in part by a teachers' union.
I'm trying to figure out whether or not they're classical liberal, Gladstone Liberal, conservative, fascist or what.
Interesting.
***
Read about the write-in candidate (the paragraph below the main table), Victor Gonzales Torres. I'm not sure what's funnier - the fact that spoiled ballots beat him out three times over or the fact that he succeeded in getting almost 300,000 people to write him in as comic relief.
***
DAY-AFTER UPDATE: Others have noticed, too.
UPDATE 2: Bienvenue aux lecteurs de Polyscopique!

2 comments:
I was a big fan of the Alliance logo, and the Alliance. Fucking Tories.....Sorry, I was having a retro moment.
Speaking of fucking Tories, did you see this: http://www.brandonsun.com/story.php?story_id=26301
File it under "Future Pains in The Ass."
I know what you mean. To people such as yourself, this is a Tory takeover. To PITA Red Tories such as Borotsik and Joe Who, this was an Alliance Takeover. I was a member of neither party, but my impressions have been that it really was the former.
I can't say that I agreed with everything Reform-CA proposed, but I can't say that about any of the parties. Most of the criticism against Reform-CA is disingenuous. Got a Bob Ringma? I've got your Reg Alcock, your Ernst Zundel, or your Joe Volpe. Difference is that Ringma was removed from caucus.
Anyhoo, I may have complaints about the PC takeover in the CPC, BUT (and there is a but here) I have to temper my foolish youthful idealism by remembering that there's only so far any government can go in either direction if they want to be government. I don't agree with everything the Conservatives do, but it's a hell of a lot better than having Liberals in charge for another 12 years.
As for Rick Borotsik - yeah, I saw that. Let the baby have his bottle in provincial politics.
Post a Comment