Hugo Chavez's opponent blasts Chavez for "terrorizing" Venezuelan people not to vote (Translation)

Caracas. - In a press conference with foreign correspondents, the opposition candidate, Manuel Rosales, qualified as a great "irresponsibility" of President Chavez that he is threatening and intimidating the people of Venezuela through phrases attacking the communications media and the collective body of the Venezuelan people, furthermore that he is inventing coup d'états and supposed plots or acts designed to raise tensions in the street.

"What we are reading between the lines are two things: the first is that he wants to terrorize people so they do not vote, and the second, is that he wants to justify the presence of armed groups in the street to sabotage the electoral process."

He assured that what will play out the third of December will not be the future of the opposition, but that of Venezuela.

He reiterated that if the contest is clean they are going to accept the results and that they will not tolerate a change of norms at the last hour, modifications of the law or making the vote itself vulnerable.

"The government has to be very clear, that if there are no clear laws and there is no respect [for them], and if they do not guarantee security the day of the elections, of course we would then assume the conduct any democrat would assume and any man who respects the ideas and the rights of a collective body of people."

He underlined further that control exists in all the public powers in Venezuela, the hand that extends from the presidency of the Republic and the executive branch.

"As a consequence in Venezuela there is no true democracy nor true freedom as far as the acting out of an open and plural society."

He considers that the electoral campaign of President Chavez has come unraveled into a "great abuse, a little beyond the obscene, as far as resources, logistics, and the abuse through the media go, and this places our electoral program at a disadvantage."

In the judgement of the aspirant [Rosales], the riches of Venezuela are not being extended to the collective body of the Venezuelan people. "A great injustice exists, a government that is moving further away from democracy and social justice. We have said repeatedly that the Venezuelan people are given crumbs, through the social programs which have existed all their lives and that are now known as the missions."¹

Nevertheless, he recognized that the missions are a positive aspect that has materialized in the acting government.

Of this situation Rosales further explained that another aspect which is aggravating the situation in the country is that the media is conducting self-censorship. "They are trying to intimidate them, to prevent them from fulfilling the duty they have to inform the people as a whole."

He explained that another of the threats which confronts society can actually be seen in the ideological indoctrination of education.

"Beginning with a supposed law which was under discussion in the National Assembly which attempted to ideologically indoctrinate children in schools, to direct them by doctrinaire themes which they define as Socialism in the 21st century, that is nothing else but a model such as that which funtions in Cuba with some democratic varnish, but which turns freedom around."

He showed himself preoccupied by the plans of the government to create a single political party, of the permanent establishment of Chavez in power, of the absolute control of the communications media, of the actions against private property and the violation of human rights.

Facing that situation, Rosales reiterated that he desires to be the President for 26 million Venezuelans, and moreover of uniting the country and entrenching democracy.

He recounted that he wants to redistribute the fifth part of petroleum resources, through the Mi Negra debit card.² "This is much less than we are giving away to other countries today."

The aspirant does not believe that this initiative is populist or paternalist, since one is only putting "social justice" into practice.

He also asserted that he has clear policies in health, education, and integral security. "We have a very clear definition of the international aspect, as far as defining the sovereign and national interest separate of ideological and political reasons, which is what has impregnated the agreements and present relations of Venezuela."

When asked about international agreements, he said that he will review everything and he will justify only those which directly benefit the people of the respective countries.

"It cannot be that we are letting ourselves spend two and a quarter billion dollars annually to cover only the area of fortification and of aid in health matters which Cuba is offering to Venezuela. If that is compared with the two million Venezuelans who have an income of a dollar a day, you do not have to be a genius to know that there is a great injustice."

He added that he is not going to give away Venezuela's money while the people are "unemployed and going hungry."

When asked about whether or not he is the candidate of the "North American Empire" he said: "I am a candidate of the people of Venezuela. I have neither an owner nor ownership, nor will I have them. I am not going to be a slave of empire nor of the Communism which reigns in Cuba. I am a slave of God and the Venezuelan people to govern well."

Rosales reiterated his policy announced beforehand of carrying out a "true distribution of the oil riches." The presidential aspirant indicated that in Venezuela "there is not nor has there been a policy" which permits the construction of a just society in which the quality of life of the citizens corresponds to that which the nation has in petroleum resources."

"We are a petroleum country with a reputation of being a very rich country, but the truth is that these riches have only been used, have only been enjoyed by an elite in Venezuela, and not only now."

He stresed his economic proposal based upon the "Mi Negra" card, the flag-bearing promise of his campaign, by means of beginning "to distribute a small part (of the oil wealth) so that the people build their future, their lever for leaving the bottom and leaving poverty."

The opposition candidate underlined that he has not arrived on the political terrain by improvising, but that his career has followed several seats from advisor to a [parliamentary] deputy, later to mayor and finally, Governor.³

In that "democratic career" -- he asserted -- he has "won and lost," but what he will not accept is "cheating." "I am not going to permit that they rob us of one vote, if they want us to steal votes to win they are mistaken, they are not going to win stealing votes from us." He avowed that "if the contest is clean" he is disposed to accept the winner to whom the people will have offered their endorsement, but "with clarity and transparency, not with manipulation nor with cheating."

He concluded saying that he has always fought for freedom and that he will continue going on "winning and losing, but also demanding that the rules and conditions are "sufficiently clear."

Rosales insisted that he does not have plans to quit the battle for the presidency of the republic, because he believes that he is "winning," but he warned that he will not permit that "they change the rules on us" before the elections "and they begin to abuse, to clip, to run over or want to do violence to the popular decision."

He emphasized that the important thing is the respect of the popular will, because what "we are not going to accept" is that "which has occurred at other opportunities" that they "manipulate and violate the norms."

The candidate asserted that if he wins the presidency his government will reestablish diplomatic relations with Mexico, and improve those with Colombia and Peru.⁴ He added that "as a governing official" he will not have differences with any country and he will have a respectful treaty with all nations and governments.

"A treaty which puts up front the international concepts and definitions about democracy and human rights, peace in the world and nothing which compromises our sovereignty nor which brings prejudices against Venezuela," he maintained.

As far as the agreements to which the government of Hugo Chavez has subscribed with countries such as Vietnam, China, and Iran,⁵ Rosales said that he would review them and would leave what is good to perfect itself, and that he would discard "that which does damage to us (...) because I would be extremely delicate with our interests."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Translator's Notes:

¹ The "missions" refer to a number of targeted social programs, of limited scope, begun under Chavez.

² The Mi Negra debit card is the cornerstone of Rosales's social policy. He intends to replace many of the widely-varying social programs Chavez has pushed with a simple debit card to be given to the poorest Venezuelans, funded by one-fifth of oil revenues.

³ Rosales is currently Governor of the State of Zulia, located in northwest Venezuela and covering the principal oil-producing areas of the country.

⁴ Diplomatic relations between Venezuela and Mexico have been carried out at the consular level only since November, 2005, when Mexico expelled then Venezuelan Ambassador Vladimir Villegas for interfering in Mexican internal politics and for developing associations with the EPR guerrillas and drug trafficking. (See introductory "Comments" in this thread, paragraph 4, for more.) Chavez has angered Colombia in many ways, but especially for his support of the FARC guerrillas, which Chavez of course denies, even though a diplomatic incident developed over a year ago when Colombian forces penetrated Venezuelan territory to seize a FARC commander, which precipitated a crisis in relations between the two countries. Venezuela's relationship with Peru is also strained, Peruvian President Alan Garcia has blasted Chavez publicly on more than one occasion.

⁵ There is too much to tell in one note here. Chavez has signed deals relating to oil development and exports with both China and Vietnam and he has negotiated several deals with Iran, most noticeably regarding Iran's leftover U.S. jet fighters.

A pollster discusses the fear factor and other aspects of the election.

Numbers without Fear

Douglas Schoen interviewed by Roger Santodomingo

17 November 2006

The partner from United States public opinion firm Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates maintains that the election results will be very close and that the trend favors Rosales.

Douglas Schoen, a partner with Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates, with offices in New York and Washington, has worked for diverse political leaders, among them Bill Clinton, Ehud Olmert, Tony Blair, Silvio Berlusconi and Leonel Fernández.

In Venezuela he was hired by a group of businessmen whose identity Schoen refuses to reveal, “because they have authorized me to talk about my findings as to electoral trends in this country, but not about them.”

In 2004, Schoen directed an exit poll that gave the lead to the opposition by 59% in the referendum that sought to remove Hugo Chávez from office. He still maintains that there were “more problems with the vote than with the public opinion survey.”

At the Noticiero Digital office, Schoen gave us his opinion about the Hinterlaces tracking that we publish daily and the interpretation we give to it, most of all taking into account the fear factor.

RS: Is the fear factor really a factor to be taken into account or is it an urban legend that is there serving to reject the results of the opinion polls?

DS: We believe that the fear factor is a true force. We do everything to minimize it. This is distorting all the polls conducted by honest Venezuelan researchers. We guarantee to people their anonymity when we interview them. We interview people on the street. We give out a paper form that people fill out secretly and then deposit in a box that is behind the pollsters back.

RS: Is the 6.5% advantage that you give Chávez over Rosales the result of an interpretation based on trends and the fear factor? Or is it based on raw data?

DS: Well, those are the raw data; that is the reason I state that the elections are going to be very close.

RS: What was your sampling and how do you process your data?

DS: We conducted a poll with one thousand voters between Monday the 6th and Friday the 10th of last week. We selected them at random based on 260 points throughout Venezuela.

RS: In your opinion, is the country uniform?

DS: Not entirely, but we did find that aside from a grueling competition, half of the population maintains a positive perception of the government of President Chávez and the other half judges him negatively. About 50% of the population believes that the country is going in the right direction and the other 50% believes that it has taken the wrong path.

RS: A country divided

DS: That is how it is. A country evenly divided for and against the so-called revolution. But Manuel Rosales has gained 7 points since out last poll in September, when we found that he was 13 points behind. Chávez, on the other hand, is dropping, although very slowly, because in our last measure he was at 50% and today he is at 48%.

RS: What can you tell us about this fear factor and the so-called spiral of silence?

DS: Well, you will see that it is very difficult to measure. But I would say that it is not probable that the opinion polls are underestimating the vote against Chávez. We are convinced that everyone who is going to vote for Chávez will say so openly. But it is certainly possible that part of those in favor of Rosales will not say so out of fear. If that is the case, all opinion polls will underestimate the vote for the challenging candidate.

RS: You have not specified the proportion affected by the fear factor; therefore we will have to find out on Election Day.

DS: In a prior inquiry we estimated that between 5% and 10% of the voters showed some tendency toward fear. But it is very difficult to translate a tendency toward fear with absolute certainty. Applying statistical filters in order to translate a tendency toward fear into intention to vote, when the competition is so close, can move the whole scenario from one direction to the other. That is what is happening with your tracking.

RS: You have worked for 30 years in the world of public opinion polls. In how many elections have you participated?

DS: Yes, three decades and some 600 elections.

RS: Is it true that this is an atypical process? Or have you run into similar cases?

DS: No doubt it is unusual. Nevertheless, I observed the elections in Serbia in the year 2000, when Milosevic was defeated. There was a feeling that he was invulnerable, that he could not lose. He was a dictator feared by many and he was defeated.

RS: Did you conduct any polls concerning voter intention then?

DS: Yes, and the tendencies showed a very close election, but the people kept saying that Milosevic would win. Take the example of Nicaragua in 1990. Mrs. Chamorro then defeated an almighty Daniel Ortega; even when Ortega appeared to be way ahead of Chamorro, she won.

RS: Why did that happen? Weren’t you conducting the polls correctly?

DS: We did not take into account fear in a cliental society, where people were in fear of the consequences resulting from their vote, especially what would happen to them if they voted against the Sandinistas.

RS: Does Venezuela remind you of Serbia and Nicaragua?

DS: The situations are similar, yes. Look, it is very difficult to state who is going to win before the votes are counted. But my intuition is that Chávez’s vote is being overestimated and that overall Rosales’ is being underestimated. Having been said that, all of the statistics from our survey indicate that the contest will be very close.

RS: Some poll takers maintain that the message sent out by Rosales is not being well received. For example, that the Mi Negra card is a populist program and he has not succeeded in taking a stance on an issue such as, for example, being the champion against criminal activity.

DS: What we are seeing is that those who know about Mi Negra like it. They consider it an attractive message. Furthermore, among those who approve of Mi Negra, 70% are voting for Rosales. Therefore I do not believe that the message is mistaken, but rather that it has not come across sufficiently. I believe that if the undecided listen to Rosales’s message and compare him to Chávez, they are going to move in the direction of Rosales.

RS: What did you find out about abstention?

DS: It is difficult to measure it. I cannot offer a prediction about those who might not be voting.

RS: What we have here is a case of data polluting the atmosphere. Polls are giving opposite results that serve to confuse the electorate, or to forewarn them as to their reliability. It is what we are calling the war of the public opinion polls. Do you believe this has a real effect on people?

DS: I have not measured that. But I believe it is healthy for a democracy to have as many honest measures as possible. I would encourage, and expect there to be, many exit polls on Election Day, so that the will of the Venezuelan people will be reflected in the elections.

RS: What do you think about Noticiero Digital’s telephone tracking?

DS: I believe that telephone tracking, in general, is very useful for marketing research. In the political market it might give indications of people’s spirits, of their attitude toward what happens everyday, and detect what they like and what it is that bothers them. But I realize that it must be difficult to take into account the opinion of that 20% of the population that has no telephones. Thus you need to provide a statistical balance in order to adjust your measure and to compensate for this, especially in a stratified election. If they were to find a formula for avoiding this bias, tracking would be very accurate, but I realize it is difficult.

RS: What is of concern to the people, and what is it that bothers them?

DS: What concerns them the most is crime, high prices, that their income from oil be kept in the country and not be taken abroad, the deterioration of their quality of life, factors that have made this a more dangerous society.

RS: What would you recommend to the candidates?

DS: A poll taker must not make any recommendations to the candidates. I only show them what I have found.

RS: What probability is there of the undecided stepping forth and exercising their option 15 days hence?

DS: Most will. I think that those who do not maintain a position are more likely to vote for Rosales than for Chávez. They know Chávez. If they remain undecided, what they are saying is, “I don’t like this life I am living. I want to find out more about the other options.”

RS: Why doesn’t Rosales convince them?

DS: I don’t know. I think it is a lack of information. I am thinking of what I told you earlier about Mi Negra. They are not well enough informed.

RS: Could it be that they do not like what they know?

DS: That happens, but most of them are lacking information.

Source: Noticiero Digital
www.noticierodigital.com

http://megaresistencia.com/foro/viewtopic.php?t=22872&sid=a381a2c0c18ae678b795f7a83232475e

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.