Yesterday the people of Colombia rejected the so-called peace accord that would have placed 10 unelected members of the Marxist narco-terrorist organization in Congress, after granting amnesty for their war crimes.
Here’s a roundup:
WSJ Colombian Voters Reject Peace Deal With FARC Rebels. Narrow dismissal of accord with FARC is a blow to President Santos, thrusting nation into uncertainty. Like in Brexit,
The results mark another instance of voters rejecting counsel from their government and the establishment, after the U.K. vote to leave the European Union in June.
. . .
With 99.9% of votes counted in Sunday’s plebiscite, “No” votes—totaling more than 6.4 million—outnumbered “Yes” votes by fewer than 54,000.
Instapundit’s Austin Bay:
COLOMBIANS REJECT PEACE DEAL: Polls projected a narrow victory for the peace agreement. The result was a narrow defeat. Former president Alvaro Uribe was against it. He argued rebel leaders would be treated too leniently.
The geographical breakdown of the voting posted online by Colombian electoral authorities indicated that much of the country’s western, southeastern, eastern, and northern regions — areas where the FARC has been more active — voted in support of the peace plan. That contrasted with the country’s center, which leaned toward “No.”
The BBC has a map of the vote.
Capitol Hill Cubans: Lesson of the Day: For Colombians (and Cubans), Justice Prevails Over Impunity
Javier Lafuente for El País (Spain): Shock as voters in Colombia reject FARC peace dealDeep distrust of the guerrilla group and a high abstention rate were key in the surprise result
Polls had predicted solid backing for the ‘yes’ camp in a country exhausted by decades of war, but an abstention rate of more than 60% in the plebiscite made a mockery of those predictions. Massive levels of distrust in the guerrilla group also played a major factor in the outcome.
While talking about distrust on one hand on the other hand, Lafuente opines (emphasis added),
The failure of the ‘yes’ camp to carry the day also shines a light on the lack of leadership in the Colombian political landscape where there is a desperate need to tackle chronic cronyism. Uribe’s Democratic Center was the big winner of Sunday while President Santos was the big loser after calling a plebiscite that he never needed to hold.
Lafuente ignores the fact that one of the reasons for distrust was Santos’s backtracking on the referendum.
The polls may have predicted it, but, like in Brexit, there appears to have been some of the Bradley effect,
The Bradley effect (less commonly the Wilder effect) is a theory concerning observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in some United States government elections where a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other. The theory proposes that some voters who intend to vote for the white candidate would nonetheless tell pollsters that they are undecided or likely to vote for the non-white candidate. It was named after Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, an African-American who lost the 1982 California governor’s race despite being ahead in voter polls going into the elections.
Orlando Luis Pardo Lazo:
“It’s a very simple formula: Vote against anything that the Castros support, vote against anything the Castros believe in.”
Es muy sencilla la fórmula: votar en contra de todo lo que apoyen los Castros, votar en contra de todo en lo que crean los Castros.
— OrlandoLuisPardoLazo (@OLPL) October 3, 2016
Carlos Alberto Montaner:
“Defeated by the Colombian NO: FARC, Santos, Raúl Castro, Maduro, Bachelet, John Kerry, pope Francis, Ban Ki-moon, King Juan Carlos.”
Los derrotados x el NO colombiano: FARC, Santos, Raúl Castro, Maduro, Bachelet, John Kerry, papa Francisco, Ban Ki-moon, rey Juan Carlos.
— Carlos A. Montaner (@CarlosAMontaner) October 3, 2016
Last, but not least, Uribe’s speech following the results,
Frente al resultado del Plebiscito pic.twitter.com/KWf5ZuyqFa
— Álvaro Uribe Vélez (@AlvaroUribeVel) October 3, 2016