The series name was used incorrectly Pluribus create this column because many of those who tirelessly defend the existence of multi-channel female party candidates in elections are targeting the same virus that depicts the history of the only woman who is able to think about it this way. Little Carol Sturka, the protagonist, is faced with a brain divided between all human beings on the planet. But Pluribus in Latin it means “of many” and refers to the motto of the 13 original colonies of the United States: “of many”. Here, I use it for our “multiple” questions, which are lists of numbered names that we vote on each year as party representatives. The disappearance has been much debated, and this column is about why and how it should replace those lists.
What happens to the multi-member debate is that it is confused with proportionality, just as it is said that having a majority in the Congress of the Union is a dictation. This statement is easy to debate: the PRI was mayor in free elections, with fraud and electoral coacción in the middle of the unions, especially the masters, but also all the affiliated organizations of the CTM, the Confederation of Workers of Mexico, who was the leader, Fidel Velázquez, who lasted 56 years at the front. The current mayor of Morena in Congress is the result of the opposite: free elections. The mayor does not want to decide on a dictation, he is simply the mayor of the voters. The PRI dictatorship was primarily a one-party dictatorship. They are primarily different things.
Now let’s move on to proportionality. It is a constant relationship between the quantities that are in me. For example, in the case of MPs, if a party obtains the number of votes from the total number of votes cast and has 500 kuruels to distribute, if these votes cast correspond to 500 votes. Yes, for example, PRI gets one eye per hundred votes, which is equivalent to one eye per hundred out of 500 votes, which the 40th says they are. Another example from 2018. If 56 million votes were cast, Andrés Manuel won 30 million of them, that is, a decided 53 percent. Since there are 500 MPs, Morena had to get 265 curls, although directly to punish her coalition with Labor and the Greens, they allocated only 190. Since the votes never end up with excess percentages, if they add up the tenths and give extra seats to the best losers, and therefore the poorest losers, it is decided on PAN and PRI. Proportionality is therefore simple. No numbered lists are needed, because it may happen that the voter wants to vote for someone who is there, let’s look at the place, and at the same time consider that whoever is at the top of the list is an installment. Therefore, the voter should be able to give preference to the same person who wants to vote. Yes, for example Paloma Sánchez from the PRI. One person who stands for many is the one who, in the middle of the debate on electricity reform, went to the floor of Congress to shout at the protesters that the bill would not pass. When Leonel Godoy asked her if the voters were afraid, she protested: “I am pluri and no”. Well, she could be third on the list of the first district in 2021. I am reminded of “Alita” Moreno, who was once on the first place on the list of the fourth, which is the city of Mexico, although the government of Campeche. Well, maybe Paloma Sánchez, the best on the unnumbered list, won’t get a single vote. But as if you were voting for a place on this list, you can ask yourself and I can safely execute on an embarrassing number. Now it is the Senate, also multi-member. In this district of Sinaloa-Sonora, the PRI makes up 10 percent of the total votes in 2021. It may be very unfair that Paloma Sánchez can be a deputy or a senator, which offends the voters, but the lists allow it.
But McPRIAN’s opposition wants us to trade proportionality for multi-party lists. We currently have this list, which varies by constituency, which has been drawn up so that the PRI is always in the majority. Or yes no, why is Guanajuato the same way as New León and Tamaulipas, and not in Michoacán? Or why is Guerrero with the city of Mexico and the state of Mexico with Querétaro? For example, there is the State of Mexico-Michoacán-Querétaro-Colima constituency where Felipe Calderón was first on the list and for which he was the representative. Why define parties on these lists? Because they describe the bureaucracy of the parties and communicate unspeakable deals or grievances to their comrades, partners.
Please go through the lists of multiple nominations from 2000 to 2018. Here is my report.
The first thing that made me scratch my head with nostalgia was that in 2000 there were parties like PARM, which got 0.73 votes, also called the Social Democrats, which got 1.8, and Centro Democrático de Manuel Camacho Solís and Marcelo Ebrard, which got 1.1 per 100. Gabriela Cuevas, Felipe Calderón and as a representative of another Kenia López Rabadán. In the PRI were Fernando Ortiz Arana, the eternal Augusto Gómez Villanueva, Felipe Solís Acero, who was the executive secretary of José Woldenberg’s IFE, and Ildefonso Guajardo, who was later entrusted with the plan to the master of Xóchitla Gálvez’s candidacy, Eduardo Andrade, who now thinks much more of the musicians of Javier Duargoberten, sidorni. from Veracruz, Beatriz Paredes, Romero Deschamps, the essential leader of the Pemex Syndicate. Purely good people. He was also the son of Miguel of Madrid. One and two of the Centro Democrático were Sergio Aguayo and Alejandro Rojas Díaz Durán, two vigorous opponents of obradorismo. But the votes were not obtained and they were not elected. Social democracy is also called one and two, Rolando Cordera, a UNAM academic, and Ricardo Raphael from Madrid, who is a very useful TV presenter.
These are the parties that did not record the votes of their first parties that followed me calling for attention in 2003. Now let’s see: Partido Sociedad Nacionalista, Alianza Social, México Posible, Partido Liberal Mexicano, Fuerza Ciudadana. PAN was highlighted by his lists: Margarita Zavala, Juan de Dios Castro, Molinar Horcasitas, Jorge Triana, Germán Martínez and Marko Cortés. PRI not prestigiously reviewed: Miguel Angel Yunes, “Alito” Moreno, Elba Esther Gordillo, Claudia Ruiz Massieu Salinas, Emilio Chauyfett, Alfredo del Mazo. At the party with a certain failed beauty was Mexico Posible —otherwise— Sergio Aguayo, accompanied by Jesus Roberto Robles Maloof.
There was a party called Social Democratic and Campesine Alternative (which I wanted for two hundred).
For the PRI they were: José Murat, Beatriz Pagés, Cesar Camacho Quiróz. For PRD and Convergencia, PT: Tonatiuh Bravo Padilla, Ruth Zavaleta, Alejandro Chanona. The first is from the group that controls the University of Guadalajara and its book fair. The other is the one who opened the microphone to Felipe Calderón so that the presidential gang could accuse themselves in the kitchen of the House of Representatives. And he is the current director of political sciences at UNAM. In 2009 there was a social democratic party (which started 1.03 for hundreds)
El PAN traía Manuel Clouthier, Javier Usabiaga, Gil Zuarth, Vázquez Mota, Kenia López as owner. El PRI again Beatriz Paredes, Claudia Ruiz Massieu Salinas. Convergencia, which is the first name of the Civic Movement, brought Alejandro Gertz Manero, the only tax withdrawal of the Republic, to its 5th electoral district. The new Alianza came with the boxer Jorge Kawaghi, with Reyes Tamez, the historically less educated Secretario de Educación del Gobierno, according to Vicente Fox. It was also Tere Vale.
In 2012 you have the Movimiento Ciudadano. The PRI without touch brought Manlio Fabio Beltrones, “Alito” Moreno, Manuel Añorve Baños, and Jesus Murillo Karam, el de la Verdad Histórica de Ayotzinapa. Por el Movimiento Ciudadano, three surprises: Alfonso Durazo, Luisa María Alcalde, hoy de Morena, Ricardo Mejía Berdeja, hoy del PT.
From 2015 to 2018, there was the Humanist Party, the Social Party and the Moreno Party. El PAN entered the truth with Miguel Ángel Yunes Linares, Santiago Taboada and Marko Cortés. The PRI competed with Ivonne Ortega, César Camacho Quiróz —otherwise— and the PRD with Acosta Naranjo, Agustín Basava, Jesus Zambrano. The Green Party with Lía Limón who—I entered—gave up on PAN, then came back to support Ricardo Anaya for president and later compensated for all his woes by being Álvaro Obregón’s delegate.
Come and leave this place here because the name does not tell us the truth. But we have to show that many are exactly the cream of the crop and born from the elite that ruled us during the decades of PRIAN. Without professional experience or what is commonly felt, for all these people you are burdened with decisions, pressure and rushed personal negotiations through places of people’s representation. But many are not popularly represented, neither by mayors nor by minorities. It is the bureaucrats who owe it to their managers who make the lists. They are, moreover, the ones who shout in the chambers, the ones who manage the votes, the ones who get the nod from the real representatives, the ones who campaigned and won their votes in the precincts. Kenía López, Lilly Téllez, “Alito”, Ricardo Anaya, Marko Cortés did not need to convince voters and were elected by their place on the list.
Representation is done by others and for others, it is decided, for your benefit. The people’s representation is not the representation of their party leaders, but the representation of the electorate. I’ll give you a simple example. The physician may act on behalf of the hospital director or on behalf of the hospital. It’s not the same thing. One thing is the friendliness of the director and the interest of the hospital. When we talk about elections, it is about representing the mayor and minorities, it is decided, in McPRIAN. There must be unity around a popular representative. Many believe that the unit should be one of the members of the movement, for example 4T or Morena. It doesn’t matter. It is interesting that there is unity around the representatives. Movement is the structure of social conflict, not its solution. In other words, different interests and opinions are structured in the general interest. To follow up on the hospital: you cannot override the nurses over the nurses or the anesthetist over the doctor until you find that the hospital is responsible for providing health services. Representation must not be something, say, being a lawyer or an economist, but an actuary, doing something. After all, it doesn’t matter so much who makes up the legislature as such, so long as that legislature does so as a whole, the laws it enforces. The mayor in congress is an instrument of negotiation, not a herramienta of representation. It does not matter whether the grounds of opinion or the mode of debate are common to their constituents, so long as they are empowered to introduce for the benefit of the whole nation the service which the hospital offers.
I say this because we often confuse representation with being of a certain form or symbolizing something. It is a political action. They are in the fields of sociology, popular statistics and insights. They must not be represented by those who act only for the benefit of their leadership, the angry or fearful, such as McPRIAN, and do not do so in the public interest. This will allow us to start building these forms of representation that do not belong to electoral mayors and minorities, in the territory, in campaigns and agitations. And one of them is the list and circuits. Menos Pluribus parties and more national interest.
Leave a Reply