Let me just add a little to Tim's comments from last
Saturday about the FMLN and ARENA.
The second number was the 50.2% of Salvadorans polled who say they do not consider themselves a part of any political party. The FMLN was the strongest political party, but still only 27.2% of Salvadorans considered themselves part of the FMLN.
In the past, there was a tendency to portray El Salvador as sharply divided between left and right, between the FMLN and ARENA. In fact, most Salvadorans are in the middle. They are not attracted by the extremes of either party. And so they strongly approve of their president who is trying to govern from a position much more towards the center.
The FMLN and ARENA have been the two dominant political parties of the postwar period increasing their share of the first round vote in presidential elections from 74% in 1994 to 100% in 2009. We tend to focus on these electoral results when discussing El Salvador and neglect any remaining support for the other political alternatives.
However, what the LPG surveys show is that a little over 50% of the population do not identify with either the FMLN or the ARENA. Azpuru has a paper on "The Salience of Ideology: Fifteen Years of Presidential Elections in El Salvador" (
Gated) that attempts to traces the ideological orientation of Salvadorans over time which gives us some understanding of how Salvadorans see themselves.
According to Azpuru's analysis of 2008 data from
IUDOP and the
AmericasBarometer, Salvadorans are amongst the most ideologically extreme citizens of the Americas with large percentages identifying themselves as "Extreme Left" (19.9%) or "Extreme Right" (17%).
El Salvador has the highest percentage of Salvadorans who identify as extreme left (Nicaragua and Uruguay are tied for second with 15%). The country also ranks fifth in the percentage of people who identify as extreme right (Dominican Republic 29%, Costa Rica 21%, Nicaragua 20%, and Colombia 18%). That leaves 63% of the public that self-identify somewhere in the middle (center-left, center, center-right, and don't know or won't answer).
When looking at 2009 numbers, the percentage of Salvadorans who self- identified as "extreme left" increased to 26% while those who self-identified as "extreme right" remained steady at 17%. If you add the 26% of the population that identified themselves as extreme left to the 13% who self-identified as "center-left," that brings you to just under 40% of the population in the center or center-right.
The increase in the percentage of Salvadorans who identified themselves as "extreme left" or "center-left" in both 2008 and 2009 helped Funes win the presidency. However, even with the sharp increase, Funes and the FMLN still needed votes to capture votes from the "center" and/or the "center-right" to win which is what they did. It's also the same thing that ARENA did (capturing the center) on its way to victory in 1994, 1999, and 2004.
Of those voters who identified themselves in the center in 2009, 68% of them voted for Funes. In previous elections, the FMLN won much smaller percentages of the center vote - 17% (1994, 24% (1999) and (41%) 2004.
While it is pretty clear that the centrist vote was imporant to Funes' victory, it's unclear, to me at least, why these centrists voted for the FMLN and whether they will vote for the FMLN in 2014.
- Did they vote FMLN because they now lean FMLN rather than ARENA?
- Did they vote FMLN because of Funes and in spite of his party?
- Did they vote FMLN because, unlike in previous elections, neither the PCN, the PDC, nor the CD presented candidates?
Scenario 1 would be good for the FMLN while scenarios 2 and 3 are more uncertain. We don't know who the FMLN is going to support and we don't know what the role of small parties will be. The answer to these questions are obviously going to be important for the FMLN in 2014.