Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
In times of a deeply divided society and also trapped in its ancestral beliefs between worship/fear of authority, surveys, and their usefulness are a difficult phenomenon to discern. They may suggest certain consistent opinions and behaviors and then report nonsense that bears no relation to what occurs in “normalcy.” How to explain this in order to understand the usefulness of public opinion reviews?
The clearest example of this is the polls evaluating presidential popularity and government performance. In general terms, the polls show a favorable evaluation of public opinion towards the President, between 50%-60%, depending on the pollster. Although he indeed enjoyed a popularity of almost 80% at the beginning of his administration, and this has dropped to the 50s, he still enjoys the approval of the majority of the country’s citizens.
This is not the case, however, with his public policies. The three problems considered the most important by the citizens (economy, health, and security) receive the majority of the population’s disapproval. In the same surveys where the President gets an approval rating above 50% for his administration, he is disapproved of the three issues of economy, health, and security.
There is the approval of the person but the rejection of his policies. In a society with an authoritarian cultural tradition, respect for authority is only surpassed by the fear it evokes.
This fact does not destabilize the country, but it does generate a significant ambiguity regarding the results of opinion polls on particular issues. An interesting example is the El Financiero poll on public opinion regarding Mexico’s conflict with the United States and Canada on the energy sector and the USMCA. The President celebrated the survey results, which showed that 49% of citizens favored “defending sovereignty, even with tariffs”, while 39% favored upholding the USMCA and its regulatory framework. He took this as confirmation that his nationalist campaign yielded a favorable result for his “sovereignty” position in the negotiation.
However, breaking down the poll more carefully, it turns out that citizens who do not consider themselves part of either of the two opposing sides in the country (4T vs. opposition), i.e., neutral and independent citizens, are more inclined to avoid confrontation with the two USMCA partners rather than go to confrontation with them and be subject to possible tariffs.
The actual poll result is reflected in the 49% who supported the President in this case. In other words, less than half of the country and nothing to do with his approval levels as a person and as a president. Once again, the ambiguity inherent to polls in a polarized country, such as Mexico has been since López Obrador’s administration, is once again confirmed. The President may even have a 60% approval rating, but only 49% support his decision to confront the USMCA partners. Mexico enters the negotiation completely divided, unlike the United States and Canada, which convene the negotiations united and defiant.
In reality, nothing to celebrate.
[email protected]
@rpascoep