Yunes and Yunes: Héctor, left, and Miguel Ángel. The Yunes cousins Héctor, left, and Miguel Ángel. One is allegedly corrupt, the other a pervert.

MX elections 2016: the dirty war is on

Pushers, perverts and thieves dominate campaign news

It’s a war out there and it’s a dirty one: welcome to the 2016 election campaigns.


In four of the 11 states that will hold elections in two weeks the campaigns have dispensed with promoting platforms and proposals, opting instead for a “dirty war” of accusations, personal attacks and the disclosure of information designed to tarnish candidates’ reputations.

The Gulf states of Veracruz and Tamaulipas have been the most hostile battlegrounds so far. In both, the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) has ruled for years on end, and both have suffered from the violence caused by drug trafficking and corruption.

In the race for governor of Veracruz two cousins are head-to-head contenders: Miguel Ángel Yunes represents a left-right alliance between the National Action and Democratic Revolution parties, PAN and PRD, respectively. His cousin, Héctor Yunes, is the candidate of the ruling party, PRI.

The most recent series of attacks between the two has included accusations of pedophilia against Miguel Ángel, allegedly complicit in a child pornography network. Héctor Yunes used a public event to accuse his cousin of being “a pervert” and “sexual deviant” and warned those in attendance to “keep [their] children safe.”

Questions have also been raised about Miguel Ángel’s expensive real estate holdings and he has been accused of having a fortune hidden in offshore tax havens. But he has responded by observing that if such were the case the federal and state Attorney General’s offices, which are under the control of PRI, would already have acted against him.

In the neighboring state of Tamaulipas, narco-trafficking has been the accusation of choice. The PRI candidate formally accused his PAN adversary of having close ties with organized crime groups, releasing a doctored photograph showing armed individuals in a truck bearing the logo of the PAN candidate.


PRI has asserted that drug dealers in Tamaulipas are working for the PAN candidate. “We have never before seen such open involvement of organized crime in [a political] campaign,” said a PRI representative.

Personal attacks have also characterized the electoral race in the southeastern state of Oaxaca, where someone close to the state governor has been accused of amassing a fortune of more than 7 billion pesos (almost US $400 million).

According to information disclosed by the newspaper El Financiero, Jorge Castillo’s fortune is distributed in more than 20 bank accounts that have been opened since 2010, the year Governor Gabino Cué won the election under the banner of a three-way alliance between PAN, PRD and the Citizens’ Movement.

El Financiero has also reported that the PAN-PRD alliance candidate in the current election, José Antonio Estefan, is under investigation by the U.S. Department of the Treasury for banking irregularities involving $27 million.

In Puebla, a telephone espionage center was discovered this week. Allegedly in operation since 2014, the spy center was able to tap into 271 conversations. Margarita Zavala, a 2018 presidential hopeful, member of PAN and wife of former president Felipe Calderón, was among the targeted politicians.

A report by the newspaper Reforma said a Deputy close to state Governor Rafael Moreno Valle (elected through a PAN-PRD alliance) was in charge of the espionage operation.

The elections take place June 5, allowing for two more weeks of campaign shenanigans.

Source: Vanguardia (sp)

Stories from our archives that you might enjoy

  • Makes me so proud to be Mexican. And what’s up with these alliances between the left and the right? Nuts.

    • Güerito

      Mexico’s democracy is non-responsive to citizens’ concerns. The party leaders choose the candidates and fight to the death to help their candidate win. Mostly this is done by buying votes or forming crooked alliances.

      Ideology means very little in Mexican elections. Right now PRD and PAN are forming alliances for some Governors races to keep PRI out of power, a very admirable goal, I might add.

      • mrpoohead

        Whilst American politics is controlled by the dollar. Two party system with little difference – LGBT, abortion, anything else? No. Both parties are supported by the same industrial groups and businesses – yes, even the NRA slips the Democrats money. No matter what happens, nothing changes – business is in charge and stuff the people. It is a plutocracy (James Smith – you’ll have to look that one up).

        Meanwhile in the rest of the West, they have opposing parties. They also have better social disparity and social mobility, plus a homicide rate a fifth to a tenth of America’s. Where’s the toilet? The Good Ol’ USA! America’s social disparity is on par with China’s and the homicide rate is pegging Cuba, Iraq and Libya.

        Don’t criticize unless you do your research and make sure you’re a lot better too and not a joke!

      • James Smith

        if you have figured out, this mrpoohead is a totally insane queer posting nonsensical trash on the web. i click abuse on him with each comment i see.

        • Güerito

          Its posts are literally unintelligible. And it has that childish habit of liking its own comments. I just ignore it.

          • James Smith

            he found me on another site and followed me to this one. my apologies:-)

    • Güerito

      Felipe, I just ran across this essay that basically explains in more detail what I noted a couple days ago:

      — Children of premodernity, the Mexican elite are barely enlightened. From that, a series of notorious disorders follow: indifference towards the public, emphasis on inequality and privilege from birth, extraction of income from properties, lack of refinement, etc. It is a conservative position, which results in a people always distrusting their leaders.

      It is already close to a historical axiom that Mexico did not exactly reach the 18th century, that period, commonly called the Age of Enlightenment, the origin of liberal democracy. After two centuries of religious monarchy, we missed that revolutionary moment in which privileges were eliminated and replaced by universal law, meaning it applied to everyone. It happened in France, the United States, England (though it did not overthrow its monarchy, it limited it) and all the countries we call modern, in other words, that overcame their medieval classes.

      Here, liberalism arrived very late—in the 19th century—and quickly was corrupted. Even though its key promoters, such as Benito Juárez, effectively revoked privileges from colonial power groups—especially from the Church—they did not remove their own privileges. They used the law in a discretionary and selective way. Juárez imprisoned and killed enemies, ignored Congress, rewarded his friends, etc. It is no coincidence that we inherited a 34-year dictatorship (the Porfirato [dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz, 1876-1911]), followed by another 71-year one (the hegemonic PRI, [Party of the Institutional Revolution, 1929-2000]): each with its own version of the law imposed from above.

      The elite, incidentally, have not always been the same people. It can be said that they have changed four times: when the Spanish arrived; 350 years later, during the Reform Movement [of Juárez]; at the beginning of the 20th century, during the Mexican Revolution; and at the beginning of this century, with the fall of the corporate system [PRI’s control of sectors of society such as workers, teachers and farmers, by incorporating them into government-controlled organizations].

      However, most importantly, what has not changed is the fact that privilege is ensured by being on the pedestal. The people have changed (more or less), but they have done little to the structures. So the Mexican elite have never really been restricted—note their eternal impunity.

      This premodern condition produces elites who feel they don’t owe anything to the people. For three simple reasons: first, because they were not actually elected by them. Rather, they were born privileged or associated themselves with privileged people (some of them for decades or even centuries), so that not only do they not consider themselves part of the people, but also they assume their privilege as destiny. Second, because they have no one to answer to, no one who can remove them when they are questioned. Moreover, the legal system doesn’t have priority over them; to the contrary, they have priority over it. And thirdly, because they were not educated in the high art of governing, but instead in the bad habit of perpetuating themselves, they don’t understand themselves to be servants but as the worthy ones.

      With that lack of awareness of duty, it is too much for them to ask themselves why the fourth generation heirs of a family close to power for 90 years [since the founding of the PRI] would have to worry about practicing republican virtues. Why would they be interested in caring about the citizenry or educating those who could replace them? If the Mexican elite are so durable and conservative, if the instruments to oversee them are so unsuccessful, why would they be interested in encouraging a meritocracy where there isn’t room for priviledges of birth? In few words, why would they want to kill themselves?

      The elite in modern countries are (slightly more) virtuous because, otherwise, they could not be the elite; the people, through their representative mechanisms, would remove them. That is the 18th century’s legacy, which never reached Mexico. Having said that, it is perfectly valid to ask why the Mexican people have not been able to build those representative mechanisms for themselves.

  • James Smith

    it was not perfect under calderon but i could see he was trying and some progress was being made. here comes PRI the party which held the people by the throat for 70 years to take back the presidency in ’12 under a puppet figure controlled by the mafia family of salinas de gortari. and now? mexico in four + short years has regressed to the rapacious vicious past of yesteryear where all hope of progress toward a modern pluralistic democratic state has all but disappeared. and it will get worse. heck, even the russians have not been foolish enough to return to power their communist party which did the same to them during the same period of time!

    • mrpoohead

      You really are dim – a least they have a choice. America is a plutocracy with none. The world is in recession, thanks to America, so crime rises. Last we had more than one per day mass shooting in the US – let he without sin cast the first stone. Still going with the same dumb rubbish as usual. Was hoping that beating would have knocked sense into you.