Honduras: Figures by "Hagamos democracia" contradicts the TSE
Dick Emanuelsson (special ARGENPRESS.info)
Listen to audio interview: http://www.box.net/shared/9gp8vhopvx
The electoral institute "Let democracy", accused by several Latin American presidents like Chavez and Daniel Ortega to serve the CIA and U.S. interests in destabilizing Latin American countries, is held in an exclusive interview to this reporter that participation in the Honduran elections November 29 reached only 47 percent turnout.
Unlike the Superior Electoral Court, "Make Democracy" had already produced its report
do at 20.30 at night on Sunday when they were called to sit with the judges and present the results. The judges of the TSE were perplexed and surprised by that TSE had not even checked to submit a figure.They failed completely because they had promised the people of Honduras with great fanfare to present a safe prediction about the course of the election and at 19.00 pm, ie two hours after polling stations were closed and the polling of in Honduras.
Why spent 5.5 hours before the judges, two of them directly elected by the national congress Micheletti against the constitution, presented?:
1) I had a technical fault that no one understood the explanation and
2) that the figures would be presented figures were not verified because it had the above fails
technical communications.
Company hired by TSE coup
Remember that one of these companies 'communication' hired by the TSE, the TIGO, Swedish transnational Contractors of Millicom International Cellular SA, acted for the coup on 28 June, a move that caused outrage in the strong movement Swedish trade union.
Feminist Organizing Resistance reported in the month of August that the company's main adviser in Honduras TIGO is the former colonel of the Armed Forces Améndola Billy Joya: Joya's security adviser and strategist coup government repression against the people Honduran manifested peacefully throughout the national territory, "the organization said in a press release.
When the judge of the TSE, Saul Escobar, reported Sunday night that they had (TSE) contracted the company "Let democracy" and presented it as an excellent company who had worked in 80 different elections and including 30 in Latin America, and to strengthen the "Resume" further stated that "the error is only less than one (1) percent," for all viewers in Honduras and abroad that followed the national network live in Honduras and elections are impacted tremendously by the words of Justice of the TSE.
All percentage figures, presidential candidates and parties almost agreed tenth. Only the figure disagreed on an issue, the voter turnout.
While TSE claimed, without any figures verified that turnout reached more than 61 percent, "Make Democracy" reported in his letter sealed envelope opened and read Saul Escobar, the Honduran people's participation in these elections only in 47 percent.
And is nothing more than logic, if we think in a rational, calm and serene. The president elected by the people of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya and the Front of Resistance Against the coup, called on the Honduran people not to participate in elections. Surveys conducted on strike, sympathy for the various characters in the country are very favorable data to ousted president and the Resistance. So it is hardly surprising that turnout is very low. All of us who have recourse neighborhoods and settlements as social communicators Tegucigalpa we observed that it was a ghost town. The same reports we have received from other parts of the country. But the TSE speaks of a "massive turnout".
We reviewed data from 'Delivering Democracy ", they say that turnout in Honduras has increased successively since the elections in the middle of the decade -90 until 2005. That year, 2,190,398 people voted in the electoral roll, which stood at 3,976,550 persons), according to the TSE website [1].
According to "Delivering Democracy" on November 29 voted 47 per cent, equivalent to 2,162,000 people, 28,000 fewer than in 2005 despite the electoral roll increased by more than 600,000 people, from 3,976,550 to 4.6 million Hondurans. And the difference between the TSE and "Delivering Democracy" is more than 14 percent.
Grañidísima Why this difference if, as Judge Saul Escobar of the TSE, the "margin of error" of the company that allegedly hired them does not even reach one (1) percent and all other data in percentage of match, different candidates and so had no more than tenths of a difference?
Habla "Delivering Democracy"
But in the role, if more than 14 percent and that was the first question we ask the coordinator of "Let Democracy, Rolando BU:
- The matter is that we present a value of participation in the projection of our sample. We work with a random sample is scientifically calculated by an error of plus or minus one (1) percent. The Tribunal (TSE) works with data from the polls, total data.
- On the other hand, we work with the value of the electoral roll, they have given us, 4.6 million. I have not talked to the judges yet, but it is likely that they are deducting things like migration. But so far the situation is unclear. In order to clarify that we expect them to finish counting the total number and the percentage and base percentage that do, says the lead author of "Delivering Democracy, Rolando Boo.
Dilation of the ballot is a tactic to the world
The results in the Hondurans would expect two hours are for much longer. This is a political tactic. And what is the reason? Then, submit to all means of media terrorism, the "Guests of the international foreign right-wing." But especially the Iberoamerican Summit of Heads of States which was made in Portugal the day after the elections and within which was the subject of Honduran elections. Several heads of Latin American and Caribbean states were literally victims because of pressure from Hillary Clinton, at least, not following the proposals of the ALBA field reconnaissance a resounding NO to rigged elections by a de facto regime, become extremely unusual and that scared presidents Cristina Kirchner and others.
Another important event is the OAS on Friday. If the OAS is left to carry the American position, be sure that the days of the organization, Che Guevara be labeled as the "Ministry of colonial affairs in America", are numbered. But the tactics of the insurgents and the Americans through the TSE is dilated, as they have for five months with the various "Agreements and Covenants" organized by the White House, the ballot that, if it really has been honest elections, will have a result, perhaps, revolves around the figure "Make Democracy" appeared before magistrates at 20.30 at night on Sunday and fell like a bucket of cold water to the TSE.
We interview the coordinator Rolando Bu
1173 registered tables and tally sheets
* How many people had "Delivering Democracy hired last Sunday?
- The project of ours is a project that is being prepared last year and began working at the beginning of this year in a consortium that has experience at other stations. And to achieve the reliability of 99 percent for the sample and margin of error one (1) percent, the sample fell 1.173 points (polling places) throughout the country. Honduras random sample random, as you well know, this show when they consider that parametración load is distributed as polling, consider also the history that has had the country in terms of participation in previous election periods, etc., a set criteria for establishing the sample and the degree of error and confidence. Depending on the sample that is calculated and makes sure that at different sample points, no matter where you fall, you may be in Mozquitia in the Bay, or on a mountain, the sample was there, you should go to collect the data.
- And another thing is that there is a poll of polls mouth. Ours is that the result is taken from the record after ending scrutiny. It is a difference with polls polls mouth. Our observer is not moving from table to table in a polling place. The observer (our) stands on a table since it opened at 6 am until it ends at 7 pm in the evening and there remains the observer as opposed to other observers moving table to table, collecting data incidents and general. We concentrate each observer at one table. That is what gives a high degree of systematization.
* Do you get a much more scientific than the observer who is wavering between the tables?
- That's right. That's why our methodology requires that the observer has to be there until it closes the table. NO can move more than a little when you go to vote if this close. If this distance where you go to vote, usually fails to vote.
We stop a RATITO ON ACCURACY statements about the data recorded by the 1173 staff and a few hours after the polling stations had their votes counted all data sent to "Make Democracy" in Tegucigalpa where abstracted data.
What it tells Bu Rolando is that they managed to gather data from tables or 1.173 points out of 8,000 who had tables around the country.And the result, I repeat, parties, candidates of different levels coincided perfectly with the data reported by the TSE. But according to TSE, the electoral participation "Make Democracy" recorded in an eighth of the country, they pretty much disagrees with more than 14 percent. A strange fact not to say, almost impossible.
Bu Rolando tells about different experiences that have been implemented in different countries and were recently in Guatemala and El Salvador. And in both cases the data recorded by "Make Democracy" agreed with the respective tickets TSE. But that fails with a tremendous difference in Honduras with TSE? is the key question in this election.
Journalist attacked by "international observers"
* Director of the Institute for the Americas Program, Laura Carlsen, a renowned American political analyst, was almost physically assaulted by a foreigners invited by TSE 60-70 as "international observers" when he gave statements to the hotel to a TV channel international, it seems, do not go down well. Do you have any comments and information on that and also his perception of these elections which had no international observers representing the Carter Center, the OAS, UNASUR, etc.?
- No, we have no information about this case. As we have been busy with other issues. . .
* How much the government paid for their service Micheletti this project?
- Micheletti has nothing to do with us.
* The Supreme Electoral Tribunal?
- Nor.
* Saul Escobar said on Sunday they live (TSE) had hired a very prestigious company, "Delivering Democracy."
- It's a mistake, the court all he does is the accreditation of observers that we are an NGO.
* Why then Saul Escobar had a sealed envelope with your report?
- We agreed on an agreement with the Court that the quick count results were going to deliver to the Court in a sealed envelope. That was the agreement that had since the program began in February-March.
* We talk about the funding of your organization. It's easy to find on the internet at pages NED (National Endowment for Democracy, USA) or with funding from USAID United States where the Obama administration has been accused by a double play or have actively participated in the coup in Honduras June 28. What is the funding entirely from the United States' Delivering Democracy?
- We work with different funding sources. I can not say the exact percentage but we are working with Norway, Holland, with national organizations such as Swiss and European Union, ie not only with USAID.
* How much you paid USAID to "Make Democracy" in its budget in 2009?
- He could not say exactly but I do not get to 29 percent.
* What a total budget of what?
- Of about $ 300,000.
Photo 1: Honduras, Elections - An illustrative image of Honduran elections on 29 November 2009: No militarization of the electorate and the polls. Jesus Mile Forest Institute in Colonia Kennedy in Tegucigalpa. / Author: Mirian Huezo Emanuelsson
Photo 2: Honduras, Elections - A woman votes in elections in Honduras on 29 November 2009en Jesus Mile Forest Institute in Colonia Kennedy in Tegucigalpa. Just voted 47 percent of Hondurans. / Author: Mirian Huezo Emanuelsson Honduras revises down participation in disputed polls
TEGUCIGALPA — Honduran election officials revised down Friday the participation rate in controversial weekend elections from more than 60 percent to 49 percent.
Conservative Porfirio Lobo claimed a solid victory in Sunday's polls for a successor to ousted President Manuel Zelaya.
De facto leaders hoped the elections would turn a page on the June 28 coup.
The United States and the European Union hailed the vote as a first step forward out of the five-month crisis, but the elections have split the Americas, with Brazil leading claims that they would whitewash the coup.
The Washington-based Organization of American States (OAS), which suspended Honduras after the coup but has been divided over the crisis, held an emergency meeting Friday on the election, with its chief Jose Miguel Insulza warning a consensus was unlikely.
The Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) posted figures of 49 percent participation after two thirds of votes were counted, down from 62 percent initially given on Sunday.
The tribunal has 30 days to provide final results for the general elections in which 4.6 million Hondurans were eligible to vote.
The impoverished Central American nation remains in limbo, with interim leader Roberto Micheletti in charge, while Zelaya remains holed up in the Brazilian embassy ever since returning in September and facing threat of arrest.
The 128-member Congress voted 111-14 on Wednesday against bringing Zelaya back to the presidency until his term runs out on January 27, despite pressure from the international community to make a gesture against the coup.
The Latin American Parliament, a regional group, sanctioned the Honduran Congress by voting to suspend it on Friday, lawmakers said after a meeting in Panama.
Zelaya supporters, who confronted a heavy-handed military crackdown while attempting to protest the coup, agreed late Thursday to give up their campaign to demand his reinstatement, but said they would still fight for his plan to change the constitution.
The military packed left-leaning Zelaya on a plane to Costa Rica in June with the blessing of Congress, the Supreme Court and business leaders over his plans to alter the constitution, which they saw as a bid to remove the current one-term limit for presidents.
Zelaya now appears left with the options of either negotiating his release with Lobo, seeking exile or remaining in the embassy.
The cowboy-hatted deposed leader beat Lobo by a small margin in 2005 elections, which saw 55 percent participation.
Secretary General Insulza warned at the start of the OAS Permanent Council's meeting that the body was divided on the Honduran elections, adding that "recognizing a government as legitimate" was a decision each OAS member state must make freely.
The OAS "cannot give a definitive verdict on this election, which we did not observe and was held in special circumstances," he added.
Insulza said neither Sunday's election not Wednesday's vote by Congress -- which he blasted as a repeat of coup-like politicking -- "have helped to solve the democracy crisis in Honduras."
The upcoming Lobo administration should work for "national reconciliation," he said, calling on the president-elect to end Zelaya's persecution and distance himself from the coup leaders.
TSE and exit polls "Only differ in abstentionism"
To recap: last night, at the official TSE press conference, the exit polling service announced turnout projections of under 50%; while the TSE itself said they thought the turnout would be over 60%.
One does not even have to delve into the on-the-ground reports by international observers and resistance activists, who saw light turnout where they were watching polls, to worry about why the two TSE numbers are so far apart.
In an article this morning in Tiempo on the declaration of Pepe Lobo as winner, the second paragraph says that
Later in the article Tiempo notes that
So let's take a close look at the votes Tiempo reports, announced at the same time by the TSE:
Take a good look here at the number of blank and null votes: 109,535 out of 1,716,027 reported; 6.38% of the votes cast are ambiguous, and this should include protest votes.
So the percentage of valid votes represents either 41.22% of the eligible voters (if we take the exit polling as our guide, and deduct the invalid votes) or 54.92% (if we take the declared turnout estimate of the TSE, which international media have accepted, and again, deduct the invalid votes).
We would suggest people need to look carefully and skeptically at the real vote counts as they come in.
By people, we mean scholars and interested public, obviously, not the US State Department, which would recognize the election no matter what.
While Tiempo has been the sole newspaper abstaining from pro-coup reporting, it is not pro-resistance either; it seems genuinely to be trying to uphold some ideal of reliable journalism.
What the election results reported there are telling us is that, far from transparent, the more than 60% participation rate the TSE wants us to circulate (which differs from their official polling agency's estimate of under 50%-- which would be in keeping with normal expectations, given previous trends) has to be looked at skeptically.
It is good propaganda: but it literally is unbelievable.
One does not even have to delve into the on-the-ground reports by international observers and resistance activists, who saw light turnout where they were watching polls, to worry about why the two TSE numbers are so far apart.
In an article this morning in Tiempo on the declaration of Pepe Lobo as winner, the second paragraph says that
En la presentación de los resultados se produjo una polémica porque mientras el Tribunal Supremo Electoral proclamó que el abstencionismo fue del 38. 7 por ciento, la Fundación Hagamos Democracia, que tiene un centro de cómputo similar al del organismo electoral, dijo que fue de 52. 4 por ciento.This is reporting on the same press conference we listened to live last night. The Fundación Hagamos Democracia is the exit polling entity in Honduras under contract to the TSE.
[In the presentation of the results a controversy was produced because while the TSE proclaimed that abstentionism was 38.7%, the FHD, which has a center of computation similar to the electoral organism, said that it was 52.4%]
Later in the article Tiempo notes that
Ortez Sequeira leyó el informe de la Fundación Hagamos Democracia que establece que a esas alturas Porfirio Lobo Sosa tenía el 55. 72 por ciento de los votos frente a 38. 50 por ciento de Elvin Santos, resultados que a su juicio son similares a los del Tribunal Supremo Electoral y que únicamente difieren en el abstencionismo.Well, duh.
[Ortez Sequeira read the report of the FHD that established that at these levels Porfirio Lobo Sosa had 55.72 % of the votes against 38.5% for Elvin Santos, results that in his judgment are similar to those of the TSE and that they only differ in abstentionism.]
So let's take a close look at the votes Tiempo reports, announced at the same time by the TSE:
Candidate | number of votes | percentage of total |
Porfirio Lobo | 897,335 | 52.29% |
Elvin Santos | 613,384 | 35.74% |
Bernardo Martinez | 35.593 | 2.07% |
Felícito Avila | 31,174 | 1.81% |
César Ham | 29,006 | 1.70% |
Votos Blancos | 42,998 | 2.51% |
Votos Nulos | 66,537 | 3.87% |
Totales | 1,716,027 | 100.00% |
Take a good look here at the number of blank and null votes: 109,535 out of 1,716,027 reported; 6.38% of the votes cast are ambiguous, and this should include protest votes.
So the percentage of valid votes represents either 41.22% of the eligible voters (if we take the exit polling as our guide, and deduct the invalid votes) or 54.92% (if we take the declared turnout estimate of the TSE, which international media have accepted, and again, deduct the invalid votes).
We would suggest people need to look carefully and skeptically at the real vote counts as they come in.
By people, we mean scholars and interested public, obviously, not the US State Department, which would recognize the election no matter what.
While Tiempo has been the sole newspaper abstaining from pro-coup reporting, it is not pro-resistance either; it seems genuinely to be trying to uphold some ideal of reliable journalism.
What the election results reported there are telling us is that, far from transparent, the more than 60% participation rate the TSE wants us to circulate (which differs from their official polling agency's estimate of under 50%-- which would be in keeping with normal expectations, given previous trends) has to be looked at skeptically.
It is good propaganda: but it literally is unbelievable.
Don't Go Changing....
To be blunt, the TSE is messing with us in order to tell the story about the election that the de facto government of Roberto MichelettiBain wants the world to accept. The message, turnout was massive. The reality is quite a bit different, and the way they're playing the game is by changing the rules. Here's how it goes.
You will remember the night of the election there was confusion about the participation level of the populace of Honduras in voting. Saul Escobar, president of the TSE, came out and told us that 63 percent of the potential voters voted, whereas at the same press conference, they read the report of the independent NGO Hagamos Democracia, which found a participation level of 47 percent in its data. Where did that discrepancy come from? Many of us have been looking for the reason.
While previous press reports have described Hagamos Democracia as having a contract with the TSE, and described its methodology as being based on exit polling, neither turns out to be true.
According to Rolando Bú, coordinator of Hagamos Democracia, the only thing the TSE did was accredit them as election observers. They were not paid by the TSE to report; they are, in fact, and NGO, funded by various governments, including the United States.
Their methodology was to select a sample of 1173 mesas electorales from around the country based on criteria like their history of participation in previous elections and other criteria. In each of these mesas electorales, they established an observer who was present the whole time, from the time the polling place opened until it closed, and did not visit other mesas electorales as many election observers do. After the polling place closed, their election observer sent them the statistics from that mesa, including the tallied vote counts, and participation from the official "actas" that the TSE has reported to it to tally. Their observers also send in their own statistics gathered from their observations during the day.
In 2005 the TSE website said 2,190,398 people voted, from an electoral roll of 3,976,550 voters. According to Hagamos Democracia, 2,162,000 voted in 2009 from an electoral roll of 4.6 million. That's approximately 28,000 fewer people voting than voted in 2005, while the electoral roll increased by some 600,000 persons. The size of the electoral roll was supplied to Hagamos Democracia by the TSE prior to the election, and was the same number supplied to the press.
Bú told Tiempo that the TSE measured participation against a different electoral roll that was adjusted for emigration, deaths, etc, that the TSE did not share with them. Bú said that Hagamos Democracia was not adjusting the electoral roll for deaths and emigrationbecause it did not have reliable enough information to do so.
To measure participation you need to know two things; how many people voted, and how many possible voters there were. In prior elections, including the 2005 election, participation was measured as a percentage of the whole electoral roll. For 2009, the TSE no longer wants to use the size of the electoral roll as registered, but rather some adjusted number that they're not publically releasing. This is transparent? For the TSE to measure against another value is disingenuous at best, and an attempt to deliberately mislead, at worst.
As I wrote this a correspondent wrote to tell me the TSE has recanted and now claims turnout was 49%.
You will remember the night of the election there was confusion about the participation level of the populace of Honduras in voting. Saul Escobar, president of the TSE, came out and told us that 63 percent of the potential voters voted, whereas at the same press conference, they read the report of the independent NGO Hagamos Democracia, which found a participation level of 47 percent in its data. Where did that discrepancy come from? Many of us have been looking for the reason.
While previous press reports have described Hagamos Democracia as having a contract with the TSE, and described its methodology as being based on exit polling, neither turns out to be true.
According to Rolando Bú, coordinator of Hagamos Democracia, the only thing the TSE did was accredit them as election observers. They were not paid by the TSE to report; they are, in fact, and NGO, funded by various governments, including the United States.
Their methodology was to select a sample of 1173 mesas electorales from around the country based on criteria like their history of participation in previous elections and other criteria. In each of these mesas electorales, they established an observer who was present the whole time, from the time the polling place opened until it closed, and did not visit other mesas electorales as many election observers do. After the polling place closed, their election observer sent them the statistics from that mesa, including the tallied vote counts, and participation from the official "actas" that the TSE has reported to it to tally. Their observers also send in their own statistics gathered from their observations during the day.
In 2005 the TSE website said 2,190,398 people voted, from an electoral roll of 3,976,550 voters. According to Hagamos Democracia, 2,162,000 voted in 2009 from an electoral roll of 4.6 million. That's approximately 28,000 fewer people voting than voted in 2005, while the electoral roll increased by some 600,000 persons. The size of the electoral roll was supplied to Hagamos Democracia by the TSE prior to the election, and was the same number supplied to the press.
Bú told Tiempo that the TSE measured participation against a different electoral roll that was adjusted for emigration, deaths, etc, that the TSE did not share with them. Bú said that Hagamos Democracia was not adjusting the electoral roll for deaths and emigrationbecause it did not have reliable enough information to do so.
To measure participation you need to know two things; how many people voted, and how many possible voters there were. In prior elections, including the 2005 election, participation was measured as a percentage of the whole electoral roll. For 2009, the TSE no longer wants to use the size of the electoral roll as registered, but rather some adjusted number that they're not publically releasing. This is transparent? For the TSE to measure against another value is disingenuous at best, and an attempt to deliberately mislead, at worst.
As I wrote this a correspondent wrote to tell me the TSE has recanted and now claims turnout was 49%.
No comments:
Post a Comment