Does Scioli Know The Party He Represents?

If scioli wins they'll continue pursuing the ks. If macri wins theyll do the same but putting more pressure on macri to try to bring about prosecutions though very difficult seeing how the judiciary is balanced in the ks favor and dont forget congress will still have a huge presence of ks.

Yes .. Prosecutions Maybe B) ...? Yesterday the First district Chamber in Rio Gallegos, Santa Cruz caught fire and most of the important files for corruption cases, where destroyed.

Weird Fire in First District Chamber Court Río Gallegos


http://www.clarin.co...1468053489.html


2118158w620.jpg
 
If scioli wins they'll continue pursuing the ks. If macri wins theyll do the same but putting more pressure on macri to try to bring about prosecutions though very difficult seeing how the judiciary is balanced in the ks favor and dont forget congress will still have a huge presence of ks.

As far as political commentary is concerned, what this country needs - badly - is a Jon Stewartesque presence. Argentines love obsessing over their juvenile infantile and nonsensical politics, and somebody who would simply apply the smallest hint of humor to reveal the absolute lack of clothes all around would be a smash hit. Lanata is way too angry.

A Stewart-style parody after every Cadena Nacional might very possibly have put an end to the practice.

====

The other important point is that the K movement is more than capable - and has almost certainly already laid the groundwork - to make governing as difficult as possible for Macri. It is entirely possible that he will fail through no fault of his own. Between the power of the hostile CGT - both of them - and the fact that the bureaucracy has been drenched with Camporistas, all of whom are protected at the very least by (ab)normal (=normal over here) labor laws and possibly golden parachutes, he will not have an easy job getting his agenda off the ground.

Macri is, though, a seasoned politician, and not at all new to operating in hostile territory. One assumes that he is not naive, and has some plan for governing once elected. I doubt he's planning on using the famed escape helicopter soon.

One of the first potential deals that come to mind would be that he is prepared to pursue prosecutions all the way to the top, and is able and willing - if the cards he holds are understood to be strong ones - to use that as his bargaining chip for an arrangement. Make it clear that you can land big people in jail, then agree to live and let live, so long as it's mutual. This, of course, requires that the other side understands that you have actionable cards. Lanata et al can be useful in this regard.
 
Macri sidestepped as many inconvenient questions as Scioli did. Nobody knows how he is going to actually govern, same as Scioli. Nobody bothered asking either if the candidates where will the money come from to pay for all their promises. Nobody took advantage of a question thrown their way to stake out or even defend a position that may in any way be controversial, relying on the courage of their convictions.

Even a normal conversation wasn't possible, because the impossibility of normal rules being respected forced the imposition of iron 'no interruption' rules which totally stifled the possibility of a good back-and-forth but at least made the debate workable to some baby extent.

Only in Argentina are baby steps such as these called a good debate, and only next to a blowhard, blustering, poorly prepared, incoherent, poor caricature of a Mafioso figure such as Scioli can Macri be called a good candidate.

Who knows? Maybe he'll make a great president. But nothing in this debate leads to the conviction that that will be the case.

The debate did make clear that Macri is the better candidate, but only because it conclusively showed Scioli to be mind-bogglingly bad. Where Macri could attempt to appear presidential and composed, Scioli repeatedly showed that he couldn't even pretend. Only a bunch of obviously hollow, patronizing, "estoy luchando para vos acá!" appropriate for a local gremio. Truly pathetic, truly Argentine.

But will Macri, in fact, be any good as president when not standing side-by-side with this buffoon? Only time will tell.

Watching this debate to find out, in detail, what the plans are is probably not the best idea. If anyone's really interested then watching interviews is a better way to go. Plenty of interviews exist where both Macri and Scioli have made their positions clearer. And to be honest, no one can read off positions papers in the length of two minutes, especially not things that are related to the economy. Any misspoken word, any misunderstood sentence and the next day that very sentence you uttered is going to be used by the opponent in an ad against you.

The only reason we had these debates here is because the US has presidential debates. Apart from the US, they are a relatively recent phenomenon in the world. It is the first ever debate for runoff elections and I think it went well and civilized (as opposed to the shouting match that one would normally expect). But as an example (just an example, don't care about US politics nor do I wish for that to become the topic here), the democratic debate had absolutely nothing either. Hillary to me seemed to suggest that she should be voted for because "Woman". Romney gained a lot of popularity in the first presidential debate in 2012 because he put on a strong show (no one cared whether what either one was saying was true or not). Then support fizzled completely because "binders full of women". He misspoke. Everyone knew he misspoke but bam! no one cared.

Debates aren't what some people think they are: a place where all your questions and wonder-ments shall be answered. In fact, they are what most people want them to be: entertaining and a chance to see who slips up. Happened here, happens in the US, happens everywhere. Two minutes just aren't enough and the risk that people will run with anything they can get their hands on is huge. There just isn't enough time to do damage control.

Most people who watch debates already have their minds made up. Few people change their minds but they do so not based on some factual data that they've all of a sudden been showered with but because they like or dislike the personality of one or the other. People who give a flying rat's hind parts about facts actually go look up information they're interested in rather than wait for a debate.

Anyway, to cut my rambling short, Macri did fine although I think he appeared as having lost his cool a little bit here and there but in the end he handled himself more like a president would and should. Scioli appeared as a thin skinned, male version of Cristina who just can't believe his eyes and ears when he reads and sees the results of October 25th. He is furious that people don't want him over Macri (who, lest we forget, is planning to privatize oxygen so lets all breathe a lot of it already before December 10th) and it shows. If anything Macri achieved what he should have done, stay (more or less) calm whereas Scioli effed up big time because I think if he were calmer, he could have won over some people.
 
I was just chatting to my chocolate shop owner friend and he reckons Scioli was on coke last night which caused his weird facial exp<b></b>ressions and tightness of the jawline.

Who knows ?? but was he wired oops...?? see infobae and #ElCableDeScioli...???

0013766016.jpg
 
I think this cable from the Wikileaks dump is very insightful:

http://cables.mrkva.eu/cable.php?id=160006

US embassy cable - 08BUENOSAIRES893

MACRI AND SCIOLI ON THE POLITICAL SITUATION IN ARGENTINA

1. (C) Summary: South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford and the
CDA met with Argentina's two most prominent center-right
politicians, Buenos Aires Governor Daniel Scioli and Buenos
Aires City Mayor Mauricio Macri on June 12. Scioli, formally
allied with the Kirchner government, appeared haggard and did
not bother to defend the government's handling of the
long-running farm crisis. Macri spoke with great disdain for
the Kirchners and pledged, in the clearest terms that we've
heard from him, his intention to run for Argentina's
presidency in 2011. Macri is not, however, eager to see the
Kirchners leave the scene before then. When asked by Gov.
Sanford whether the Kirchner regime would make it to the end
of its term, Macri replied, "I sure hope so." End Summary.

2. (C) South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford visited
Argentina from June 25-27, and met with Argentine officials
on June 26. Sanford, accompanied by the CDA, met separately
with the country's two most prominent right-leaning
politicians, Buenos Aires province Governor Daniel Scioli and
Buenos Aires city Mayor Mauricio Macri. The difference
between the two was striking: Scioli, a Kirchner ally,
appeared beaten down and distracted, while Macri was animated
and relaxed, despite his concern for the current situation.

Down and Out in La Plata
------------------------

3. (SBU) Scioli began his meeting, which took place in
Scioli's offices in the provincial capital of La Plata, with
Sanford by noting that the country was enmeshed in a very
difficult face-off between the GOA and farm sector which
began, he said, "as a result of the tax measures that the
government insisted on implementing." He did not defend the
GOA's position, but noted grimly that 93% of the territory in
his province was occupied by farmers, and that soybeans, the
crop at the heart of the current crisis, was an important
crop for many of his constituents.

4. (U) Scioli spent the rest of the meeting asking the
governor about South Carolina's success in attracting foreign
investment and noting the similarities between the economies
of his province and South Carolina.

The Mayor: Hat in the Ring?
---------------------------

5. (C) The Governor and CDA met Mayor Macri later on June 26
at the Buenos Aires City Hall. The mayor opened by
indicating that Argentina's main problem at present is the
ruling couple, who are governing in a dysfunctional way. The
governor asked whether Macri would help retire the Kirchners
from public life by running for president in the next
election. Macri responded: "I will. I'm going to go for
it."

6. (C) When Sanford asked if President Cristina Fernandez de
Kirchner's regime would last to the end of its term, Macri
replied, "I don't know. I hope so." He explained that the
failure of an elected government to make it to the end of its
term would be a "calamity" for Argentina. Nor, he said,
would it be convenient for him. He had much to do to make
the capital city more livable and dynamic, and he wanted to
complete his work as mayor without the distraction of a
collapsing federal government.

7. (C) Macri was not shy in expressing his disdain for the
first couple, especially ex-president Nestor Kirchner.
"(Nestor) Kirchner is completely crazy," he told the
Governor. "All of the favorable external circumstances in
Argentina's favor over the last few years obscured that from
people's view, but now it's clear. He's just crazy." Citing
President Bush, PM Zapatero, Chancellor Schroeder, and a host
of other international leaders who had personally experienced
the former Argentine president's incivility, Macri complained
that no foreign leaders had stood up to Kirchner and made him
pay for his rudeness and defiance. This encouraged Kirchner
to believe that his confrontational approach to politics had
no costs. Now, Macri said, "we're paying the price" in
Argentina, starting with the country's lack of access to
international capital markets.

8. (C) Noting challenges that still confront his state,
Governor Sanford asked for any advice Macri might have in
advancing reform. Macri replied that "the United States has
nothing to learn from Argentina. We need to learn from you."

He told the governor that, a century ago, the GDP of
Argentina was roughly 80% of that of the United States, even
though it was a much smaller country. Now, Argentina's GDP
was fifty times smaller than U.S. GDP. With the right
policies, he continued, Argentina could reverse this "reverse
development" over a span of 40 years time. He hoped that the
reformist era in national politics would begin in 2011.

Comment
-------

9. (C) The two meetings suggest that the relative proximity
of politicians to the GOA is a useful gauge of their morale
and confidence. Despite his graciousness to the visiting
governor, Scioli was a mess, sweating profusely, losing his
train of thought, and appearing like he hadn't slept in days.
This was not the poised, smooth former Vice President in the
Nestor Kirchner administration whom we know so well. Our
best guess is that the farm strike has taken a toll on him.
He is walking a tightrope between his poor constituents in
the working class districts that ring the Buenos Aires
metropolitan area and the defiant countryside that covers
much of the territory that he governs. His earlier efforts
to mediate have been disabled and sabotaged by the Kirchners.
Now, he must suffer in silence as the Kirchners try to
bludgeon farmers (including many of his constituents) into
submission.

10. (C) Scioli has long been known to have Presidential
ambitions, and our contacts say his best chances for making a
bid in 2011 is to break with the Kirchners sooner rather than
later. Scioli's approval ratings have taken a hit during the
protracted farm dispute, with his approval rating dropping to
34% (from 58% pre-farm strike) and "neutral" rating rising to
46% (from 22%). Our sources opine that if the agricultural
sector is not appeased by the ultimate outcome in the
Congress regarding the variable agricultural export taxes, he
will have to break with the Kirchners to survive politically.
Given his province's financial dependence on the federal
government, however, it's not clear whether he will be
willing to make the break.

11. (C) Macri, on the other hand, seemed fired up and ready
to take the Kirchners on -- in due course. After spending
much of the farm crisis on the sidelines ("the city doesn't
grow soybeans," he explained to the governor), Macri has
recently become more assertive on the issue, taking on the
federal government in this week's battle (reftel) over the
placement of tents on city property adjacent to the Congress
by GOA supporters. His statement of intent to run for
president in 2011 was the clearest that we've heard from him.
It may be that the Kirchners' declining fortunes have
convinced him that the future looks brighter than ever for an
anti-Kirchner, non-Peronist politician like himself.
Scioli's glumness may reflect the same realization.

12. (C) Political analysts doubt, however, that Macri can
win without a national party structure behind him. Our
contacts within Macri's party, Propuesta Nacional, tell us
that building a national party structure will take years to
accomplish. Macri's major weakness is that he has not
reached out to other mayors and provincial governors in an
effort to build national support. Speculation among the
political class currently suggests that Macri will have to
cut a deal with dissident Peronist leader Eduardo Duhalde in
order to claim the Casa Rosada in 2011. But if Scioli makes
his move first, Macri's chances of winning will decline, even
if he forges an alliance with the center-left Civic Coalition
headed by Elisa Carrio. Even so, Macri does not seem to be
in a hurry to cut any deals with the Peronist Party just yet.
 
http://www.lanacion....-de-brasil-2014

More people watched the debate than the Argentina-Germany final of the last world cup.

Thats amazing.

And incredibly damning for scioli. He thought he could get away with blowing off the first debate because nobody cared, clearly thats not the case.

Also unbelievable but true, debates are a novelty. The fact that it had such a draw would seem to echo a trend that's going to favor the 'change', not the continuity.
 
Also unbelievable but true, debates are a novelty.

Many countries don't have these kinds of debates or introduced them not too long ago. Personally, I don't even think they are too helpful (at least the ones I have seen): basically they only show which candidate has better marketing skills, but I have yet to see a debate with hard questions (and a panel insisting on an actual answer) or in-depth comparisons of the actual political agenda. Unfortunately, if you'd have a politician who is completely honest and explains everything his whole agenda in detail (including necessary but unpopular actions), he'd reduce his chances of getting elected significantly.
 
It doesnt really matter what they spoke or debated about last night. It could have been a debate about who had the best collection of soft toys. What it did show us is how they behave on the spot under pressure and scioli failed massively. He really doesnt look like he enjoys being a prez candidate.
I almost feel sorry for the millionaire.
 
Back
Top