Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
The recent Mitofsky poll on Mexico City’s opinion about “how President Andrés Manuel López Obrador is governing the Republic”. Approval of the President stands at 45% and disapproval at 55%.
The survey is relevant for a hyper-centralized society such as Mexico. What happens in Mexico City is national news, while what happens in, for example, Monterrey is local news. This is the way things are.
The death of former President Echeverría reminds us of the massacre of October 2, 1968, which took place in Mexico City and was a determining factor so that, in 1978, the PRI regime had to open the political-electoral system wide open.
In 1988, when Salinas won the Presidency, the PRI lost Mexico City for the first time in 70 years, including senators and deputies. What was the conclusion of that election in the social mood of the country? That Salinas lost the election, and Cárdenas won it. The proof? The electoral result in Mexico City.
In 1997, and as a result of the election for Mexico City’s Mayor, Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas was elected, defeating PRI candidate Alfredo Del Mazo. A national phenomenon also accompanied this defeat of the PRI in Mexico City: the PRI lost the majority in Congress for the first time in its history. The general perception of the electoral result was that it was a direct consequence of an opponent’s victory in the Mexico City government.
Indirectly, the victory of Cárdenas and the PRD in Mexico City paved the way for Vicente Fox and the PAN to win the Presidency of the Republic three years later. This perception of causality between Cárdenas in 1997 and Fox in 2000 may open some discussion. Still, by then, the idea that Mexico City tended to set the tone for the country’s political future was well established.
López Obrador himself, when he was head of the Mexico City Government and later argued his main reason to explain that he had been robbed of successive presidential elections: because he won widely in Mexico City.
Precisely because López Obrador and Morenismo have in their minds the idea that Mexico City sets the tone and the electoral route for the rest of the country, is why they hear steps on the roof. And it is also why López Obrador appointed Sheinbaum as Mexico City’s Head of Government: metaphorically, it is the Vice-Presidency of the country.
Electorally, she has been a disaster for Morena. She lost the most important mid-term elections of her political career: the opposition won more than half of the mayoralties. Even in the recall vote, when Morena was alone and without the participation of the opposition, she lost even more votes.
Due to these electoral setbacks, the viability of Sheinbaum’s presidential candidacy is, frankly, in doubt. She is and has been a loser.
The perception of the recent Mitofsky poll is that Mexico City is lost for Morena. Whether or not this fact is true, which remains to be seen, the situation in Mexico City raises Morena’s electoral concern in the State of Mexico to emergency levels. If it loses the State of Mexico, together with Mexico City, the numerical and social mood consequence is evident: Morena will lose the Presidency of the Republic in 2024.
[email protected]
@rpascoep