Tooth Infection Black And Blue Eye

The encuestocracia Vs Alan's hand in the JNE


I do not think that polls are pillars of democracy, much less. Valentín Paniagua himself told us that a couple of pollsters offered his services (to his credit, of course) in exchange for money.

A survey done well is a tool that yields real results, and I also believe that there are serious surveys. But I think the suspicion is meritorious in terms of some pollsters surveyed ghosts for money to sell their surveys to the highest bidder.

quality but what countries can do forcing survey respondents give very personal information? Let's see if some interviewers ask respondents personal data many of these are going to refuse to give them, then the reviewers are not going to be surveyed and will have to survey only those who are willing to give their highly personal data (including full names, passport number, telephone, address, etc, no eye that the JNE has asked to give the views of citizens or their intention to vote or electoral preference corresponding to each name, so the State nor the NJE not know who would vote for which candidate as some suggest or wrongly what the polls say and not contributing to clarify the confusion), which will make it a kind of citizens who are part of the universe sample, which will make such a sampling frame are not representative and therefore their results are not true. So that the polls are right in their claim in this part.

But beware, I also understand that currently the pollsters call their phones and personal data of respondents to then make a control, I have even heard SUPPORT and other pollsters say that after they check the polls that pollsters have been surveyed through phone calls to some of the respondents.

why I believe that both the JNE election as the polls should sit down and find ways so as to lift the suspicion that hangs over the extent of JN and on the polling. "The legitimate interests of both parties will allow this? I doubt it.

In any case, not poll results do not believe that endanger democracy, but the mere fact that the JNE amend its rules in the middle of an ongoing process that citizens do have a right to doubt of their intentions. This does not seem democratic and some have argued that changing the rules in the middle of electoral process is typical of authoritarian regimes like Hugo Chavez and not a respectable democracy. Especially when the October municipal earlier also modified its rules and put together a pandemonium in the polls (since required that all records have the signatures of all members of tables and then paid to have thousands of objections it would take more than two months to the end results that damaged the electoral process, but happily accepted the results Lourdes Flores). The background should count for something.

As we see there are arguments on both sides. It is here that public awareness must demonstrate and express their opinions. Some as Congressman Carlos Bruce ensure that no surveys are threatening democracy as these surveys ensure that the results are not changed in table. As decide to weaken public opinion have some reason maybe but not in substance. Then there are the polls which will guarantee the people's will but the minutes of voting (properly counted) that must be carefully monitored by the ombudsmen of all parties. And do not forget that electronic voting has to be implemented gradually so as not to be election after election that the "vote of the ombudsmen" that is not good for democracy. After all the surveys are not intended to contribute to democracy, but to "contribute" with efficient operation of enterprises and organizations involved in legitimate business or services. So we must not be more Catholic than the pope.

Who loses with this rule JNE? Toledo and could Humala. Toledo because a Scandal (And boy scandals come against him, are well known to Alan Garcia) can be now if perceived as a sign of weakness and decline in voter preference which was not before the polls because I put up with "always on top." And Humala also loses because he was on the rise and was likely to be forced to continue rallying the surveys provide survey results as close to reality as the Elections are approaching, so if you play with the margin of error against the nationalist leader and will not be able to do so. Humala seems to celebrate this and has called for the audit of the surveys.

Wins APRA Castañeda also wins, especially the latter since the polls began to hurt because of their voting intentions is the weakest of all sustained in part that was the favorite, but once it ceases to be a lot of their constituents are looking elsewhere as Toledo and PPK. Now without polls will be difficult for the public to observe the collapse of Castro and Castro government assistance could be sold as a favorite (Ignoring the fact that his fall is sung the national anthem). Hard to tell whether you win or lose Keiko. On one side loses, because the fall of Castro will not be noticeable to the public, but on the other side would win because the rise of Ollanta can not be perceived by people.

In any case, polls are a relatively recent reference in the history of elections. They do not have 30 years of real influence in the electoral process. It is true that many fair elections were held before and many consolidated democracies long, long before the appearance of force surveys as important electoral factor. Not since the end of the world. Greetings

Rudolph The Red Nosed Reindeer Lyrics In Spanish

Humala VS KEIKO


The presidential campaign began long before 2010, and turned into a sort of war of position. And both candidates have shown strength and weaknesses. These two candidates have the following matches:

_ confronting the party-were born corrupt and for social inclusion (at least so they said)
- are held in the lower classes, mainly
- Not conveniently located in the center of ideological spectrum, one is left and one right.
- Both are among the favorites for 2011
- have seats in Congress
disciplined - Their leaders Keiko and Ollanta are charismatic leadership, as presidential candidates are stronger than their parties.

Usually the message in this type of applications (charismatic) is to combat political exclusion confronting the establishment. In this factor lies the strength and potential of both the electoral and the Humala when Fujimori came to political life. When Fujimori was born, but especially after the coup of April 5, 1992 these promises were hoisted, and people believed in these promises and endorsed.

Neither Alberto Fujimori promises have been fully met: in fact, classes are still being felt marginalized and on the other side of the political establishment (corrupt) but suffered a severe blow to 92 today has been restored. The promise of Fujimori in the early 90's simply not been fulfilled. And that's the main weakness of Fujimori to face 2011.

When the core of any political power is confronted and weakened then its electoral potential is severely compromised. And this is what happens to the Fujimori today. According to the evil of the country Fujimori was the establishment, corrupt party-was useless and had to enter a phase of national reconstruction without the vices of the 'party. The core of Fujimori (inclusion and defeat of the 'party) has been confronted with reality. If Fujimori was the promise of inclusion and the fight against the 'party, its relation to corruption and understanding (and compromise) with the ruling APRA is the opposite to that promise:

With Humala the matter is different. His promise is the same for all charismatic leadership: the inclusion of the majority and defeat the exclusive factor: the 'party. But has not yet been confronted and defeated the core of his promise. Its leader, Ollanta Humala, has not yet come to power. As yet no one can tell who has betrayed the working classes since they continue to confront the ruling APRA party-and Peru. Therefore, the core of his promise to be kept intact. And this marks its electoral potential ahead to 2011. What we have seen in recent years is an attack not because Humala has lowered their flags but it has kept.

While not "hurt" the symbolic heart of the charismatic candidate does not greatly weakened, while the core of the application "anti" is not attacked and defeated in its "center" resurgence capacity is intact.

But Fujimori's promise is not fulfilled even though 10 years had the power does not automatically mean defeat, but its weakness. Similarly, the fact that humanism has not been defeated in its symbolic and political center does not automatically mean victory, but expresses its potentiality. Fujimori can happen is the one who enters the second round and not Humala, Why?

"Why today is Keiko Ollanta about 20 and about 12% in voting intention?? I think for two reasons: Keiko has better press Ollanta and secondly, the fact that Keiko depoliticized a snare with his constituents while Ollanta politicized in a relationship with their constituents. A section of the voters of the middle classes and are more easily attracted by non-political issues (Singing and dancing, announcements such as "death penalty for rapists, general bickering, etc.).

For politicians it is easier to reach the working classes through the apolitical and not necessarily the policy itself. This would be met especially in "normal" situations. For as the campaign progresses, and that politics is entering a social happening than a sector of the working class will politicized and tend to claim and radicalization. When this happens (end of February, March) then Ollanta But you could grow enough to go to the 2nd round? Hard to say, easier Humala is the understanding that it will not get anything out of moderation. It has all the center-left and the political left his audience almost exclusively. If you wasted by the siren songs of the right have wasted an opportunity to try the 2 nd round.

As you enter the final stretch of the campaign Ollanta claim should influence the demands of the marginalized and excluded without neglecting matters of state. You may need more radical to try to co-opt the votes of rural and marginal urban areas, the crossfire of the favorites may make things easier. Try to restore to the people the features that was born to politics: opposition radical neo-liberal establishment (and candidates), fight against corruption, radical change in the economy, opposition to the APRA government, defense of people's everyday economics, inequality and poverty, protection of natural resources, etc. . That is all that has been advocating in recent years. In addition to expanding their contact with people by non-political. There is always a voting sector that will not be able to get through political means, must tend to them non-political alternative, without falling into the farandulización of his candidacy, of course. Keiko

meanwhile, should definitely exploit their proposals as the subject security (which can be strengthened if there are high-profile cases related to security), also Peru still macho to elect a woman has to relate to strength. Keiko good strategy of linking his candidacy to this topic. The theme of the death penalty against rapists will also revenues, and that from now until April 9 would not be surprising still see cases of this type. In terms of political and electoral returns have not lost strengthen their arrival to the voters rather than political means (music, cumbia, gifts, etc), the negative would be to exaggerate. The fact that you need only ¼ of votes of the total votes to pass the 2 º round ago that this way of relating to the popular classes is profitable for Keiko. However, Keiko should not neglect that should be getting more serious issues as the campaign heats up in a moment because people will be apt to listen to policy proposals, especially in March. Keiko did not take as Ollanta presenting his deputies or his list to Congress should not waste the opportunity to make a good technical team of government and a cool finish campaign (against Toledo and against the government of Alan Garcia.) Can you?

Best Regards, Edson

Baldeón