Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
Polls have become a deadly weapon in the fight for the Presidency of the Republic. Based on the actual or apparent results of the polls, the campaigns construct narratives that are transmitted through different channels to the segments of the population they want to influence with their vote.
The incumbent campaign has had the economic and political capacity to create the narrative of a supposed Sheinbaum lead unattainable by the opposition. The notion of at least a 20-point lead has been repeated by multiple media outlets to create the mystique of the certainty of the ruling party’s victory over the opposition.
Since the beginning of this government, the same has been done with presidential approval. They promoted the myth of an 80% approval of AMLO, the most popular President in the world. They promoted polls about those numbers and turned it into a never-ending narrative. Today, when presidential approval is around 52%-54%, the same as with Calderón, Fox, and Zedillo, the myth of the “most popular President in the world” continues.
We must recognize the capacity of this government to create myths as a method to govern. But since they are narratives based on data that may or may not correspond to reality, they are also highly vulnerable and fragile. It is so fragile that the very polls that pretend to support the myth of invincibility also show data that directly contradict the myth and reflect that reality goes the other way.
It all has to do with the way surveys are studied and understood. The fundamental premise of a survey, regardless of the subject matter, is the degree of its internal coherence in terms of its data. A study that, on the one hand, shows that a product has good public acceptance and, on the other hand, that there are negative responses to its use or consumption would not be very credible. The survey customer would have to ask the polling company to refund the money for such a poorly conducted, supervised, and misrepresented survey.
In other words, if a survey finds that a product is rejected, the subsequent questions would necessarily have to shed light on the reason for the rejection.
With political-electoral surveys, the situation is the same. The consistency of the data corresponds to reality. For example, Calderon ended his administration with the same approval levels AMLO currently has at the end of his term. And the PAN lost the subsequent presidential election. How can this be explained?
Mexico, as a country with a tradition of respect (not to say genuflection) for its Presidents, tends to have consideration for the incumbent. Peña Nieto is the anomaly in this tradition due to his frivolity and corruption. But such respect does not imply submission.
Then, what defeated Calderón and the PAN at the time? Mainly the irruption of violence and the presence of drug trafficking in national life, despite the good presidential approval. Following the same logic, what could defeat AMLO and Morena despite the good presidential approval? Drug trafficking and violence. The polls say it very clearly. Therefore, the narrative of the “most popular president in the world” as a guarantor of electoral victory is just a myth sold to those who would buy it.
The recent poll by El Financiero newspaper clearly states the need to re-read the data for those who want to read reality and not follow preconceived myths. What did the El Financiero poll say?
Despite the presidential approval of 54%, the general opinion of Mexicans on his handling of the country’s security dropped to a meager 18% approval. And the unfavorable opinion in this area rose to an alarming 71%. With these numbers, Morena is deceived and deceiving in thinking it can win the election in four months.
But the bad news continues: in the management of the economy, the President also fails. 52% of those polled say that the economic management is bad, and only 27% approve of it.
There is a technical tie on corruption: 38% think he is corrupt, and 38% think he is not. 24% do not know what to think. The coin is in the air because of rumors about his children’s corruption. Despite being rumors, they are credible since people see them as feasible acts of corruption of the presidential family. No wonder: it is an old Mexican tradition, and López Obrador has turned out to be the same as some previous rulers.
Even the government’s backing for social support has decreased, dropping to 48% approval, with 34% seeing the support as negative. Why this new suspicion about social support? It is because they are perceived as Morena’s instrument to force beneficiaries to vote in their favor, which generates rejection and social resentment, even among those who receive this support.
A previous poll by El Financiero found that the gap between Claudia and Xóchitl is closing, breaking with the narrative of “more than 20 points difference” between the candidates. There, they found a 16% difference between them, with a marked tendency to close even more. That same survey confirms the credibility crisis in AMLO’s and Morenismo’s public policies.
Let us return to the issue of the coherence between the polls’ numbers. Those high rejection levels of López Obrador’s government policies indicate that a severe electoral defeat may be coming for the 4th Transformation project. Obviously, there is an overwhelming majority opinion among Mexicans that little, if anything, has changed with this government. It is neither revolutionary nor transformative. Even if we go by the data, it is a government that has spearheaded a regression in security, economy, and social welfare.
There is a relentless correspondence between government achievements, or lack thereof, and electoral results. Every day, presidential approval is less important to the final result. Citizens will vote using formed and informed criteria based on what they have seen with their own eyes. And they have said so without evasion in the polls.
[email protected]
@rpascoep
Further Reading: