Two elections, different outcomes, different headlines at the Wall Street Journal (6/6/11).
When the left loses:
Portugal Decisively Ends Leftist Rule
Portugal on Sunday voted decisively to end six years of leftist rule, electing the country’s main conservative party and boosting prospects for austerity measures tied to a $114 billion aid package from the EU and IMF.
But when the left wins:
Peru Votes in Divisive Runoff for President
Voters in one of the world’s most dynamic economies went to the polls Sunday to choose between two divisive presidential candidates.
The latter piece included this: “Financial markets, which have been riding a roller coaster during the long campaign, would be almost certain to take a win by Mr. Humala badly, analysts say.”
That analysis wasn’t confined to Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal. In today’s Washington Post (6/7/11):
Peru’s Path Is Question Mark as Nationalist Wins Presidential Race
Investors worry whether he will pursue leftist economic policies
And the Los Angeles Times (6/7/11):
Leftist’s Victory Rattles Peruvian Stock Market
After his narrow win, Ollanta Humala seeks to reassure the business class, but his previous pledge to work for better distribution of the nation’s silver and gold wealth sends the market down more than 12 percent.
Viewing elections through the eyes of the investor class might be helpful for some, but it’s doubtful that it’s a great way to understand what the people in any country are thinking.
The misdirection from Murdock and his ilk is akin, to true religious fever. proving miracles! Both of these elections were fueled by anger among the voters about their economic position- I suspect the non-populace government of Portugal is dead in it’s crib, additional austerity measures will be it’s conclusion.
I’d be interested in knowing just how Humala is “seek(ing) to reassure the business class” – and what that means for the folks in Peru – but that’s not a task the corpress will ever have to fret about, is it?
@Doug Latimer: I guess by now if your coinage “corpress” was going to catch on, it would have. No?
I wasn’t aware a word had to “catch on” for it to be “legitimate”, Roger.
(How do you determine that, in any event?)
You understanding its meaning, and I assume anyone else encountering it does, as well.
And it saves a few keystrokes.
So just what’s got your knickers in a twist?