The date of the second round and confusion about Peru is enormous. The political class is added to one or another candidate, supports, denies, denies. Intellectuals do the same. It aims to be cautious, objective, impartial, but we can not deny that any view is immediately smeared by the distortions of feverish already seen Halley's Comet to fall on Peru. It costs a lot on them. Even looking at the distance makes you suspect. They are also, of course, from the beginning have had things very clear and look like good alternatives either Humala or Keiko Fujimori. For these people, everything that is said in the press, radio, blogs, etc. not going to change opinion. It seems that all we assume we own the truth, to the point that no one believes anyone, only yourself. We have never felt so alone.
are also those who vote for reasons that take practice. For one side are those who say that if Ollanta wins, foreign investment will go elsewhere and they will lose their jobs. Keiko, then, despite the corruption that bears the aura, becomes your best option. This means that a large number of Peruvians who live with corruption without much resentment. This is not surprising, since corruption was the air you just breathed in Fujimorato and has not vanished altogether.
are the followers of Humala. That is to mask Chavez or Lula, I do not care. They see it as a leader, a true leader of Peru: with an iron hand, threatening, willing to put in line to be diverted. And then there are those who look a little closer to them, more earthly, that despite their mistakes represents.
At this point, I must say I will not vote for Keiko Fujimori. Perhaps with it the economy does not alter its course, perhaps yes, but what is clear is that I is highly likely to return to the degrading situation of living in a country that was no man's land in the nineties. With Humala, by contrast, although doubts are many, I hope it can be controlled, we do enforce the laws that misled the country. And I think a good measure would be from and control their environment, their advisors and to support the judiciary to fulfill its functions at the first sign of authoritarianism.
not pretend to convince anyone, because they speak only to convince others.
