Dear Socorro,
With curiosity, we read your statements from today, in which you claim, with the precision of a Swiss watch, that the electoral constituencies were designed by a “method” based on “the law.”
What is this “method,” Socorro?
The only states where modifications occurred were Zulia, the Capital District, Miranda, Carabobo, Amazonas, Barinas, Lara, and Táchira. What a coincidence that seven of these eight states are opposition strongholds, while one (Barinas) is the President’s homeland. Just some math, you might say.
But tell us, is it possible for you to share with us the magical mathematical formula – “the method,” as you call it – that produced such a wonderful result? Don’t be stingy, come on.
If you have an exact “method” that forces the merging of Baruta with Chacao and Leoncio Martínez, isn’t it a crime to keep it locked away?
It must be fascinating that “method” that led you to divide the Sucre Municipality in Miranda State into three parts – two traditionally won by the opposition and one that favors the government, which was added to Guarenas.
That “method” must be very wise, having united the parishes of El Paraíso and La Vega in the Capital District – where the opposition performed relatively well – with the parishes of Antímano and Macarao, where chavismo hits hard.
This method must be so sophisticated that no one seems to understand it. Is it the reason why your colleague Vicente Díaz stated in January of 2010 that there were no technical criteria for the changes? Don’t you think that this “method” deserves to see the light of day? Shouldn’t your “method” come out of the closet?
Look, Socorro, we are just simple blogging citizens. We don’t have the apparatus of the State at our disposal, nor do we command the Plan República. We lack the technological, financial, and mathematical weapons that you, the powerful ones, have.
The only thing we have – for now, right? – is our voice and Article 186 of the Constitution, which states that representation in the Assembly must be proportional.
That’s why we invite you to discuss your “method” with us, wherever and whenever you want. Bring your formula, and we’ll bring our studies that, modesty aside, we believe are quite serious. Bring your “model,” and we will present the forecasts we made that accurately predicted the election outcome.
If it’s true that the “method” doesn’t favor anyone specifically, you shouldn’t have a problem debating it with us. If your “method” is as you portray it, we would acknowledge it without hesitation.
In fact, if you convince us, we’ll provide you with a ton of publicity. Since our work has been cited by The Guardian, The Economist, the BBC, Reuters, and other international media, we might even help you reverse that “opinion matrix” against the CNE that you denounced today.
It would just be a simple debate among compatriots. Pure democracy, indeed.
So, Socorro, are you in?