Chavez's Popularity Down in Venezuela, Polls Finds

[Zorro]

<snip>

President Hugo Chavez's allies launched their campaigns Wednesday for crucial congressional elections that come just as recession, crime and inflation have pushed the socialist leader's popularity to a seven-year low.

A survey by the Venezuelan polling firm Consultores 21 indicates just 36 percent of Venezuelans approve of Chavez's performance, the lowest figure since 2003, when Chavez survived an opposition-led strike that devastated the economy, pollster Saul Cabrera said.

The results suggest Chavez allies could face a difficult struggle to keep control of the National Assembly in the Sept. 26 election.

The survey of 1,500 people nationwide in late June and early July had a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points, said Cabrera, who is vice president of the polling firm. He said the poll was financed by a group of private businesses, which he declined to identify.

<snip>

More at: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=11480995

Sounds as if Hugo may not be as universally beloved, as is continually asserted in these forums ad nauseum.

[bherrera]

1. loss of popularity for Chavez makes sense

All over the world, it has been shown people tend to vote against those in power when they feel their economic circumstances are poor. Venezuela's economic indicators are very bad, with high inflation and dropping gross national product, a situation which has been taking place for about two years now. When a party and individual have been in power for more than 10 years, and the economy is doing very poorly, then they have to show improvements in some other areas, but I understand the crime rate is very high, and there is a high perception of government corruption. The Chavez government has also made the mistake to give a lot of money to other nations, which is very nice if he has the money, but he has been borrowing money to give it away. And there is also the constant threat of wars and the coarse language he uses to insult everybody. This behavior is unaceptable to civilized people and evidently there are enough Venezuelans who are civilized enough to understand this party Chavez runs is not taking them in a good direction. The question is, will the elections be fair, or will they manipulate results? I think they will be dirty elections, as has happened in other third world countries, and these fascists led by Chavez will perpetuate themselves, evolving into an oligarchy of fascist thieves who will ruin the country. Such is the history of Latin America, a continuous self-injury caused by venal, selfish, and megalomaniac caudillos.

[Joe Chi Minh]

2. Why can't you ever get anything right, Zorro? Below, is a reader's response to the far-right

propaganda bullsh*t of one, Francisco Tore, on the Guardian comment site linked here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/aug/31/venezuelans-desperate-change-hugo-chavez?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments

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

Pquod:

"Venezuelans are desperate for change" claims the anti-government activist Francisco Toro. In support of that statement, he asserts:

"A series of power cuts and water shortages have further eroded Chávez's popularity which, by one recent measure, has dipped to 36% – his lowest of the last seven years."

Even were Hugo Chávez the dictatorial figure which the US-backed opposition paint him as, he would hardly be responisible for the severe drought which has affected the country. As has already been pointed out, most of Venezuela's electricity is produced from hydro-electric plants, and this is the result of developments before Chávez was elected president.

But what about the "36%" popularity rating? The link cited by Toro is to a Reuters article which says:

"A survey by Venezuelan polling firm Consultores 21 found that just 36 percent of Venezuelans approve of Chavez's performance, the lowest figure since 2003, when Chavez survived an opposition-led strike that devastated the economy... The survey of 1,500 people nationwide in late June and early July had a 2.3 percentage-point margin of error, said Cabrera, who is vice president of the polling firm. He said the poll was financed by a group of private businesses, which he declined to identify."

Unfortunately for Francisco Toro and the anonymous 'private businesses' who finance the polling firm Consultores 21, that firm has a dismal record in predicting how Venezuelans will vote.

In 2004, before the recall referendum that year on whether President Chávez should be removed from office, Consultores 21 announced a poll which rated anti-Chávez opinion at 65.8%. Closer to the referendum, the firm conducted another poll which, it claimed, showed 54.5% of Venezuelans wanting Chavez removed from office.

Check:

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/582

But when the actual referendum took place, only 42% voted against Chávez. 58% voted to keep Chávez as president.

The problem for Francisco Toro and his fellow oppositionists is that - despite the economic difficulties caused by the right-wing strike in 2002/03, and by the combination of the global recession and the drought at the present time, the majority of Venezuelans- especially the poor- are benefiting from the socialist policies of the government.

A big reduction in poverty, eradication of illiteracy and the extension of educational opportunities, free school meals, free primary healthcare, the country's oil and other resources used to benefit the people rather than merely
the rich elite- who could possibly disagree with that?

Though of course, Francisco Toro and his friends in the wealthy elite, backed by the elite in the USA, do disagree with those measures. They want a return to neo-liberal capitalism, and to a political system dominated by a corporate ultra-rich minority. But Toro & Co, true to form, lack the honesty to admit this.

[Zorro]

3. What's not right, Joe?

You consider a reader's comment that references a Venezuelan government-sponsored website sufficient evidence to contradict the reported decline in Chavez' popularity? And then you use it to direct a personal comment at me?

That's the kind of thing a delusional religious git would do.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Wilms]

5. Yappy little dogs are amusing?

[EFerrari]

12. At least they seem to amuse themselves, sort of like self watering house plants.

[Joe Chi Minh]

14. You do feel like pattting them on the head and saying, 'There... there... Don't

get in a state. All come out in the wash." And then thow a stick for them to fetch.

[Zorro]

6. What facts that are untrue are you accusing me of promoting?

That a polling organization is reporting results that indicate Chavez' popularity is at a 7 year low?

What's your evidence to contradict that report? Any alternative current polling result to contradict that report?

Oh. That's right. You have none. Just your fervent, ill-informed belief in the holiness of Saint Hugo and the righteousness of his actions.

Typical delusional religious git behavior.

[bherrera]

7. It doesn't matter, I think

This is a simple debate, in which you, Mr Zorro, have provided some quotes from a polling firm, and your opponent, using a typical tactic, attacks your source, rather than providing a counter argument via a different poll result. This tells the perceptive person that he lacks such data, and therefore indeed Mr Chavez seems to be down in the polls. Which, as my comment indicated, is the usual trend, because the people of a country have a tendency to vote against those in power when things look bad. And in Venezuela things look very bad indeed.

I did notice that my comments regarding this phenomenom (that people tend to vote against the government party when the economy is not performing well), is not being answered by the pro-Chavez posters. This also tells me they realize the economy of Venezuela is indeed in serious trouble, and they realize this is happening in spite of very high oil prices (Venezuela lives from the oil it sells, because it lacks any other meaningful export now that its minerals industry has been semi-destroyed by nationalization, debt, and lack of electricity).

I write in this site to observe the psychology of the people who defend the corrupt Latin American governments. I was always curious about the nature of the German people, who defended Hitler, until such time when Hitler's regime was destroyed, and then all the Germans claimed they were opposed to nazism. I see a similar trend, in the case of these dictators such as Castro, and the autocratic emerging tyrant in Venezuela, Chavez, we see the apologists emerge and in a very patterned fashion defend these terrible regimes. The pattern usually involves attacking any person which posts negative information about the regime in question, while at the same time invoking something about the fault being caused by capitalism, the evil oligarchs, or some other cause.

This is such a clear pattern, it is almost as if they were trained in a religious seminar to act this way. I believe it is a semi-religious cult they develop, like the members of the old inquisition, or the crusaders, they march on, throwing non believers in the fire, to further the cause of their god, which in case happens to be one of these fascist bufoons who are the subject of personality worship and want to be acclaimed as the saviours of mankind.

[Zorro]

8. Well stated

What's also interesting is that almost all Chavistas posting in the Latin America forums have never been to South America or speak Spanish, yet they claim their knowledge about Latin American affairs is superior to all others.

And their "analysis" on events that occur in Latin America is always the same: it's a US conspiracy.

[bherrera]

9. Americans tend to be badly informed

They believe all the causes have to be linked to some American action, which is so lacking in reality. I thought it was funny when Chavez gave Mr Obama some book about how all the problems in Latin America are caused by the USA. They would do a lot better if they devoted themselves to a thorough analysis of how they make mistakes, rather than pointing fingers, which is a very puerile and banal exercise, behavior more proper of youngsters and immature individuals.

Mr Chavez is a man who is quite easily seen to be a flawed, and somewhat stupid man. He has managed to lead his country into a very bad economic depression, while at the same time continues to insult everybody around him, and carries out grotesque acts such as exhumating Bolivar's corpse. The man is more like the cartoon character one would invent to symbolize the Latin American autocrat. He even gives himself endless air time to discuss the most boring subjects, mixing "eh"? and insults, hectoring his red clad ministers in public, and otherwise making an arse of himself. And yet these American supporters don't realize just how funny the guy is. I laugh when I see his acting on youtube.

[EFerrari]

11. LOL

:rofl:

It's always so amusing to see a failed empire still critiquing its losses.

[Flatulo]

18. Allow me to commend you on your dead-on observations.

That was extremely well put, and echos my observations quite accurately.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Joe Chi Minh]

15. Pardon me if I don't respond to your nonsense, lads. You may or may

not be aware of the response of that the villainous old Blackjack Kennedy, to the question put to him, as to why he sold all his stocks just before the (first) Great Crash, when everyone else was buying. He replied that when his shoe-shine man told him what stocks to buy, he knew there was something very wrong with market. It's first principles, you see.

Now it's a virtual certainty that that man who polished matey's shoes was a giant in just about every significant connection, particularly spiritual, compared to Blakjack, but worldy wisdom in terms of the stockmarket in particular, in this context, would not have been a forte of his.

Consequently, Blackjack would surely have nodded his thanks and went on his merry way, without probing the whys and wherefores of the shoe-shine man's choice of stocks at that time. Well, in the same way, although worldly wisdom is supposed to be the forte of you two, doubtless, the only forte, pardon me if I don't waste my time by trying to engage in a rational, fact-based discussion with you.

Nevertheless, I would not hesitate to recommend your prowess at "bulling up" our shoes to a future employer. They positively gleam against the miasmic penumbra that ever dogs your presence, as implicit defenders of the monstrous right-wing 'caudillos' of South America. I would tip you handsomely, if I didn't think it would corrupt you.

Now, move along. Nothing to see here, as you and your pals used to say when you were in the box seat.

[Zorro]

17. Five paragraphs is how you “don’t respond”?

Well, I guess you’re somewhat right. It was five paragraphs of incoherency.

Still waiting for your keen snout to root out some current data that contradicts Chavez's reported decline in popularity.

[bherrera]

19. Funny response about black jack kennedy

We see an interesting lack of connection with the subject. I think the subject itself is interesting, that is, Chavez seems to be losing popularity day by day. I also find an interesting link between the diminishing popularity of politicians when the economy is hurting. This is also impacting others, for example President Obama in the USA was given a terrible economy by Mr Bush, and the recovery has been slow and painful. This is going to cost the democrats in the forthcoming elections.

There is no reason why Venezuela should be an exception to this law of politics, it makes sense if Chavez is seen as a loser who can't improve the economy, because he has been in power for so many years. I am sure a slum person in Caracas isn't going to be interested in these absurd comments about black jack kennedy.

What these guys need is to figure out what to do if they want to win an honest election, which I believe is too late for them to win now. I am ready to bet they will now use crooked means to control the electronic voting machines, and in good latin american tradition, have crooked elections to perpetuate themselves in power, so they can keep stealing and ruining the country. Venezuela is just another latin american diasaster area, due to be ruled by another autocrat wearing funny clothes and speaking as if he were a cartoon character.

[Flatulo]

20. You forgot to mention...

The usual bluster about the royal ass-whoopin' they're going to give the Yanquis when we invade.

There has to be a Yanqui boogeyman to complete the scenario.

[bherrera]

21. It does sound like bluster

I don't think the USA would bother to invade Venezuela. Why should they? If they want to intimidate Venezuela, they can stop purchasing Venezuela's oil, and suspend shipment of US products to Venezuela. But I don't think they would do that, it is better for President Obama to let Chavez boil in his own pot.

[Flatulo]

23. Unfortunately, we need their crude, and they need our dollars.

We get about 10% of our crude from Venezuela, so we seem to have each other by the short hairs.

[bherrera]

24. OPEC statistics show otherwise

I checked this figure using the OPEC website. Venezuela's oil production has been lower than what the government states (that is, they lie about the actual figures). If we rely on the OPEC numbers, then Venezuela's exports to the US are a mere 5 to 7 % of imports. Displacing Venezuela from the US market is easy. All this requires is for the USA based companies to purchase oil from other nations. This in turn shifts the trade directions. The USA purchases oil from further abroad, which costs the USA about $300 million per year. Venezuela is thus forced to sell its oil further abroad as well. But there is a slight problem for Venezuela, its oil is very low quality, which means it will have to ship very far, and a discount. This means Venezuela pays about $500 million to ship to other markets. The USA, with a Gross Domestic Product in excess of $14 billion (or US 14 trillion), doesn't feel this very much. Venezuela, on the other hand, has a smaller economy, therefore if the USA were to cut oil imports from Venezuela, it hurts Venezuela more than it hurts the USA. It is a simple math exercise.

[Flatulo]

25. Are you certain that other exporters could pick up the slack?

I had read from several sources that the worldwide supply and demand were extremely well-matched. I had read this in the context of an invasion of Iran and how the USA could not survive without their 4% contribution.

Of course, the Saudis could always increase production, but I've heard that they also lie about their reserves and production capabilities.

[Joe Chi Minh]

22. What's the point, when they showed themselves to be as bent as a corkscrew in

their coverage of the last election.

The onus is on you to prove that some fact has since come to light, which might now lend them some small degree of credibility to their operation.

[bherrera]

26. I found a different pollster, called Datanalisis

They say Chavez' popularity is low, the majority of the people dislike him, don't trust him, and don't like his blend of communism and fascism.

[ChangoLoa]

27. Do you have the poll or the report please? TIA nt

[VioletLake]

28. On Datanalisis, from 2003:

Datanalisis Pollster: Chavez “has to be killed”
http://www.narconews.com/Issue27/article594.html

[bherrera]

32. Datanalisis shows high quality results

According to a friend who is in the Spanish foreign service, they provide the most reliable results for Venezuela's politics. The narconews reference is unreliable, as it is from an extremist website known for its lies and blind allegiance to the neo-fascist groups aligned with Mr Chavez.

[Judi Lynn]

34. So your friend, whomever he/she is, must be believed over a news source whose RECORD has been

respected for years, and years by multitudes of people all over the world.

Yes, that certainly makes sense.

Your claim concerning the source's "allegiance" certainly does so much for your credibility, of course.

The article was written by a U.S. citizen, Justin Delacour, (why would you not catch that?) well known to so many of us as an authentic, tremendous reference on Latin American politics. We've been reading him for ages.

Here's the same article printed in another of many other periodicals:

http://www.zcommunications.org/can-you-believe-venezuelas-pollsters-by-justin-delacour

[bherrera]

36. Respected by whom?

These sites you use are run by people who like to apologize for criminal regimes such as the one run by Fidel Castro. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are attacked in these sites. Therefore they lack any credibility. The idea i propose is very simple, something you try to avoid like a plague because you know your case is weak and indefensible: Venezuela suffers from a poor economy, hyperinflation, and a huge crime wave. These are facts. You can attack the "corpo fascist press" or enter into a bizarre denial of these facts, but they remain facts.

The interesting thing is the way these guys in Venezuela have invented their own version of socialism, which is closer to what was practiced by nazi Germany than anything else we have seen. They are a parody of true socialists. And they hurt the cause of progressive politics, because they are changing Venezuela into a poor, destroyed, repressed society, where workers' rights are eliminated, the pooor suffer due to inflation and crime, and there is no economic growth. Or do you deny Venezuela is suffering from a very poor economy? Escape that with some more comments about corpo fascist press, and meanwhile the Venezuelan people will continue to suffer, and to dislike that nazi regime Chavez is running.

[Judi Lynn]

38. Unless the sources serve the interests of the right-wing they are to be ignored?

I don't think so. That's not going to happen here.

You are barking so LOUDLY up the wrong tree.

http://fallschurchtimes.com.nyud.net:8090/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/tree_before.JPG

http://rookery2.viary.com.nyud.net:8090/storagev12/722000/722017_5cdd_625x1000.jpg

[Judi Lynn]

29. DU'ers have known about Datanalisis for years and years and years.

The head of Datanalisis was quoted as claiming Hugo Chavez should be murdered. How profoundly pathetic.

Spinning “Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics”
Venezuelan Pollster’s Deceit Failed to Rob Chávez of His Base Among the Poor

By Justin Delacour
Special to The Narco News Bulletin
July 30, 2004

“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

– Benjamin Disraeli, Prime Minister of England (1868, 1874-1880)

~snip~
In early February 2003, the anti-Chávez Venezuelan polling firms Datanálisis and Consultores 21 held a joint press conference in Caracas claiming to be “neutral parties” in the country’s deeply polarized political conflict. Just over two weeks before the press conference, Narco News had highlighted that Datanálisis’ President Jose Antonio Gil Yepes had told the Los Angeles Times in July 2002 that Chávez “has to be killed.” Narco News pointed out that a simple glance at Datanálisis’ website revealed “the kind of blatant political partisanship that one normally does not associate with respectable polling operations” (as this report goes to print, Datanálisis’ website has been running John Kerry’s Chávez-bashing misstatement at the top of their “news” column for over a month).

Since Narco News first reported on Datanálisis’ blatant partisanship and biased polling, Gil Yepes has mysteriously disappeared as a public spokesperson for his company (although he occasionally pops up brandishing a letter from L.A. Times correspondent T. Christian Miller, who now supposedly claims that the pollster did not have criminal intent when he told Miller that Chávez “has to be killed”).

With Gil Yepes’ reputation in question, the job of restoring Datanálisis’ mythic neutrality was left to company director Luis Vicente León. Never mind that León had also been making blatantly anti-Chávez statements to the press long before Gil Yepes blurted out his homicidal fantasies to the L.A. Times. In Venezuela, where Chávez-bashing journalists abound, “neutrality” means telling the business-controlled propaganda apparatus what it wants to hear.

~snip~
As it turned out, Datanálisis’ claim that the poor had turned against Chávez with greater vehemence than middle to wealthier strata was plainly dishonest.

Between November 2002 and February 2003—the period of business-led economic sabotage against the Venezuelan government and people—Datanálisis temporarily stopped sending field workers into Chavista-controlled slums. Due to the heightening of resentment towards biased pollsters as well as increasing levels of crime resulting from the misery induced by the economic sabotage, field workers could not safely perform surveys.

In other words, León relied on telephone polls for his claim that lower-income respondents had turned strongly against Chávez (Datanálisis’ website acknowledged that its December 2002 poll regarding the opposition’s so-called “general strike” was conducted by telephone). The sociologist Greg Wilpert, who resides in Caracas, estimates that only 50 percent of Venezuelan households have mainline telephones, meaning that Datanálisis could scarcely have polled stratum E (the poor) during the period on which León based his deceitful claim.

Now, as the opposition’s campaign is clearly faltering and Venezuela’s poor appear poised to turn out en masse against the recall of President Chávez, the failure of the anti-Chávez pollsters’ underhanded attempts to deny the government of its long-standing base becomes increasingly clear.

http://www.narconews.com/Issue33/article1007.html

[rabs]

30. Thanks for this refresher on Datanalysis

These anti-chavez polling elitists have been getting it wrong for the past 11 years.

In the end, the only "poll" that will matter is the one scheduled for Sept. 27.

[Judi Lynn]

33. They've been caught screwing around time after time. You remember Mark Penn,

who worked for BOTH Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign, AND for Alvaro Uribe's campaign to push the Congress to pass his FTA between the US and Colombia, working for BOTH at the same time until enough people made noise that Hillary forced Penn to drop Uribe. Damned shabby, isn't it? (And her husband, of course, was the Einstein who introduced Plan Colombia.)

Penn's company, Penn, Schoen and Berland Associates, did some shifty polling in Venezuela which was a triumph in treachery. From Sourcewatch:

PSB and the 2004 Venezuelan recall election

PSB received negative attention for polling it did during the August 2004 Venezuelan recall election of President Hugo Chavez:<8>

"Exit Poll Results Show Major Defeat for Chavez" the survey, conducted by Penn, Schoen & Berland Associates, asserted even as Sunday's voting was still on. But in fact, the opposite was true - Chavez ended up trouncing his enemies and capturing 59 percent of the vote.

PSB's Venezuela poll raised eyebrows for several reasons: the opposition to Hugo Chavez seized upon it as proof that "the results from the vote itself were fraudulent"; the poll results "were sent out by fax and e-mail to media outlets and opposition offices more than four hours before polls closed," in violation of Venezuelan law; "members of Sumate, a Venezuelan group that helped organize the recall initiative, the fieldwork for the poll"; and remarks to media went beyond poll results and analysis to election commentary - Mark Penn told Associated Press that Doug Schoen "believes there were more problems with the voting than with the exit poll."<9>

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Penn,_Schoen_and_Berland_Associates#PSB_and_the_2004_Venezuelan_recall_election

[Judi Lynn]

31. From early this year, data from a reputable polling source.

Arthur Shaw: Why is Hugo Chavez so irresistible to the electorate now?
By Arthur Shaw

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez reached the end of 2009, supported by 60.3% of his country's citizens, according to poll results, based on a survey of 1200 people, released Thursday, December 31, 2009, by Venezuelan Institute for Data Analysis (IVAD).

Bourgeois liberals control IVAD at the top and, below, the Institute is largely staffed by middle class liberals. Most likely, there is not even one Marxist-Leninist on IVAD's premises or ever been on IVAD premises. In the past IVAD has, on occasion, has been disparaging of the Venezuela Revolution but occasionally IVAD has been supportive, too.

IVAD is an outlet of the bourgeois media in Venezuela but, unlike most of the bourgeois media in Venezuela, is not known for an irrepressible propensity to tell lies, whether the falsities seem to favor revolution or ideological neutrality or counter-revolution.

Here are IVAD findings.

How would you rate the performance of Hugo Chavez as President?
Excellent 18.4%
Good 41.8%
Average to good 22.9%
Average to bad 5.7%
Bad 5.5%
Terrible 4.6%

Given the yearlong campaign of defamation and misinformation by the bourgeois media against Hugo Chavez, these numbers are stunning.

Four of the six labels used to express approval or scorn -- i.e., terrible, bad, good, and excellent -- are clear and concise. The other two labels average to good and average to bad -- are not so clear and not so concise. But despite their lack of clarity, the latter two labels still seem useful because they throw some light on lukewarm voters, a key category of the electorate that is often ignored. Lukewarm voters are key because they are more likely to switch either approval or disapproval on job performance or switch candidate preference than the decided voter. These voters tended to rate Chavez's job performance either excellent or terrible.

So, according to the IVAD December 31 poll, well over 80% of the Venezuelan people believe Hugo Chavez is either average or good or excellent, with half of them believing that Chavez is good, with about a quarter of the people thinking Chavez is excellent and the remaining quarter judging him as only average. These findings are stunning because even if the bourgeois media manages to brainwash all of the 22.9% of the people who have the "average to good" label pinned on them, Hugo Chavez still wins by a whopping 18 points. This 18-point win presupposes that the electorate votes for candidates whom the electorate believes are doing an excellent, good, or average job in office.More:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Arthur-Shaw-Why-is-Hugo-C-by-Arthur-Shaw-100103-628.html

[bherrera]

35. That is history, today Chavez is not so popular

you are quoting figures from last year. Today, Mr Chavez is extremely unpopular due to the power cuts, the rotten food affair, the crime wave, and the high inflation rate. Venezuelans, like other peoples, vote according to their perception of the latest results, and today Mr Chavez is very disliked by the people. His party already lost the elections in the metropolitan area, which was a terrible sign for the neo fascist camp around Chavez. Now, with the economic problems becoming much worse, the crime wave, and the food problems caused by the food the government allowed to rot in the ports, the future for the Chavez camp looks very grim. The only thing left for them is to alter the elections via a crooked system, which is to be expected, because they are very corrupt people. These individuals around Chavez are there to feed off the huge corruption and thievery the government has become famous for, and they are a group of incompetents and thieves. They can only win by crooked means. They are not honorable socialists, like the Brazilians and the Chilean socialists, these guys are far from it, they are more of a national socialist or nazi group.

[Judi Lynn]

37. I see. He was tremendously popular every year since he was inaugurated in February 1999,

until it all fell apart this year, in your esteemed view. That' makes sense, doesn't it?

Do you not grasp your claim that leftists are both communists and fascists is astonishingly stupid? That doesn't happen.

There IS a segment of U.S. citizens apparently so appallingly stupid, right-wingers, of course, they will believe anything someone who can sound smarter (almost the entire world) tells them. They are the ones who would buy that claim, since they have no grasp whatsoever what is meant by either of these polar opposite terms.

If you had any dignity you would never have tried that here, but then ......

Oh, well.

[ChangoLoa]

40. Recent polls from IVAD.

There are more recent polls from IVAD. They talk about 55% of the votes going to the PSUV candidates in the 9-26 elections. Thanks to last year's reconfiguration of the territorial sectors, 55% of the votes would translate into 70% of the seats for PSUV, according to their prediction.

This is not the estimation of the support to Chavez with IVAD's famous "excellent-good-average good/bad-bad-terrible" diagram. That method was giving Chavez something around 50% of "excellent"-"good"-"average good" the last time it was done. In that same poll, only 39% of the people wanted him to win the 2012 elections, though.

I listen to IVAD because it has historically been the most accurate polling company.

[ChangoLoa]

39. Please stop feeding false information provided by paid propagandists

The IVAD poll from december 2009 talked about 60.3% of the Venezuelans rating Chavez from "average to good" to "excellent".
This cheating article you posted gives 83.1%.

A. Shaw is most probably lying on purpose since all this info was reported and accessible at that time.

Here's Venezuelan public TV website(VTV) reporting:
http://www.vtv.gob.ve/noticias-nacionales/27971

Here's your favorite:
http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/5049

Here's a foreign newspaper:
http://www.noticanarias.com/america/en-venezuela-segun-encuesta-del-ivad-de-diciembre-chavez-cierra-el-2009-con-popularidad-del-60-3-10666

[bherrera]

10. I believe Mr Chavez has been president for 11 years

It is difficult to defend his administration on this issue (lack of electricity) when he has been in power for 11 years. The lack of infrastructure development and maintenance, when they knew droughts are a frequent problem in the region, caused the crisis. It is not so easy for the Chavez regime to find excuses now, because they have perpetuated themselves in power for so long. All of the problems they suffer are caused by their own lack of competence, their corruption, and the simple fact that Chavez surrounds himself with courtesans and other weak minded individuals.