Chile Constitutional Referendum, September 4th 2022

[Lumine]

RN won't assist to meeting with government to talk about the continuation of the constituent process. Words cannot describe how shocked I am, shocked I'm telling you.

They're all apparently on their way now (RN, UDI, Evopoli), but yes, it would have been a bad sign had they not gone. I do concede that Chahuan - as RN President - has a history of (rather childlish) tantrums, so I have to imagine the others had to drag him.

[Logical]

Reasons why people voted no on the referendum.

Disapprove of the Constituent Assembly's process 40%
Instability and uncertainty 35%
Plurinationalism 29%
A new constitution is unnecessary 24%



77% of Chileans still want a new constitution. Only 20% reject a new constitution. The level of support for a new constitution has not changed significantly since the start of the process.

[buritobr]

Reasons why people voted no on the referendum.

Disapprove of the Constituent Assembly's process 40%
Instability and uncertainty 35%
Plurinationalism 29%
A new constitution is unnecessary 24%



77% of Chileans still want a new constitution. Only 20% reject a new constitution. The level of support for a new constitution has not changed significantly since the start of the process.

I saw a discussion in the Twitter yesterday between Brazilians who watch international politics. One of them claimed that the constitution was defeated because of the "identitiy politics". Others claimed that the economic issues mattered more. We can see that the "identity politics" narrative is wrong, considering that only 29% answered the plurinationalism.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Moving the discussion back to election results, I notice a lot of the region's with a higher indigenous population voted against it. Is that because indigenous Chileans opposed the counstituon or was it the non indigenous population being more strongly against it.

[kaoras]

Moving the discussion back to election results, I notice a lot of the region's with a higher indigenous population voted against it. Is that because indigenous Chileans opposed the counstituon or was it the non indigenous population being more strongly against it.

Results at comunal level show that other than the Rapa Nui, they rejected but less strongly than the general population. Indigenous voters at presidential level have been swinging left but the non-indigenous population that lives near traditional indigenous communities are polarized into being extremely right wing.

[Red Velvet]

Reasons why people voted no on the referendum.

Disapprove of the Constituent Assembly's process 40%
Instability and uncertainty 35%
Plurinationalism 29%
A new constitution is unnecessary 24%



77% of Chileans still want a new constitution. Only 20% reject a new constitution. The level of support for a new constitution has not changed significantly since the start of the process.

I saw a discussion in the Twitter yesterday between Brazilians who watch international politics. One of them claimed that the constitution was defeated because of the "identitiy politics". Others claimed that the economic issues mattered more. We can see that the "identity politics" narrative is wrong, considering that only 29% answered the plurinationalism.

29% of people is a lot! One third of the Rechazo vote translates to around 20% of voters overall, which is decisive for this. It’s also clearly the main issue that people had problems with, as the only other two most popular answers were vague non-specific stuff not related to the text and more to campaign rhetoric only.

Meanwhile the pension answers is down below and almost no one answered it. I will always agree that the left gets too ambitious and sacrifices basic structural change by not finding common ground with a popular message on social issues (what people call by “identity politics”).

And that’s because Chile is supposedly one of the most social progressive countries on the region! Imagine forcing that social progressive focus on Peru, etc. Do people forget where they live? Because LatAm is only extremely socially progressive if we compare ourselves to places like Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc.

It’s giving amno to the hard conservatives for the sake of keeping the most morally correct agenda as possible, even if it’s not something that can be passed. People should question whether it’s worth to sacrifice some stuff temporarily in order to get other important change or if they rather have this “All or nothing” approach.

[kaoras]

BTW, I'm going to start a new thread to cover political developments and hopefully new constituent elections, especially because this one already has like 5 elections in it and it will be a hassle for people in the future that want to search threads for those elections.

Don't know whether to create it in this board or in International General Discussion, does anyone have an opinion about that?

[Lumine]

BTW, I'm going to start a new thread to cover political developments and hopefully new constituent elections, especially because this one already has like 5 elections in it and it will be a hassle for people in the future that want to search threads for those elections.

Don't know whether to create it in this board or in International General Discussion, does anyone have an opinion about that?

I'd advise the International General Discussion, it's more suitable given the variety of non-electoral topics likely to show up.

Also, Felipe Delpin just resigned as Party Chairman of the DC. He and his allies rather overplayed their hand by driving the party so stridently towards Approve - even trying to expel pro-Reject personalities, the same who were vindicated by Sunday's result -, so it seems the party is headed for quite a fascinating internal debate.

[Oryxslayer]

Also, if there is to be future elections,  such as to the new constitutional assembly,  then it would be unwise to split discussion.

[kaoras]

New thread on this board https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=521562.0