Explaining the credibility gap in Mexico’s 2006 presidential election, despite strong (albeit perfectable) electoral institutions

While none of the vote-annulling claims made by Mexico presidential election loser Andrés Manuel López Obrador were backed by reliable evidence, the disgruntled candidate and social movement leader did, at least temporarily, raise questions about the election’s credibility. This article claims that while part of the explanation lies in López Obrador’s ability to frame the election within Mexico’s now-defunct tradition of fraudulent elections, we also argue that obstacles to full electoral transparency in Mexico do remain, and of a sufficient magnitude to justify further electoral reforms. Issues in the aftermath of the election, especially those related to the levelness of the electoral and pre-electoral “playing field” warrant further consideration. Not addressing lacunas in campaign laws may lead to future attempts to invalidate elections on similar grounds.