VZCZCXRO8345
RR RUEHCD RUEHGD RUEHHO RUEHMC RUEHNG RUEHNL RUEHRD RUEHRS RUEHTM
DE RUEHME #3035 1561919
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 051919Z JUN 06
FM AMEMBASSY MEXICO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1392
INFO RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS 1182
RUEHXC/ALL US CONSULATES IN MEXICO

UNCLAS MEXICO 003035 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
EO 12598:NA 
TAGS: PGOV MX
SUBJECT:  POLLSTERS SEE PRESIDENTIAL RACE AT "CRITICAL" 
POINT 
 
REF: Mexico 1002 
 
¶1. (SBU)  Summary:  The Ambassador again convened four 
pollsters (reftel) who concurred that Democratic Revolution 
(PRD) candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) and 
National Action Party (PAN) candidate Felipe Calderon were 
virtually tied, making this a critical moment for the 
campaign.   While it might be hard to "win" next week's 
debate, all agreed that a serious error by either leading 
contender could be maximized by his opponent.  They also 
anticipated that additional "scandals" might come out in the 
course of the month.  Absent any new political events, the 
final month of the campaign would depend on strategies and 
media "spots."  Three out of four pollsters present, when 
pressed, gave the margin to AMLO on election day if the two 
candidates are still in a virtual tie by then.  End Summary. 
 
Discounting the Institutional Revolution Party (PRI) 
 
¶2. (SBU)  The Ambassador, accompanied by POL and PAS, met 
for the second time 6/1 with leading pollsters Rafael 
Jimenez (ARCOP for the PAN), Ana Cristina Covarrubias (Pulso 
for the PRD), Francisco Abundis (Parametria and Channel 40 
commentator) and Roy Campos (Consulta Mitofsky and Televisa 
pollster).  During the usual lively discussion certain 
points of agreement emerged: 
 
-- the four agreed the two leading candidates, AMLO and 
Calderon, were virtually tied. 
 
-- the four agreed that the PRI no longer figured 
realistically in the presidential race, although it would 
still remain important in congressional and local races. 
 
-- the four agreed that next week's debate importance would 
be determined by how the campaigns used it in follow-on 
strategies.  For example, the PAN had effectively promoted 
the perception that Calderon had "won" the April debate in 
follow-on ads, while at the same time the PRI had stressed 
AMLO's failure to participate.  Both messages resonated with 
the public primarily because of the PRI and PAN follow-on 
ads, according to the pollsters.  While it was probable no 
one would "win" the debate outright, it was very possible 
someone would make a mistake that the others would magnify 
in subsequent "spots." 
 
Factors That Could Affect the Polls 
 
¶3.  (SBU)  Rafael Jimenez said this was a "critical" point 
for the election because of the technical tie between the 
candidates.  It would come down to who had the most 
effective campaign strategy -- and who could turn out the 
vote.  Abundis suggested, and the others agreed, that 
outside of the debate, June would likely also bring out 
whatever videoscandals or other derogatory surprises the 
campaigns could uncover.  Finally, there was inconclusive 
discussion of the impact the World Cup would have on the 
candidates and voter turnout.   Mitofsky and Jimenez 
suggested the PAN would benefit if the Mexico team did 
unexpectedly well.  All agreed that a peripheral benefit of 
the increased television viewing during the games was that 
more people would see the campaign ads.  There was no 
consensus on whether or how the World Cup might affect voter 
turn-out, which those present estimated would be 50-60 
percent. 
 
AMLO Has the Edge 
 
¶4.  (SBU)  When pressed, the four pollsters gave highly- 
caveated guesses regarding the final outcome.  Three of the 
four suggested that if Calderon and AMLO were neck-and-neck 
going into election day, probably AMLO would have the edge. 
Reasons ranged from the fervor of his support to his 
qualities as a candidate to a sense that change was needed. 
Not surprisingly, PAN pollster Jimenez came out firmly for 
Calderon. 
 
Garza