An excellent external rebuttal to RW "Spain caves in" horse sh*t

From the Toronto Globe and Mail

Edit
A victory for democracy. This must be seen in the context of the defeat for democracy embodied in Spain's entry into the Iraq war. Ninety per cent had opposed it, but their elected leaders ignored them. Ninety per cent is close to unanimity. You get a few per cent saying yes to anything. The Spanish people had survived 40 years of fascist dictatorship (I'm not name-calling; it was literally fascist) followed by an attempted coup, and established a healthy democracy. Think how humiliating it was to have their clear will disregarded.
Edit

<http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040319/COSALU19/TPColumnists/>

Edit added

Wasn't Aznar's party predicted to win before 3/11? How does this jibe with the fact that 90% opposed the war? I'm not a troll. I just don't understand. Someone 'splain it to me.

Its true that Aznar's party led in the polls by 5 or 6% prior to the terrorist attack despite its unpopular position on the Iraq war. The Spanish people were satisfied the conservative's handling of the economy whereas the leaders put forward by the Socialists were not very compelling. However, the people were outraged by the way conservatives responded to the attacks. They immediately blamed ETA and witheld information from the people that pointed to Al Qaeda.

The Spanish people's response was clearly a statement against the way the conservative party handled the situation by deceiving the people. Voter turnout surged and the anti-war candidate was the beneficiary.

You're correct, prior to the attacks on 3/11, Aznar's PP stood about 5% ahead of PSOE throughout various polls.

Then, the attacks of 3/11 happened (that was on a Thursday morning, at about 7:30am Madrid time).

Then, Aznar's government went into hyperspin mode, immediately stubbornly and furiously pinning blame on ETA which “almost certainly” did it - in spite of evidence that emerged within hours of the attack, clearly pointing in the direction of an Al Q'aida type group.

Press conferences, press releases, Aznar personally calling a dozen or so editors-in-chief, Foreign Minister Ana Palacio sending cables to foreign Ambassadors, UN Security Council pressured (with help from Washington) to adopt a condemnation resolution specific to ETA, felloow (friendly) law enforcement bodies getting misleading info... All to pin blame the attacks on ETA.

Meanwhile, news of the tape with Koran verses found in a van used by the suspects came out, pointing more toward Al Q'aida. Then, on Saturday afternoon -- the day before the election, which by law is campaign free, the so-called "day of reflection" -- news broke of the arrest of 5 people, including 3 Moroccan citizens. Still, Government insisted that "with 99% certainty" ETA was behind it.

Then, within PSOE people got fed up - they were kept informed of progress made in the investigation, practically from the beginning, and therefore knew that at the very least Al Q'aida was a very likely suspect. That Saturday afternoon, they released a press statement, essentially accusing government of spinning the investigation of the attacks - clearly for electoral reasons.

The the shit hit the fan.

Someone in Madrid sent out a text message to a dozen of his friends through his cell phone, calling them to appear in front of the HQ of PP and protest against the misleading information, just before the elections.

Two hours later, at 6pm, thousands ofpeople -- contacted via cell phone text messages and e-mail -- stood protesting on Genova street, in front of PP headquarters, banging pots and pans, and demanding the truth. The protests spread out like wildfire, almost instantaneously to other cities as well, all demanding truthful reports on progress of the investigation - hours before the elections.

These protests became a widely publicised row, as PP claimed those protests were "orchestrated" (pointing angry fingers at PSOE, which had nothing to do with it) and "demanded" that the protests be declared illegal by the Spanish FEC equivalent so that police could disperse them.

But by the time the protests were declared illegal, the damage was done already: news had spread throughout Spain, virtually by word of mouth and flash news reports, of the accusation that Aznar's government engaged in manipulating information on the attacks.

That caused a wave of anger at electoral games played over the victims of the attacks; this anger was a factor for people who on the last moment decided to switch their vote to PSOE.

However, there's a second factor: the attacks were widely felt as an attack on Spanish democracy - that's a major reason why 11.4 million Spaniards took to the streets on Friday, according to police accounts; on election day, this boosted turnout up to 77% of eligible voters.

Of those "new" / "extra" voters, the majority were young people. In Spain, as in most of Europe, they tend to vote leftist.

So there: a surge in voter turnout that benefited PSOE, and a backlash of people angry at the government switching to the main opposition party (PSOE) is what gave PSOE 2 million more votes, putting them 1 million ahead of PP.

And of the "switching" voters, many came from IU (United Left, former communists + smaller "green" parties) opting instead for PSOE considered as a more "viable" option, so as accumulate a "strong" leftist party. In US political vernacular, they switched to (what they considered) the ham sandwich - a Spanish ABB (ABA in this case)

This combined is what swung a relatively stable advantage (throughout weeks prior to elections) of 5% for PP into a defeat.

how about the fact that Bush gave in to Al Qaeda's top demand by withdrawing all of our troops from Saudi Arabia last April?