not have left from here, the criticism of many decisions taken by the Kirchner. Intervention to INDEC, the looting of the administrators, the witnesses, the conflict with the country ... I could go. But within hours of the end of the campaign, I can not help think that the opposition offers just that: an opposition. They deserve to lose. Let
. We have two partnerships with enough political clout to cope with Kirchner: Peronism dissent and radicalism reloaded. "Union-Pro" and "Civic and Social Agreement" are, in superficial, advertising constructions.
The two met with an interesting breeding ground to give the thud: recession, inflation, dengue, authoritarian leadership and irritating, a marked impairment in social, institutional and corruption cases unresolved. Obama had sparked a global wave and a local AlfonsÃn for change ... In short, a situation more favorable, if you will.
The opposition comes at the end of the season the hard way. Did you give
Union-Pro Pro profile of the campaign? No, ended up embroiled in the debate over what and how estatizarÃan privatized. Was there a big picture Cobos-Carrio-Prat-Gay-Stolbizer to show the "safe change" together? No, only a tentative picture of Cobos and Alfonsin. Does anyone campaigned with "(5, 10, 15 .., any number!) Proposals that would change everything?" Less. "They put on the ropes to Kirchner, forcing him to respond on thorny issues such as Indec, increasing poverty, debt, or the bag Antonini? Mildly.
This can result in the Sunday night show kirchnerismo better overall numbers than any opposition party, though none take a clear advantage. The contrast is the distribution of seats in Congress, which will be opposition. But still a fine contrast of political analysis. The number, which people look at the reality of the polls may show a triumphant Kirchner. And that seems a big shit.
0 comments:
Post a Comment