Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T22:29:04.959Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Origins and Rationality of the “Legal versus Legitimate” Dichotomy Invoked in Mexico's 2006 Post-Electoral Conflict

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 January 2007

Todd A. Eisenstadt
Todd A. Eisenstadt
Affiliation:
American University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Months after Mexico's independent electoral institute had validated the July 2, 2006, presidential elections, and weeks after the autonomous electoral court had certified National Action Party (PAN) candidate Felipe Calderón as president, runner-up Andrés Manuel López Obrador continued to cry foul. Days before the court's final September 5 ruling, López Obrador (known widely as “AMLO”), representing the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) and the Coalition for the Good of All, decided to disband the mobilizations blocking some of Mexico City's main transportation arteries, but to continue protesting indefinitely, and to name a “shadow cabinet,” to press Calderón. López Obrador lost the election by a hair (a mere 233,831 votes, out of over 41,700,000 cast—the final certified number after electoral court rulings), but he did lose, and in a “free and fair” contest organized by one of the world's more respected electoral institutions.

Type
SYMPOSIUM—THE 2006 MEXICAN ELECTION AND ITS AFTERMATH
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , January 2007 , pp. 39 - 43
Copyright
© 2007 The American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, John M., and Irma E. Sandoval. 2006. “Last Word on Ballot Results Rests with Mexico's People: Citizen Recount Results Will Determine Election Credibility.” Houston Chronicle, August 8.Google Scholar
Alianza Cívica. 2006. “Observación del proceso Electoral Federal 2006,” typescript at www.alianzacivica.org.mx/informes.html, accessed October 12, 2006.Google Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J., et al. 2005. Loser's Consent: Elections and Democratic Legitimacy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Todd A. 1999. “ Electoral Federalism or Abdication of Authority? Gubernatorial Elections in Tabasco.” In Subnational Politics and Democratization in Mexico, eds. Wayne A. Cornelius, Todd A. Eisenstadt, and Jane Hindley. La Jolla: Center for US-Mexican Studies, University of California, San Diego, 269–94.Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Todd A. 2004. Courting Democracy in Mexico: Party Strategies and Electoral Institutions. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Todd A. 2006. “ Mexico's Concertacesiones: The Rise and Fall of a Substitutive Informal Institution.” In Informal Institutions and Politics in Latin America, eds. Gretchen Helmke and Steven Levitsky. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 227–48.Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Todd A. 2007, forthcoming. “Usos y Costumbres and Post-Electoral Conflicts in Oaxaca, Mexico, 1995–2004: An Empirical and Normative Assessment.” Latin American Research Review 42 (1).Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Todd A., and Alejandro Poiré. 2005. “Campaign Finance and Playing Field ‘Levelness’ Issues in Mexico's 2006 Presidential Election.” Working paper at http://repositories.cdlib.org/usmex/eisenstadt_poire/.Google Scholar
Eisenstadt, Todd A., and Alejandro Poiré. 2006. “Explaining the Credibility Gap in Mexico's 2006 Presidential Election, Despite Strong (Albeit Perfectable) Electoral Institutions.” Typescript.Google Scholar
Grayson, George W. 2006a. Mesías Mexicano: Biografía crítica de Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Mexico City: Grijalbo.Google Scholar
Grayson, George W. 2006b. “Mexican Messiah.” Wall Street Journal, August 11, A-13.Google Scholar
López Obrador, Andrés Manuel. 1995. Entre la Historia y la Esperanza: Corrupción y lucha Democrática en Tabasco. Mexico, df: Grijalbo.Google Scholar
López Obrador, Andrés Manuel. 2006. “Recounting Our Way to Democracy.” New York Times, August 11.Google Scholar
Martínez Silva, Mario, and Roberto Salcedo Aquino. 2002. Diccionario Electoral INEP. Mexico City: Instituto Nacional de Estudios Políticos (INEP).Google Scholar
Nadeau, Richard, and André Blaís. 1993. “Accepting the Election Outcome: The Effect of Participation on Losers' Consent.” British Journal of Political Science 23 (4): 553–63.Google Scholar
Poiré, Alejandro. 2006. “Reflexiones Sobre la Equidad de la Elección Presidencial de 2006.” Este País (July).Google Scholar
Poiré, Alejandro, and Luis Estrada. 2006. “Allegations of Fraud in Mexico's 2006 Presidential Election.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Przeworski, Adam. 1991. Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rosas, Guillermo, Federico Estévez, and Eric Magar. 2005. “Are Non-Partisan Technocrats the Best Party Watchdogs Money Can Buy? An Examination of Mexico's Instituto Federal Electoral.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Thomson, Adam. 2006. “Transcript: Andrés Manuel López Obrador.” Financial Times, August 22.Google Scholar
Parametría. 2006. “El Tribunal Electoral pasó la prueba y aumentó la confianza en el IFE,” Carta Paramétrica, September 18. www.parametria.com.mx/es_carmespub.php?mes=9&ano=2006 accessed September 25, 2006.Google Scholar