Mexico's defeated leftist presidential candidate has claimed his country's election was "fraudulent", a claim supported by the local chapter of Anonymous. Enrique Peña Nieto, of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), declared victory late on Sunday after official results showed he landed 38 per cent of the vote. Andres …
............maybe he just lost, and the "local chapter of Anonymous" are a bit "leftist" and wanted him to win.
Sometimes the simplest solutions are the right ones.
Thanks for that valuable expert analysis Ellipsis Man!
".....and the "local chapter of Anonymous" are a bit "leftist"...." Don't be silly, what a stupid thing to say! Honestly, how could anyone think the Anons were only "a bit" leftist? Bit like calling that tw@ Chris Nineham of the Stop The War stupidness "just slightly influenced by Trotsky".
"...Mexico's defeated leftist presidential candidate has claimed his country's election was "fraudulent", a claim supported by the local chapter of Anonymous...."
It's a good job that you can rely upon Internet vigilantes, who are prepared to hack election officials IT systems, to let you know if an election is safe or not...
It's also kinda sad that these government sites which all boast having amazing security are getting taken down so easily. Either Anon are really good, internet security really sucks, or its just that governments can't do a single thing right.
I'm going with options b and c.
Isn't it possible that "the local chapter of Anonymous" is just random blokes posting crap on the web without having hacked anything at all?
"It's a good job that you can rely upon Internet vigilantes, who are prepared to hack election officials IT systems, to let you know if an election is safe or not..."
If an electoral IT system can be hacked, the election is not safe.
If you wait a while,
Destiny, Symphony, Melody and Rhapsody will arrive and they'll tell you about Irony.
Or check for fraud the mathematical way :-)
Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador will be telling his assistants to get the local Anons to shut up. "Damn it," they'll say to the Anons, "we're trying to look believable here....."
no need to frig the vote when you can frig the government.
'Do what we say or we'll take out banks elsewhere...'
Sent on a postcard from the Caymans
And in old news
So if you don't agree with the messenger the news can be ignored?
Very long URL I know but these are Official Russian voting figures
Look at the first two rows of the last column.
Registered voters 320455
Votes cast 1619073
~64% of these votes went to guess who?
the real question
The real question is probably not whether there was fraud--it was an election, after all--but whether it changed the outcome of the election (see Nixon v. Kennedy, Hayes v. Tilden, and many others). Did the votes I stole downstate balance the votes you stole upstate?
Trusting souls believing in the efficiency and unambiguity of the election process are urged to check the New York press for primary contest between the incumbent Charles Rangel and the challenger Adriano Espaillat in the 13th congressional district of New York.
Not really a case of bad loosers.
Over here in Mexico right now. Most of the educated Mexicans I have been speaking with seem to think that Peña Nieto's party is easily the most corrupt, and there was talk of vote buying (in the very poor areas) well before the result.
Doesn't sound like anyone with a clue actually wanted him in but there are a lot of areas of Mexico that are still very poor (one town I was in only got electricity in 2004), so votes could easily be bought, and bribes are common practice here.
Actually talking with real Mexicans would give you a bit more insight into the reality of it all. The few Mexican I know have been posting against the corruption for the last few months on Facebook now.
There's a difference ...
Paying the impoverished for their vote cards is tawdry; what they need is a nice respectable billionaire class like the Koch Brothers to put their weight behind the election. Then it's nothing more than "free speech" in service of a fair political choice. It works for U$, it should work for Mexico.
Re: There's a difference ...
Paying the impoverished for their vote cards is tawdry;
Since you want to drag American politics into this, I'll point out that this is EXACTLY what the Democrats have been doing for ~50 years now, and with taxpayer dollars to boot!!!
You don't REALLY think they enacted all those handout programs because they actually give two shits about the poor, do you?
It's not just Anonymous, there's A LOT of reports about bribing.
For those who speak spanish, here's just a very tiny bit of recorded info about what happened:
You guys are slipping!
How come no-one else has posted the obvious correction:
Mexican election runner-up and losers say vote was 'fraudulent'