The Gap Between Kirchneristas and Anti-Kirchneristas

For almost two years opinion polls have indicated that Argentine President Cristina Fernández and her husband, former president Néstor Kirchner, are highly unpopular.

Most Argentines dislike the Kirchners, according to the polls.

The Kirchners dispute this notion, however, saying that their polls show the First Couple to be very popular. Last week Presidential Cabinet Chief Anibal Fernández was asked about the issue.

“Why is Kirchner so unloved?” journalist Marcelo Longobardi asked. “Relax, it’s not that way at all,” replied Fernández. “Kirchner is very loved, very popular.”

Repeating the argument often offered by the Kirchners themselves, Fernández said the government’s own opinion polls show Kirchner to be highly popular.

Unfortunately, the government doesn’t publish its polls, making it hard to distinguish between their survey results and those offered by private sector polling firms.

The most accurate pollster during last year’s mid-term congressional election was the consulting firm Poliarquía, which proved more reliable than anyone else in predicting Néstor Kirchner’s election performance.

It’s been a long time since Poliarquía has publicly released a new poll. But their most recent polls consistently put the Kichners’ approval rating down at around 20% to 30%, which is exceptionally low for any public leader.

It can be hard to find educated Argentines who support the Kirchners. This is not to say the Kirchners don’t have their backers. Clearly, they do, but as polls and personal experience indicate, their numbers seem slim.

Given that Argentina’s has registered historically impressive economic growth and political stability since 2003, when Kirchner took power, what explains the low ratings?

Some analysts point to the First Couple’s angry, combative, no-holds-barred style of politics, saying this rubs many voters the wrong way. Others point to inflation, noting that consumer prices have been surging since Cristina Fernández took office.

The Kirchners have long been exceptionally unpopular among upper income Argentines. But as it always does, inflation has been hitting lower income workers disproportionately hard, pushing them further into poverty. This partly explains why surveys have shown support for the Kirchners erode among lower income voters.

Apart from style and more substantive concerns about culture, the economy and politics, there is a fundamental paradigm, a way of viewing and critiquing the world, that separates those who support the Kirchners from those who don’t.

This has become increasingly clear in countless conversations and debates I’ve had – or witnessed – over the past year.

Thought admittedly a generalization which has its exceptions, here is what, in my view, differentiates the Kirchners’ supporters from their detractors:

Kirchneristas tend to compare the present with the past while anti-Kirchneristas tend to compare the present with what they think things could be like now or in the future.

The comparative measure for many Kirchneristas often seems to be Argentina’s unimpressive past. Compared with many previous governments and historical periods, the Kirchners have been doing a splendid job.

Unemployment is relatively low, the economy, with the exception of 2009, has been growing like gangbusters, the streets are relatively safe, the political system is stable, the currency is firm, banks are open, and so are plenty of new restaurants, bars and movie theaters. Retirees are earning more in social security benefits and more people are working in the formal, tax-paying economy than in decades. The educational and public health systems are free and provide universal access. El Secreto de Sus Ojos just won an Oscar. There is no hyperinflation, there is no dictatorship, there is no major, catastrophic political crisis. People aren’t living in fear, they’re going about their lives, trying to achieve their dreams. Argentina is maturing as a democracy and the Supreme Court is more independent and respected than ever.

In short, life is good.

This is the view of the typical Kirchner supporter.

That may be true, claim the critics, but things could be much better:

Crime is up, the streets aren’t really that safe, banks aren’t lending, housing prices are high and based in dollars, inflation is real and rising rapidly, poverty is up and has been rising every quarter since Cristina Fernández took office, Argentina is a diplomatic joke, the laughing stock of its neighbors (including allies like Brazil and Uruguay) and the world, the government is friendly with questionable regimes like those in Venezuela and Cuba while confrontational with developed countries like the U.S. and the U.K. The government lies about economic statistics like inflation, GDP and poverty, and it verbally and vulgarly attacks anyone who questions the wisdom of public policy. Those who seek to expand debate or criticize policies are labeled coup-mongers, traitors, oligarchs or imperialists. Government policy is unpredictable, stifles investment and isolates Argentina from the rest of the world. The government has at times banned top selling exports like beef and now wants to ban popular foreign foods and drink imports. What is this? Venezuela? Finally, a climate of hostility exists among Argentines, which the government tends to exacerbate by constantly arguing with critics and the media.

Life, in short, is not bad but it could be much better.

Interestingly, there is a lot of truth to both of these perspectives. Things are relatively good now. But they could be better.

At the same time, it’s fair to ask, “Is the country worse off in some ways than it was just two or three years ago?”

The answer, economists and sociologists say, is yes, largely because of how inflation has pushed hundreds of thousands of people into poverty. (The government denies this.) But is the country still better off now than it was 10 years ago?

Well, the answer to that question differs depending on whether you’re a fan of the Kirchners or not. To a Kirchnerista, the answer is usually an unequivocal yes. To a detractor, the answer is often an unequivocal no. The two sides almost seem to see the world through different colored lenses, with each believing it sees more clearly than the other.

So the next time you find yourself debating the merits of the Kirchners, try to find out of the person in favor of the Kirchners – or against them – is comparing the government’s accomplishments to the past or if they’re comparing them to what the country could or should be.

Popularity: 1% [?]