Jules, this is hardly worth my time.  Ask any social scientist anywhere and he or she will tell you that the poor suffer more from systematic electoral exclusion than the non-poor, for obvious reasons.  They suffer more systematic roadblocks to registration (for reasons of illiteracy, itinerant status, etc. etc.).  In developing countries (yes, Jules, Mexico is a developing country, in case you've lost sight of that), the poor's means of transportation are also more limited. One could go on and on about the systematic roadblocks to voting for the poor.  These are some of the major reasons why the poor vote less frequently than the non-poor in most countries throughout the world.  Mexico is no exception, Jules.  And just in case you've forgotten, the poor still constitute half the country in which you reside.

It is, again, utterly absurd to compare the systematic electoral exclusion of thousands upon thousands of poor migrants (both inside and outside Mexico) to the minor inconvenience of not being able to vacation on election day.  There is nothing "systematic" about vacationing, Jules.  A vacationer has the choice of whether or not to vacation on election day.  The Mexican corn farmer who was SYSTEMATICALLY uprooted from his or her community as a result of subsidized imports of U.S. agribusiness didn't "choose" to become a migrant, Jules.  That choice was foisted upon him or her by necessities of the stomach.

I must say, with all seriousness, Jules, that the absurdity of your comparisons demonstrates an astounding insensitivity to the realities of poverty.  I'm not just saying this for rhetorical purposes.  To be honest, I find your insensitivity to the realities of poverty to be utterly appalling (especially in a venue like Narco News).

I think you underestimate the mobility of the middle- and upper-middle classes, especially during the summer. Since I believe that they were most likely to be registered voters, they would be a significant number of those who were deprived of the right to vote. How many poor, itinerant workers are registered, do you think?

Jules, try developing some serious social analysis.  The fact that the itinerant is less likely to be registered is precisely the point.  It's been the point of this entire discussion.  The poor often can't even exercise the right to vote due to social circumstances largely beyond their control.  Such is not the case for someone who chooses to vacation in Cancún on election day.

Personally, I don't give a shit what your supposed progressive credentials are or whether you see yourself as standing up to Bush's supposedly impending "gunboat diplomacy intervention" in Mexico.  You really should stop and reflect about the deeply retrograde nature of your arguments lately, which reflect a thorough-going internalization of the values of those same reactionary political elements that you claim to despise.