...as the article points out.
The article is written by Dr. Franco Dominguez, head for the Centre of Brazilian and Latin American Studies at Middlesex University, in England. He reminds us that Capriles won a state governorship in an election run by the same National Electoral Council (CNE) that his adviser, Hausmann, is now saying he doesn't trust. The CNE also ran the primary that Capriles recently won and all elections in Venezuela including Chavez losses in one of the legislative elections and on a package of constitutional amendments.
To be fair, this was not an official Capriles campaign statement, as far as I can tell. Dominguez attributes it to "key economic adviser" Hausmann and to "sections of Venezuela's right wing opposition coalition." He doesn't make clear how widespread this tactic is, nor if any other high profile advisers or Capriles aides (or Capriles himself) agree.
But it's true that the rightwing opposition has been crybabying about "election fraud" for over ten years--in the face of the unanimous opinion by the best international election monitors that Venezuela's election system is honest and transparent (the Carter Center, the OAS, the EU and others).
---
"Rejecting the results in the face of a Hugo Chavez victory would be totally consistent with the Venezuelan right-wing's record of resorting to undemocratic means. Most well known is the short-lived coup against the democratically-elected Chavez government in 2002 which abolished democracy altogether until it was overturned by popular demonstrations. Soon after in 2003, they unleashed a 64-day oil industry lock-out that saw GDP collapse by a third with the declared aim of ousting President Chavez. They then claimed fraud at the 2004 recall referendum to decide if Hugo Chávez would continue as President, which he won 58% to 42%. The opposition promised to provide the evidence but eight years on they have yet to produce it. And faced with certain defeat, they decided to boycott the 2005 parliamentary elections to distract from their unpopularity, a move opposed by the Organisation of American States." --from the OP (my emphasis)
---
Dominguez doesn't mention that there was evidence of a Washington DC-based plot to overthrow Chavez's victory in the '04 recall election, using false exit poll results (which were to be used to stir up rightwing riots). The poll, by a Washington firm, was discredited. And there was a repeat of this threat in the '06 election (which Chavez also won, hands down).
He also doesn't mention that what Hausmann is proposing may be illegal, according to CNE rules, which forbid publication of private exit poll results (which we know, from Venezuela '04, and from the '04 Bush (s)election, can be rigged) before the CNE announces official results. Venezuela has a very efficient system which reports results quickly. It is an electronic system which uses OPEN SOURCE programming code--code that anyone may review--and is attended by a whopping 55% audit (comparison of ballots to electronic results). A 55% audit is more than five times the minimum needed to detect fraud in an electronic system.*
Venezuela's election system is based on "best practices" rules as recommended by international monitoring groups and as utilized by the best European and Latin American systems. The ban on TV ads in the weeks prior to the vote (to prevent "hit pieces"--false allegations that there is no time to counter) is one of these. The ban on private exit poll releases, prior to official returns, is another. And possibly the most important "best practice" is that all contending political parties are included in the set up of the system and the rule-making and all major political groups are included on the Council.
Venezuela's rightwing has often been irrational in their anticipation of and response to Chavez victories. They have been very "Mad Tea Party"-like. They often don't make sense, even from the point of view of their own interest--for instance, their boycott of the 2005 legislative election and their crazy opposition to fingerprinting for voter ID. The CNE has bent over backwards to accommodate them--but the rightwing's bottom-line, really, is that they--Venezuela's rich elite--were "born to rule." They think they have a RIGHT to rule Venezuela, as evidenced in their many undemocratic attempts to overturn the will of the majority of Venezuelans.
The U.S. feeds this "born to rule" mentality with money and political support and with USAID "training" and other help, given exclusively to the rightwing. The U.S. and transglobal corporate media also feed their delusions by NEVER crediting the Chavez government with its significant achievements and ALWAYS dissing the Chavez government, in a relentless echo campaign of rightwing "talking points." Venezuela's rightwing apparently thinks that, because AP and Reuters and the New York Slimes and all the rest, repeat their "talking points" and ONLY their "talking points," and ONLY report news that SUPPORTS those "talking points," that what they are saying is true and everybody should believe them. This is the basis of their childish shitfits about Chavez's popularity and electoral wins.
But unlike many of our people, Venezuelans have long memories and a native suspicion of corporate media propaganda. They do not let events like the '02 coup attempt and '03 oil bosses lockout slip into the corporate media "river of forgetfulness." They seem to have judged Capriles as a "wolf in sheep's clothing"--an airbrushed version of the "born to rule" crowd-- whose real agenda is to undo Venezuela's "New Deal" rather than supporting it (as he claims). And they KNOW--in their own lives and the lives of other Venezuelans--how big an improvement the Chavez government has been for most people. Statistics overwhelmingly support that improvement. And recent history overwhelmingly points to rightwing greed, neglect of the poor, contempt for democracy and fairness and collusion with the U.S. government and corporate monsters like Exxon Mobil.
Dominguez concludes--and I agree...
"The truth is that any opposition attempt to cry fraud is really about covering up its own political failings. Polls carried out by the major companies indicate a clear win for Hugo Chávez, with leads of between 15-27% in each of the 8 major polls carried out in July. August's polls give similar results." --from the OP (my emphasis)
----------------
*(Our system, by comparison, is extremely non-transparent. It is largely (70%) run by one, private, far rightwing-connected corporation--ES&S, which bought out Diebold--and uses 'TRADE SECRET' code--code that the public is forbidden to review--with ZERO auditing in half the states and a miserable 1% audit in the others. It is easily--EASILY!--riggable. Thus, we can never again elect an FDR as president, for instance, among other curtailments of our rights and power as a democratic people. We get nothing but corporate presidents and, lately, endless unjust war (including official U.S. murder of "suspects" around the globe by anonymous U.S. personnel conducting war-as-video-game)--in addition to outright fascists like Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, and fascist governors and legislators. I do NOT advocate not voting, however. There is always a chance that an overwhelming turnout can scare off the rigsters. And it's clear that what the bad guys want is for us to give up on voting. Voting is our most precious democratic right and power. We MUST exercise it, lest we forget that we have this right and power, and we MUST fight for the transparency of our elections, lest we lose our democracy altogether, which is what the transglobal corporations who are running things here clearly have in mind.)
= new reply since forum marked as read
| | | | | 
