ISSUES....
Inside,
confidential, off the record
Too
close to call
The last poll we have information, is from the very respected
Gallup
survey firm, that just came out this week, it gives Rosales a
winner with 57% of the votes.
It
looks that Rosales has gained a lot and probably has a good chance
to be the winner by the numbers, but really on the numbers is
very close to call.
Our feeling, directed by the motivation we see everyday on the
streets, Rosales is the surging underdog and the good guy, has
the momentum and in the very last leg is going past its contender
and opening the gap between its second.
Here is an article by respected venezuelans were you can read
everything on the numbers, and about the venezuela's election
surveys strategies and objectives:
Venezuela:
Government Prepares World to Accept Massive Fraud
By John Salas and Thor Halvorssen
Four
Government-paid surveys smeared across the world in key media
Cuban-Venezuelan
international PR and lobby in high gear previous to Sunday's high-profile
presidential elections, creating a spin that could allow President
Chavez to disavow unfavourable results.
International and domestic surveys that show opposition candidate
Manuel Rosales tied or ahead of Hugo Chavez are not reflected
in American and international media.
Only government-paid surveys that show Chavez with a dubious lead
are commented in international press, radio and TV.
AP, CNN, Spain's TVE and other media accused of coverage slanted
in favour of the Chavez government.
Opposition wary of tricks in an electoral system sandbagged by
Chavez loyalists and questionable machines.
A week ahead of Sunday's crucial Venezuelan Presidential election,
many serious surveys –international and national–
show the race as being either a tie or have opposition candidate
Manuel Rosales ahead; these surveys report fiery President Hugo
Chavez' support as waning and Rosales as surging quickly and starting
to pull away from the incumbent President.
However,
the only surveys that are being printed in international newspapers
and commented on radio and TV around the world are four surveys
that show Chavez ahead by twenty or more points over Rosales.
What's
really going on, why these seemingly inexplicable differences,
and who is the American and international public to believe?
Two
weeks ago,
respected American pollsters Penn
Schoen & Berland reported Chavez
with 48% of the electorate and Rosales
with 42%, but with
Chavez trending downward and Rosales surging,
thus predicting a Rosales victory on December 3rd. In his presentation
of the survey results, Douglas Schoen described the method used,
with anonymous respondents approached on the street and handed
printed questionnaires which were filled in and returned in a
way that guaranteed the person's anonymity. In explaining why
the company had adopted this system, Schoen described a "fear
factor" that had appeared for the first time in Venezuela,
and that if not taken into account seriously distorted the results.
Mr. Schoen asserts that this fear factor is not at all present
in Mr. Chavez' backers, only in opposition voters.
A
poll conducted in the first half
of November by Gaither
International –the surveyors that as early
as 1997 predicted Chavez' 1998 election victory– showed
Chavez at 52% and Rosales at 44.3%,
but
again with Chavez falling fast and Rosales surging.
A company spokesman reported, also, that for the
first time they had found tension and fear surrounding a Venezuelan
presidential election, with many citizens considering that they
might be victims of government reprisals if it were known that
they wanted to vote for Mr. Rosales.
The
Hannah Arndt Observatory
places the election at a dead heat,
again emphasizing that their pollsters had to overcome an
important fear factor in order to weed out an
approximation to the truth of what Venezuelans citizens really
are thinking.
Angus-Reid
Global Monitor
reports a survey by respected pollsters Survey
Fast –whose main clients are the Venezuelan
banking community– as having
Mr. Chavez leading with 49%, followed closely
by Mr. Rosales with 47.6%,
with Chavez falling fast and Rosales
rising equally fast, and
predicting a Rosales victory in December by over
five percentage points.
Highly
respected Swiss-Venezuelan pollster Alfredo
Keller, president of AKSA Partners, reported at
the beginning of this month that Hugo
Chavez' support was 52%, down from over 65% two months earlier,
with Rosales at 48% and rising.
Mr. Keller reports that Mr. Chavez' hard-line support was down
9 points to 22% and falling, while Rosales' was 29% and growing,
predicting that a Rosales victory on December 3rd was very possible.
And,
CE.CA., another respected Venezuelan pollster, reported last week
that their polls show Rosales ahead
for the first time, at 45.8%, with Chavez
trailing at 35.3%. Once again, as in all of the
previous polls, fear has been found to be a major factor hindering
the freedom of expression by Venezuelans.
Contrasting
with these poll results are those of four polls recently unveiled:
Zogby International, Evans-McDonough, one reported as being authored
by Madrid's Complutense University, and AP-Ipsos. All of these
polls have been loudly celebrated by the Chavez campaign, but
have become highly suspect for different reasons.
The
poll by Zogby International,
a firm run by John and James Zogby, is suspect because James Zogby
participated two years ago –with Noam Chomsky– in
a forum where one of the themes to be discussed was the "defense"
of the Chavez regime. The Zogby brothers have been identified
with extreme issues: John Zogby signed a New York Times advertisement
on March 13, 1988, headlined: "The Time Has Come: End All
Aid to Apartheid Israel!", declared that "Israel is
an apartheid state, found on pillage and predicated on exclusivity,"
and that it has "a quintessentially racist character".
The ad proposed "dismantling the apartheid state and replacing
it with a democratic secular Palestine." Interestingly, Chavez
recently retired his ambassador to Israel in protest for the recent
war in southern Lebanon. To date, Zogby has not revealed who paid
for the Venezuelan poll.
Evans-McDonough's
pollsters did reveal who paid for their survey: Venezuela state
oil company PDVSA, whose President became universally known last
month for an infamous speech telling his state oil company workers
that the whole institution was pro-Chavez, that they were "red,
red" (Chavez party colors) and that anybody who wasn't in
agreement should leave or be literally kicked out.
Regarding
these two polls, Investors Business Daily stated the following:
"In
another sign that he [Chavez] won't go willingly, the Venezuelan
government seems to be sponsoring pro-Chavez polls of dubious
merit. One is from Zogby, which gave Chavez an odd double-digit
lead over Rosales but refused to say who paid for it. Now there's
a new one by a San Francisco pollster, Evans-McDonough, which
claims Chavez is 22 points ahead of Rosales, countering other
polls. It may be reported in the mainstream media as news, but
Evans-McDonough has been in the pay of Venezuela's government
in the past. The San Francisco Chronicle profiled it two years
ago as a Chavez supporter. This survey was paid for by PDVSA,
the oil firm where workers were intimidated into voting for Chavez
for fear of losing their jobs."
Madrid's
Complutense University disavowed the survey publicized as theirs,
saying only that one of their professors, Carolina Bescansa, was
involved. Ms. Bescansa was recently hired and paid by the Venezuelan
government to do an investigation on "health and drugs".
An investigation has turned up that the person who ordered and
paid for the survey is Roberto Viciano-Pastor, a member of the
Spanish Communist Party who was under hire as an "advisor"
to Venezuela's Congress in the critical two-year period between
1999 and 2000, when the constitutional assembly forged Venezuela's
present constitution. Not surprisingly, Mr. Viciano-Pastor was
seen at Bolivia president Evo Morales' inauguration, and local
press reported that Peruvian leftist presidential candidate Ollanta
Humala "was greeted by Spanish citizen Roberto Viciano-Pastor,
advisor to Venezuela's National Assembly and an extremist who
has defended the Basque separatist movement". During that
trip, Mr. Viciano-Pastor served as host, guide and advisor to
Humala, a Chavez ally, who was soon to be defeated by now-President
Alan García.
The
Associated Press-Ipsos poll
is the most curious one of all, presenting the race as a blow-out
with Chavez at 59% and Rosales at a lowly 27%. William H. Klemme,
in his article Fear Factor Biases Associated Press Poll in Venezuela,
reports that the AP-IPSOS poll was based on face-to-face interviews
in people's homes, differentiating it from the Penn, Schoen and
Berland poll method. According to an investigation conducted by
Per Kurowski, once inside the person's home, Ipsos asked a detailed
series of questions about Chavez government projects:
14)
Now I'm going to read you a list of projects, programs and initiatives
by Hugo Chavez's government. Please tell me if you have heard
of each one of these [different government-sponsored social programs]:
Misión Ribas, Misión Madres de Barrio, Misión
Vuelvan Caras, Misión Barrio Adentro, Misión Habitat,
Misión Milagro and Misión Mercal.
14
a) Which of these projects, programs and initiatives of Hugo Chavez's
government do you consider most important for you and your family?
And in second place? And in third place?
14
b) Have you or someone in your family benefited from these programs?
14
c) Aside from yourself or someone in your family, do you know
anyone who has benefited from these programs?
Immediately
following these questions –made in the person's home, in
a national environment of fear and mistrust–, the pollster
then asked for what candidate they were thinking of voting!
The
only justification for a mistake of this magnitude would be that
the Ipsos pollsters were unaware of this fear factor. However,
those same citizens' answers to their questions numbers 26, 27
and 28 disavow any such ignorance:
26.
54% expressed some distrust in how the votes will be counted (30%
were not very or not at all confident).
27.
58% expressed some concern about that their vote will not be kept
secret (31% were not very or not at all confident).
28.
71% expressed some concern about that people could face reprisals
for their vote in the upcoming elections (57% were somewhat or
very concerned).
Curiously,
only these pro-Chavez surveys have been picked up and reported
widely in American and international media. Organizations such
as AP, Reuters, CNN, BBC and Spain's TVE, to name just a few,
constantly refer to Chavez' "huge lead", and either
neglect or downplay the other, serious and scientific surveys,
creating a belief that the Venezuelan presidential election is
a shoo-in for incumbent President Chavez, when the truth is quite
the contrary: The President is in big trouble.
Is
the Chavez government simply whistling in the dark, are they trying
to influence voters putting themselves as winners when reality
is quite different, or is there some other agenda going on? In
response to these questions, the Investors Business Daily article
previously cited states the following:
"The
potential aim of all this is to put enough polls out there to
suggest that Chavez is popular, letting him get away with outrageous
fraud. Should a fraud-tainted election happen on Dec. 3 and cause
an outcry, Chavez could point to government-sponsored pre-election
polls as cover for the inevitable outrage in the streets."
Regarding
the electoral climate surrounding the elections, Gustavo Coronel,
a Venezuelan oil expert and political analyst, states,
"…the
regime feels terrified of the results of the election. Chavez
controls four of the five members of the National Electoral Council
and for the last two years has been beefing up the electoral registry
with foreigners who will vote for him in exchange for quick nationalization.
Colombian narco-terrorists have been known to be registered and
have voted for Chavez in past elections. The company that supplied
the electronic voting machines, Smartmatic, received a controversial
contract from Chavez and has had a murky history. It is currently
being investigated in the U.S. The electoral registry is deeply
corrupted, having at one point in time over 39,000 voters more
than 100 years old and 2,000 living at the same address. Chavez
utilizes the state-owned media at his total discretion, while
limiting the time of the opposition candidate in private stations
and barring him from using the state-owned media that should be
available, by law, to all citizens".
Investors
Business Daily concludes:
"Make
no mistake: Chavez's lies and intimidation don't sound like the
actions of a political leader who's secure in a coming re-election
victory. As vast crowds gather in the streets of Caracas, it's
going to get more important to note their role in countering a
potentially rigged vote in a Potemkin democracy that could only
fool election observer Jimmy Carter."
What
seems obvious to independent observers is that the Cuban-Venezuelan
propaganda machine is in full swing internationally. These international
"pollsters" are being used to create a climate where
international public opinion would disregard any opposition claim
that the election process was fraudulent, if and when Chavez faces
defeat on December 3rd and decides to use his clout within the
Electoral Council to electronically switch enough votes to give
him the victory.
Examples
of the effectiveness of this international propaganda machine
can be seen in the way some report the Rosales and Chavez political
rallies this past weekend in Caracas: Independent observers place
Rosales supporters at 950,000, and Chavez' at 225,000.
CNN's
Spanish network channel reported the Rosales rally with impressive
television shots showing the huge mass of people, spoke of hundreds
of thousands of people, only to finish ascertaining that Chavez
was ahead by thirty points in the surveys.
The
Associated Press included the following in its account:
"The
crowd appeared to number in the hundreds of thousands. Organizers
claimed more than 1 million people attended. …Despite the
revived opposition movement, Chavez remains hugely popular among
the poor, especially those who see benefits from oil-funded social
programs ranging from free health care to heavily subsidized government
grocery stores… Ernesto Galindez, a 58-year-old butcher
who backs Chavez, said he was surprised by the size of Saturday's
march, but predicted Rosales would lose. 'They are going to have
to wait six more years because Chavez is still very strong, and
he's not going anywhere,' said Galindez, grinning."
AP's
coverage of the Chavez rally the next day included the following:
"Sunday's
rally was the largest in support of Chavez since campaigning began
in August and appeared to number in the hundreds of thousands.
There were no official estimate by police…His rally came
a day after hundreds of thousands of Rosales supporters flooded
a major highway in one of the largest anti-Chavez demonstrations
in years. Rosales, a state governor who favors a free-market economy,
trailed Chavez by a wide margin in an AP-Ipsos poll earlier this
month."
On
November 4th, Investors Business Daily, AP and Reuters had markedly
distinct angles to report that day's massive Rosales rally:
IBD
reported as follows: "Not since 2002 has Caracas seen the
likes of Saturday's 15-mile presidential campaign rally for Chavez's
rival, Manuel Rosales, ahead of the Dec. 3 election. Dragging
through the capital, the march crossed through the eastern and
western slums that are supposedly Chavez's political stronghold.
As many as half a million people showed up, one out of 12 residents
of Caracas, making Chavez's claims of continuing popularity farcical.
The march was a big sign of voter rejection of Chavez and his
"revolution." It's telling that there have been no comparable
pro-Chavez rallies of this size. And don't think Chavez isn't
worried.
The mood in the Caracas streets reflects a Nov. 2 AKSA Partners
poll putting Chavez just four points ahead of Rosales, 52-48,
with momentum shifting to the challenger."
Reuters
titled "Huge march in Venezuela for Chavez opponent",
speaking of "hundreds of thousands of people" that marched
in Caracas… ; "Most polls released in recent weeks
show Rosales far behind Chavez despite having united a fractured
opposition";
AP
titled: "Opposition's top presidential challenger leads march
across Venezuela's capital", speaking of a march "drawing
tens of thousands into the streets". The AP reporter smugly
interjected, "Still, a recent survey by Zogby International
showed Chavez with a 59 percent to 24 percent lead over Rosales.
The face-to-face survey of 800 registered voters was conducted
between Oct. 1 and Oct. 16 and had a 3.5 percent margin of error."
However,
Reuters also has fallen into the Chavez survey trap. On November
24th it reported the following:
"Venezuelan
President Hugo Chavez has 60 percent support from likely voters
ahead of a December 3 election, outstripping his rival Manuel
Rosales by 29 points, a poll said on Friday. The survey, conducted
by U.S. pollster Zogby International in collaboration with the
University of Miami, surveyed 800 likely voters between November
12-18 and had a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points. Zogby
showed Rosales slightly narrowing the gap with Chavez from its
previous survey, which was conducted between October 1-16 and
showed the president with a 35-point lead. The poll is generally
in line with most independent surveys that show Chavez has a clear
lead."
Spanish
TVE, which Olympus Consulting accused of slanting its coverage
towards Kerry in the past U.S. Presidential campaign, and of only
reporting surveys that showed Kerry tied or leading President
Bush, recently aired a program that spoke of Chavez' supposed
"huge lead" in terms nothing but favourable towards
his campaign.
Along
with Fidel Castro's undying friendship and strategic might, Hugo
Chavez inherited a potent and well-greased Cuban PR and lobbying
apparatus well experienced in denying the undeniable and defending
the indefensible. This apparatus is now working at full steam,
because Hugo Chavez has come to realize that eight years of government
with few results at great cost not only have wasted away the passion
the poor had for him for so long, but have turned a majority of
them adamantly against him.
He's
scared. He controls the electoral council. What does he do? For
now, he's pouring the coal onto the international PR machine,
trying to convince the world that he can't lose.
ISSUES....
Is an independent
journalist effort from Petroleumworld, on Inside, Confidential
and Off The Record Information, its views are not necessarily
those of
Petroleumworld
Legal
information: Copyright/Disclaimer
Copyright ©Petroleumworld, 1999-2006, All rights reserved
Send
this story to a friend
