Chilean Elections and General Discussion. Municipal and Regional elections, October 27th, 2024
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 06:42:36 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Chilean Elections and General Discussion. Municipal and Regional elections, October 27th, 2024
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10
Poll
Question: Which list would you vote for?
#1
Unidad para Chile (AD-PS-PL, left-wing)
 
#2
Todo por Chile (PPD-DC-PR, centre-left)
 
#3
Partido de la Gente (populism)
 
#4
Chile Seguro (Chile Vamos, right-wing)
 
#5
Partido Republicano (Far right)
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 25

Author Topic: Chilean Elections and General Discussion. Municipal and Regional elections, October 27th, 2024  (Read 15474 times)
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 27, 2022, 03:28:37 PM »
« edited: October 27, 2022, 03:38:08 PM by kaoras »

BTW, Rincón and Walker officially quit the DC and the presentation of the new "Democratic Party" is due for next week according to the press.

Los Lagos regional governor, Patricio Vallespín, also left the party but given that he supported Approve is unlikely to join Amarillos nor democrats.

There were also internal elections in EVOPOLI and Convergencia Social (Boric's party). In EVOPOLI the more liberal faction of former minister Gloria Hutt won 55% against Cruz Coke, close to Felipe Kast. (not JAK, the faux ""liberal"" one)

In Convergencia Social, deputy Diego Ibáñez won with 75% but I don't know much about the stakes there. He seems to want closer coordination with PS and more moderate.
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: November 02, 2022, 06:47:45 PM »

Constitutional talks have reached a stalemate with no accord in sight. They can't agree neither on the electoral system nor on the "edges" (topics that the new convention could not touch, which besides defeating the point of a convention, the right wants to keep all the subsidiarity of the current constitution). Gee, I wonder who could have seen this coming.

On political news, there was a long running drama about the presidency of the chamber of deputies. According to the administrative deal of the Left+PDG, now it was the turn of communist Karol Cariola, but PDG and several rogue deputies changed their minds (because Cariola was one of the leading figures of Approve) and seem poised to give control of the chamber to the right. Today PC rescinded Cariola candidacy, so is unclear what will happen now.

Ximena Rincón (ex-DC), Patricio Walker (ex-DC), Carlos Maldonado (ex-PR) and other ex-Concertación figures officially launched their new party called "Demócratas" with all the inane and bland enlightened centrism, indistinguishable from Amarillos. Claudio Orrego, governor of the Metropolitan Region is also looking to found a new Party, maybe with Patricio Vallespín and other ex-DCs that weren't part of the right wing. Let's ignore for a second that Orrego in 2013 represented the conservative wing against Ximena Rincón from the left in internal primaries. Rincón change is all about her hating Yasna Provoste for "stealing" his spot on the presidential ballot

DC-meltdown update:Senator Francisco Huenchumilla has said that if the new party Congress results in a rightist takeover of the DC, he will also quit the party. So, at this point the question is whose faction gets to keep the empty shell of the party while everyone else leaves

Finally, Boric is going to present the pension reform, his first relevant piece of legislation (yes, it took this long, that's why he didn't have a honeymoon). The main points are changing some of the inner workings of the AFP (Pension administration funds, the private entities in charge of pension in Chile) changing their names and creating a public entity to compete with them. It would also create a 6% payroll tax for employers that would go to a common fund, while keeping the current 10% for individual accounts.

Overall, a very reasonable reform that is going to be extremely unpopular and has 0 chance of passing Congress. Boric also has seen his approvals fall in recent weeks from 35 to 25% because he pissed leftwingers with the approval of the TPP11
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: November 02, 2022, 07:14:14 PM »

Also, before I forget again, the plebiscite results according to the socioeconomic estrata of the comunas (5 being poorer and 1 richer) Bear in mind that 2021 turnout seem to be switched up (richer comunas should have the higher rate of turnout)


Overall, Approve lost more relative to Boric in the middle classes while holding slightly better with lower and upper clases. Approve had the hardest loss in the third quintile with -21,2% while "only" losing -17,6% among the rich and -15,2% among the poor. All this with wildly different turnout product of compulsory voting. The terror campaign appears to have been more effective on the middle classes that felt that had more to lose (as in, actually having homes that the evil communist were going to expropriate)

Also, keep in mind that in Chile the usual voting patterns are an inverted U, with the left being stronger with the middle class, so this lineal pattern is unusual.
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,282
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -1.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: November 03, 2022, 05:22:21 AM »

Also, keep in mind that in Chile the usual voting patterns are an inverted U, with the left being stronger with the middle class, so this lineal pattern is unusual.

Is the reason for this pattern that the poorest communes are disproportionately rural areas in Araucanía, Bío Bío etc.?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: November 03, 2022, 09:02:44 AM »

Also, before I forget again, the plebiscite results according to the socioeconomic estrata of the comunas (5 being poorer and 1 richer) Bear in mind that 2021 turnout seem to be switched up (richer comunas should have the higher rate of turnout)


Overall, Approve lost more relative to Boric in the middle classes while holding slightly better with lower and upper clases. Approve had the hardest loss in the third quintile with -21,2% while "only" losing -17,6% among the rich and -15,2% among the poor. All this with wildly different turnout product of compulsory voting. The terror campaign appears to have been more effective on the middle classes that felt that had more to lose (as in, actually having homes that the evil communist were going to expropriate)

Also, keep in mind that in Chile the usual voting patterns are an inverted U, with the left being stronger with the middle class, so this lineal pattern is unusual.


If I'm reading this data right, the richest people in Chile had lower turnout than average? That's fascinating. I'm not aware of any country where that's the case.
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: November 03, 2022, 10:31:52 AM »

Also, keep in mind that in Chile the usual voting patterns are an inverted U, with the left being stronger with the middle class, so this lineal pattern is unusual.

Is the reason for this pattern that the poorest communes are disproportionately rural areas in Araucanía, Bío Bío etc.?

Yes, but that's not the whole story. Is very well documented that the Chilean Left, since its inception in the saltpeter offices in the 1920's, has been a project of the educated working classes (nowadays what constitutes the middle class). A book in electoral geography from 1950's noted that support for the left was stronger in provinces with higher income, higher unionization rates, and better living standards.

To quote myself:


There isn't much research into that (or any electoral topic outside abstentionism tbh). Some researchers said that support for the left among the working class pre 1973 was actually dependent on them believing that social classes existed, basically, having class consciousness, and that this only happened in more educated and prosperous areas. The relationship between leftism and better living standards is really old, the guy from 1954 who I cited in the last page already noted that back then.

Anecdotally, I have noted that more militantly left wing people tend to be very aspirational, wanting to get ahead in life and putting a lot of value in education. And when they do actually get ahead they keep their voting patterns because the right is repulsive to them at a personal and cultural level.

Honestly the FA pattern of support is the inverted U in steroids,   their best results are among the "new" middle class that used to be poor in the 80's and 90's, with the difference that, unlike the Concertación, they also tend to struggle with the urban poor. But even the Concertación had this pattern, a paper from 2001 showed that the support for the Concertación and the right was tied among unskilled workers but the Concertación beat the right 3-1 among qualified workers.

Graphic in question


Not only that, if you look at provincial results in presidential elections from 1938 to 1973, you can see that the expansion of suffrage actually hurt the left in some places. In Magallanes, which never had an historic aristocracy and the people that could vote in 1938 where mainly educated industrial workers, the leftist candidate got 88% of the vote. Allende in 1970 got only 47% there (still way above his national average)

There's some paper to be wrote about how the Chilean left has always been the political option of the "social climbers" and "those who get ahead" through education. Anecdotally, the most fire-breathing leftists you cand find in Chile are all from typical middle-class backgrounds (have relatively comfy lives, his parents used to be much poorer but put a lot of effort on their own education or their son's).
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: November 03, 2022, 10:40:18 AM »

If I'm reading this data right, the richest people in Chile had lower turnout than average? That's fascinating. I'm not aware of any country where that's the case.

The 2021 data is probably inverted. Is fairly clear that rich people voted more. For the plebiscite the differences are very small because of compulsory voting, though I guess the rich are more likely to be away from their polling place. 
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,282
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -1.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: November 03, 2022, 10:51:02 AM »

Also, keep in mind that in Chile the usual voting patterns are an inverted U, with the left being stronger with the middle class, so this lineal pattern is unusual.

Is the reason for this pattern that the poorest communes are disproportionately rural areas in Araucanía, Bío Bío etc.?

Yes, but that's not the whole story. Is very well documented that the Chilean Left, since its inception in the saltpeter offices in the 1920's, has been a project of the educated working classes (nowadays what constitutes the middle class). A book in electoral geography from 1950's noted that support for the left was stronger in provinces with higher income, higher unionization rates, and better living standards.

[SNIP]

There's some paper to be wrote about how the Chilean left has always been the political option of the "social climbers" and "those who get ahead" through education. Anecdotally, the most fire-breathing leftists you cand find in Chile are all from typical middle-class backgrounds (have relatively comfy lives, his parents used to be much poorer but put a lot of effort on their own education or their son's).

I am Italian and the middling performance of our left in the poorest parts of the country is well-documented, so all of this is quite familiar. Yet another similarity between us (I have spent an inordinate amount of time thinking about the resemblance between Concertación being born out of the uneasy alliance of PS and DC and The Olive Tree being born out of the uneasy alliance of ex-PCI and ex-DC).
Logged
Secretary of State Liberal Hack
IBNU
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,878
Singapore


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: November 03, 2022, 11:35:25 AM »

Also, before I forget again, the plebiscite results according to the socioeconomic estrata of the comunas (5 being poorer and 1 richer) Bear in mind that 2021 turnout seem to be switched up (richer comunas should have the higher rate of turnout)


Overall, Approve lost more relative to Boric in the middle classes while holding slightly better with lower and upper clases. Approve had the hardest loss in the third quintile with -21,2% while "only" losing -17,6% among the rich and -15,2% among the poor. All this with wildly different turnout product of compulsory voting. The terror campaign appears to have been more effective on the middle classes that felt that had more to lose (as in, actually having homes that the evil communist were going to expropriate)

Also, keep in mind that in Chile the usual voting patterns are an inverted U, with the left being stronger with the middle class, so this lineal pattern is unusual.


If I'm reading this data right, the richest people in Chile had lower turnout than average? That's fascinating. I'm not aware of any country where that's the case.
That's also the case in india, voting turnout among the upper-class is extremely low. Anecdotally neither of my parents have ever voted in an indian general election despite my dad being about as obsessed with politics as me.
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: November 07, 2022, 12:54:13 PM »

Cadem polled the "totally going to happen any day now" Constituent Elections 2.0

PDG 15%
Chile Vamos 14%
Apruebo Dignidad 14% (7% FA + 7% Communist)
Partido Republicano 9%
Independents 9%
Amarillos 8%
Socialismo Democrático 6%
DC 3%

Right (CHV+ REP): 23%
Pro-Government Left (AD+SD) 20%
Everyone else is basically its own category for now.

CADEM didn't ask for the "outsider left" (Ecologists, Humanists, tankies) which got 10% combined in the last parliamentary election.
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: November 07, 2022, 01:02:50 PM »

A big meeting of all the pro-goverment parties was held yesterday. The most relevant thing was that they agreed to build a single "Presidential Majority "Alianza de Gobierno" with unified spokesperson, coordination meetings and so on.

It would be set up as a "confederation", Apruebo Dignidad and Socialismo Democrático* will still exists but within that coordination space. It remains to be seen if they will bother to give the alliance a proper name but given how lazy the Chilean left is with those things (SD still doesn't have a logo!) I wouldn't bet on it.

*Wich means, for example, that a party like Convergencia social is inside the Frente Amplio coalition, which is inside Apruebo Dignidad which is now inside the Alianza de Gobierno.
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: November 07, 2022, 07:08:46 PM »

On political news, there was a long running drama about the presidency of the chamber of deputies. According to the administrative deal of the Left+PDG, now it was the turn of communist Karol Cariola, but PDG and several rogue deputies changed their minds (because Cariola was one of the leading figures of Approve) and seem poised to give control of the chamber to the right. Today PC rescinded Cariola candidacy, so is unclear what will happen now.

Well, the end of this saga was really funny. Over the weekend the right was sure that they had the votes for winning the presidency along with PDG and PR and DC dissidents. The name they put forward was PDG Victor Pino. However, he "didn't generate consensus" among the PDG caucus (allegedly because he was a Mormon which didn't sit well with the couple of evangelical pastors PDG has, same story with some evangelical RN deputies). At the same time, the pro-goverment parties choose Liberal Vlado Mirosevic as their candidate, and the government was able to whip several dissidents.

Sensing defeat, the Right changed their candidate at the last minute for the conservative DC Miguel Angel Calisto, but it was to no avail as Mirosevic was elected on a 77-73 vote.

Even more funny, PDG caucus split in half. Karen Medina (Arauco-Biobio) and Ruben Oyarzo (Metropolitan Region), along with independents Francisco Pulgar (ex-Cento Unido) and Gaspar Rivas (one of the biggest clowns in congress) voted for Mirosevic, while the rest of the party voted for Calisto.

The DC also split in half, with 4 deputies voting for Mirosevic and 4 for their fellow party member Calisto, showing that the DC has effectively stopped functioning as a coherent party.

Now the right on twitter is on full meltdown mode calling PDG traitors and unreliable, ending their short love affair. Hilarious. And the cherry on top is that PDG and Parisi also are in a legal cruzade against meme pages on Instagram that mocked them, causing even more mockery.

Centrist parties try to be cohesive and ideologically coherent challenge (Impossible)
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: November 12, 2022, 01:35:31 PM »
« Edited: November 12, 2022, 01:41:44 PM by kaoras »



I did this graphic on Paint to show all the layers of the Matrioshka that is currently the Chilean Left. I only included parties or movements with parliamentary representation, otherwise Chile Digno has like 10 small movements like the Cristian Left and so on.  By election time there always appear or reappear a few hard left /outsider parties, like Partido Igualdad, the tankies and the trots. I also didn't include the DC, Amarillos or Demócratas.

While doing this I noticed that an official looking twitter account of Socialismo Democrático does, in fact, have a logo. And I couldn't find that especific rose design anywhere else, so it seems original and legit.

The Ecologist Party and the Humanists are outside the Government coalition but have 2 and 1 deputy each and usually support the goverment.

Are all those parties necessary? Long term PPD is doomed and the only reason it doesn't merge with PS is because the socialists wouldn't accept anything other than unconditional incorporation into their brand (nothing of "Socialdemocratic" Party, like Lagos proposed once upon a time). There are talks to merge all FA parties into one, but I doubt it will happen. All other ones can all at least somewhat justify their separate existence (except for the Humanist Party and Humanist Action, they should just merge again now that Pamela Jiles is gone)


Logged
Lumine
LumineVonReuental
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,610
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: December 12, 2022, 04:30:01 PM »

An agreement has been reached! Took over 100 days of talks, but apparently a blueprint for the new constituent process is due to be released within half an hour or so.

Rumor has it that it will be a "Constitutional Council" (name unconfirmed), fully elected, 50 members, using the electoral system for the Senate (open list D'Hondt, between 2-5 per region); which will work alongside 24 designated experts - appointed by Congress - that will have some sort of overseer role, preparing a constitutional project that the Council will then revise and work on. There's talk of a 3/5's quorum, it's not entirely clear yet how powerful the 24 experts will be in regards to the final text.

I was rather despairing of the deadlock, so if confirmed, great news.
Logged
H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY
Alfred F. Jones
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,075
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: December 12, 2022, 04:31:58 PM »
« Edited: December 12, 2022, 04:57:09 PM by H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY »

An agreement has been reached! Took over 100 days of talks, but apparently a blueprint for the new constituent process is due to be released within half an hour or so.

Rumor has it that it will be a "Constitutional Council" (name unconfirmed), fully elected, 50 members, using the electoral system for the Senate (open list D'Hondt, between 2-5 per region); which will work alongside 24 designated experts - appointed by Congress - that will have some sort of overseer role, preparing a constitutional project that the Council will then revise and work on. There's talk of a 3/5's quorum, it's not entirely clear yet how powerful the 24 experts will be in regards to the final text.

I was rather despairing of the deadlock, so if confirmed, great news.

There will also be indigenous seats with the number based on turnout and electoral lists alternating by gender, and it seems like the quorum in the “Council” will be 3/5.
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: December 12, 2022, 05:49:12 PM »

The veto power of the "experts" over the final text plus all the "borders" that basically ensure the continuation of the subsidiary state makes this whole thing a farse.

I'm voting communist on the constituent election 2.0 in April and spoiling my ballot on the December referendum

Both the election and the referendum will have compulsory turnout. The constituent elections will use the voting system of the Senate
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: December 12, 2022, 07:47:26 PM »
« Edited: December 13, 2022, 11:01:27 AM by kaoras »

Details of the deal.

1.  Once the constitutional reform is approved, experts are chosen, who start on January 15th drafting a preliminary project and leave as a base the 12 principles that function as constitutional borders.

2. The 50 members of the Constitutional Council have a mandate of 5 months to reach the final text.

3. Four months after the start of the work of the Constitutional Council, the experts can begin to reject rules or make observations. In case of discrepancies, a mixed commission made up of six elected councilors and 6 experts is created.

4. If any standard does not achieve a quorum of 3/5, it is not approved.

5. The norms contained in the 12 constitutional bases or borders must remain as the experts propose them.

6. Delivery of the final text will be in October 2023.

7. Exit referendum date will be December 3 or 17. EDIT. November 26th.

8. Republicans out. Agreement includes the PC and the FA and the rest of the political forces with parliamentary representation. EDIT: PDG didn't sign either.

9.  The experts must have a career of at least 8 semesters, in addition to a recognized public and private career.

10.Council members and experts will not be able to compete in elections until 2026. Former conventionals will not be able to participate in the new constitutional process.

11. Indigenous seats. They will get seats according to their vote. It is estimated that it requires 195,000 votes to obtain a seat.

12. Voting will be mandatory.
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: December 12, 2022, 08:02:15 PM »
« Edited: December 12, 2022, 08:59:59 PM by kaoras »

Veto power is achieved with 20 seats. A quick "doomsday-escenario" projection for the Left gives a floor of 16 seats (2 seats in Valparaiso and Santiago, 0 in Ñuble, 0 in either Arica or Tarapacá and 1 seat in each other region)

A more realistic "Pesimist" projection gives them exactly 20 seats, though is really hard to see them going much higher unless they somehow hold off PDG in the north (unlikely) or PS runs Bachelet in the Metropolitan Region.
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: December 13, 2022, 11:00:50 AM »

3 deputies of PDG resigned Yovana Ahumada, Víctor Pino y Roberto Arroyo over the refusal of the party to sign the constitutional accord and because the party didn't do anything over Gaspar Rivas calling them "conchesumares" (mother*ckers). However, they will remain in the PDG caucus.

This is honestly schizophrenic because they are the faction closer to the Right that voted with them in the election of the Deputies Chamber president and supposedly were closer to the party leadership.

Really funny anyhow.
Logged
Lumine
LumineVonReuental
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,610
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: December 13, 2022, 12:13:00 PM »

3 deputies of PDG resigned Yovana Ahumada, Víctor Pino y Roberto Arroyo over the refusal of the party to sign the constitutional accord and because the party didn't do anything over Gaspar Rivas calling them "conchesumares" (mother*ckers). However, they will remain in the PDG caucus.

This is honestly schizophrenic because they are the faction closer to the Right that voted with them in the election of the Deputies Chamber president and supposedly were closer to the party leadership.

Really funny anyhow.

I don't claim to understand the PDG - does anyone? even Parisi? - but it seems there's like a four-way struggle between the right-leaning deputies (Ahumada and company), the left-leaning deputies (and Rivas, who I think defies any possible labels), the current party leadership (who, it seems, are dead set on staying in post and avoiding transparency), and Parisi, who... well, I really don't know.

It really is the right-wing Lista del Pueblo 2.0: this time with more chaos.
Logged
H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY
Alfred F. Jones
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,075
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: December 13, 2022, 01:32:55 PM »

Pueblo = left, gente = right (see also Uruguay’s Partido de la Gente, which has been sometimes amusingly translated as “Party of the Folk”). Got it.
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,282
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -1.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: December 14, 2022, 08:07:56 AM »

Pueblo = left, gente = right (see also Uruguay’s Partido de la Gente, which has been sometimes amusingly translated as “Party of the Folk”). Got it.

This linguistic quirk (assuming it is not just a complete coincidence) makes me really curious, I would be very glad if kaoras or Lumine or another native Spanish speaker could tell us more on the usage and nuances of those words.
Logged
kaoras
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,239
Chile


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: December 14, 2022, 08:46:47 AM »
« Edited: December 14, 2022, 10:10:36 AM by kaoras »

Pueblo = left, gente = right (see also Uruguay’s Partido de la Gente, which has been sometimes amusingly translated as “Party of the Folk”). Got it.

This linguistic quirk (assuming it is not just a complete coincidence) makes me really curious, I would be very glad if kaoras or Lumine or another native Spanish speaker could tell us more on the usage and nuances of those words.

Well, "Pueblo" can literally mean "Town", but when used to refer to "the people" it carries a strong leftist connotation. It is also very old-fashioned, it was common usage in politics pre 1973 but nowadays is only regularly used by tankies and by PC and PS when they feel like being performative.

In current politics the most common and favored word is "Ciudadanía" ("Citizenry") which is used by all governments and political forces. It's a bland, innofensive word without the connotations of saying Pueblo.

Gente is a like a more common and less pretentious version of Ciudadanía. It doesn't really have a political connotation and is regularly used by all politicians (and when they feel like they have used Ciudadanía too many times) but it feels like more populist than Ciudadanía in a way is difficult to explain. If PDG wanted to be a serious centrist party a la Amarillos they would be called Partido de la Ciudadanía (Which is also the name of C's in Spain!) but they are all about populism and standing with the people, hence "gente"

In everyday usage, most people say gente, me included. Ciudadanía is a very uppity and official word and Pueblo feels almost explicitly political, though is sometimes used in Sports commentary or to talk about different countries ( El Pueblo peruano, argentino) or indigenous peoples (pueblo mapuche)
Logged
Lumine
LumineVonReuental
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,610
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: December 14, 2022, 09:15:24 AM »
« Edited: December 14, 2022, 10:51:29 AM by Lumine »

I rather endorse what Kaoras said, the differences between pueblo/gente/ciudadanos o ciudadanía shouldn't be all that stark, but they do carry substantial political meaning through their usage.

In the case of the PDG, as I understand it the use of "Gente" is actually a direct - though not formally admitted, I think -  response to the Lista del Pueblo, in the hopes of pulling off a similar marketing ploy. They probably figured it was a useful way to achieve mass appeal and stake a populist claim without having a name that implied ideology or sounded right out of a random word generator.

As to "ciudadania", we of course had the centrist to (barely) center-left Ciudadanos (2015-2022) as a political party, a renaming of Andrés Velasco's - the former Finance Minister and 2013 independent presidential candidate in the Nueva Mayoria primaries - party "Fuerza Pública". Rather predictably, it only appealed to centrist liberals in Santiago (in the wealthy communes, that is), which as we can all agree are not a major demographic. Never got more than 0,5% of the vote and got dissolved.
Logged
Battista Minola 1616
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,282
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -1.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: December 14, 2022, 09:21:32 AM »

Pueblo = left, gente = right (see also Uruguay’s Partido de la Gente, which has been sometimes amusingly translated as “Party of the Folk”). Got it.

This linguistic quirk (assuming it is not just a complete coincidence) makes me really curious, I would be very glad if kaoras or Lumine or another native Spanish speaker could tell us more on the usage and nuances of those words.

Well, "Pueblo" can literally mean "Town", but when used to refer to "the people" it carries a strong leftist connotation. It is also very old-fashioned, it was common usage in politics pre 1973 but nowadays is only regularly used by talkies and by PC and PS when they feel like being performative.

In current politics the most common and favored word is "Ciudadanía" ("Citizenry") which is used by all governments and political forces. It's a bland, innofensive word without the connotations of saying Pueblo.

Gente is a like a more common and less pretentious version of Ciudadanía. It doesn't really have a political connotation and is regularly used by all politicians (and when they feel like they have used Ciudadanía too many times) but it feels like more populist than Ciudadanía in a way is difficult to explain. If PDG wanted to be a serious centrist party a la Amarillos they would be called Partido de la Ciudadanía (Which is also the name of C's in Spain!) but they are all about populism and standing with the people, hence "gente"

In everyday usage, most people say gente, me included. Ciudadanía is a very uppity and official word and Pueblo feels almost explicitly political, though is sometimes used in Sports commentary or to talk about different countries ( El Pueblo peruano, argentino) or indigenous peoples (pueblo mapuche)

Thanks! This is unsurprisingly not too dissimilar from "popolo" and "gente" in Italian - the former doesn't have the additional meaning of town and just refers to people(s), but here too it generally carries a leftist tinge* if it refers to the mass of the people or a group of people, for which the latter is the standard word. On the other hand "cittadinanza" is not notable part of our politicianspeak and the idea of calling a party "partito della gente" seems completely far-fetched and kind of ridiculous.

*I suppose this is somewhat complicated by the fact that "popolare" has long been a favourite adjective of Christian democrats, which has an obvious equivalent in Spain (Partido Popular) but I'm not sure I've ever seen it in Latin America.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.06 seconds with 13 queries.