Yeas, that is the salient question: Did the terrorist bombings in Madrid change the outcome of Spain's election?
The inference is clear, and the criticisms of Spain have come directly from this assumption.
What evidence is there that the election results turned? Let me break it down:
The evidence for this opinion is a set of Poll results released by the PP less than 2 weeks before the actual election, which had them (the PP) leading by 6-7 points.
The problem is those poll results were doctored. They were results from a survey done in late January. The results were misrepresented. Rural counties were focused on--and not large population centers, such as Madrid.
The bottom line is those numbers are questionable at best-- primarily designed to make it look good for the PP 2 weeks before the election--The numbers quoted were from 2 months before and that was not disclosed, neither was the bias of the poll.
Dirty tricks, no surprise here. This is politics. but,...
The PP's own polls which were taken one week (not the phoney ones 2 months ago) before the election showed that they had dropped 5 points in the last 2 weeks previous to the poll. Bringing the difference to a virtual dead heat with margin of error. The PP was looking down the wrong end of the trend, and they were justifiably worried.
At this point (1 week before) the projected outcome for the PP, according to their own numbers had them at 39.8 % of the vote. This number was questioned and questionable, independent polls had the PSOE ahead by this time.
The actual results of the election had the PP at 37.6 %, the PSOE (Partido Socialista Obrero Espanol) at 42.6 %, and the next highest the IU (Izquerda Unidad--leftist) 5%
My Analysis: Can you come to a logical conclusion that its possible/probable the PSOE would have carried a majority of the votes even without a terrorist attack?
Yes, as late as one week before the election (Before the train bombings!) the election was statistically a tie.
Even more telling is the trend. The PP was falling, and the PSOE was moving ahead by that last week, even before the bombings. In my opinion the PP had real numbers that showed yhem behind--thats why they published the phoney numbers, as a last ditch effort to stop the bleeding.
Add to that, how the PP tried to manipulate the bombings as an ETA attack, 3 (three) day before the election. This is revealing to me. If they were ahead in the polls the best strategy would have been to be neutral, or say nothing, yet the PP felt the need to garner more votes.
The reality is that it was too close to call --Before the bombings-- with the trend going to the socialists.
Now some may say you can lie with statistics, but that is the only evidence to support the opposite position. Poll numbers, and doctored, manipulated ones to boot.
So, where is the controversy?
Many news stories after the elections repeated the quote of the PP being 5 points ahead the day before elections. The headlines were all something akin to "Socialist party wins in huge upset" "Terrorist win"
It makes a compelling story, and it serves some vested interests, I have no doubts.
Huge upset? Terrorism changed the results of the election?
The numbers don't support either position.
Where do these 5 points come from? I do not know? I haven't been able to track down the source. It is curious since Spanish law does not allow any further polling 1 week before elections--and also, because of the train bombings 3 days before the elections all campaigning after that was discontinued. So this is puzzling to me.
It makes a compelling story, but one has to wonder who put this out???
If you cut through the hype and the spin--you come to the conclusion that a win by the PP would have been the true upset (mild, but an upset, nevertheless)--not the other way around.
Facebook
Twitter