The China Mail - Milei suffers crushing Defeat

USD -
AED 3.672504
AFN 68.146381
ALL 82.605547
AMD 382.141183
ANG 1.790403
AOA 917.000367
ARS 1449.82499
AUD 1.515611
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.70397
BAM 1.666425
BBD 2.013633
BDT 121.671708
BGN 1.667518
BHD 0.376859
BIF 2983.683381
BMD 1
BND 1.28258
BOB 6.908363
BRL 5.346404
BSD 0.999787
BTN 88.189835
BWP 13.318281
BYN 3.386359
BYR 19600
BZD 2.010736
CAD 1.38535
CDF 2835.000362
CHF 0.79671
CLF 0.02434
CLP 951.160908
CNY 7.124704
CNH 7.12442
COP 3891.449751
CRC 503.642483
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 93.950496
CZK 20.726804
DJF 178.034337
DKK 6.36065
DOP 63.383462
DZD 129.343501
EGP 48.013462
ERN 15
ETB 143.551399
EUR 0.852104
FJD 2.238704
FKP 0.738285
GBP 0.737626
GEL 2.690391
GGP 0.738285
GHS 12.196992
GIP 0.738285
GMD 71.503851
GNF 8671.239296
GTQ 7.664977
GYD 209.16798
HKD 7.778205
HNL 26.193499
HRK 6.420404
HTG 130.822647
HUF 333.080388
IDR 16407.9
ILS 3.335965
IMP 0.738285
INR 88.27785
IQD 1309.76015
IRR 42075.000352
ISK 122.050386
JEP 0.738285
JMD 160.380011
JOD 0.70904
JPY 147.69404
KES 129.169684
KGS 87.450384
KHR 4007.157159
KMF 419.503794
KPW 899.952557
KRW 1393.030383
KWD 0.30537
KYD 0.833213
KZT 540.612619
LAK 21678.524262
LBP 89530.950454
LKR 301.657223
LRD 177.463469
LSL 17.351681
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 5.398543
MAD 9.003451
MDL 16.606314
MGA 4430.622417
MKD 52.434712
MMK 2099.430376
MNT 3599.247901
MOP 8.014485
MRU 39.911388
MUR 45.480378
MVR 15.310378
MWK 1733.566225
MXN 18.440104
MYR 4.205039
MZN 63.910377
NAD 17.351681
NGN 1502.303725
NIO 36.791207
NOK 9.860104
NPR 141.103395
NZD 1.678698
OMR 0.383334
PAB 0.999787
PEN 3.484259
PGK 4.237209
PHP 57.170375
PKR 283.854556
PLN 3.627061
PYG 7144.378648
QAR 3.649725
RON 4.317038
RSD 99.80829
RUB 83.75163
RWF 1448.728326
SAR 3.751509
SBD 8.206879
SCR 14.222298
SDG 601.503676
SEK 9.316804
SGD 1.284404
SHP 0.785843
SLE 23.375038
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 571.379883
SRD 39.375038
STD 20697.981008
STN 20.875048
SVC 8.747923
SYP 13001.524619
SZL 17.33481
THB 31.710369
TJS 9.408001
TMT 3.51
TND 2.910408
TOP 2.342104
TRY 41.326504
TTD 6.797597
TWD 30.299904
TZS 2459.506667
UAH 41.217314
UGX 3513.824394
UYU 40.04601
UZS 12444.936736
VES 158.73035
VND 26385
VUV 118.783744
WST 2.67732
XAF 558.903421
XAG 0.023708
XAU 0.000275
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.8019
XDR 0.695096
XOF 558.903421
XPF 101.614621
YER 239.550363
ZAR 17.38811
ZMK 9001.203584
ZMW 23.720019
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    77.27

    0%

  • NGG

    0.5300

    71.6

    +0.74%

  • GSK

    -0.6500

    40.83

    -1.59%

  • BTI

    -0.7200

    56.59

    -1.27%

  • RELX

    0.1700

    46.5

    +0.37%

  • VOD

    -0.0100

    11.85

    -0.08%

  • RYCEF

    0.1800

    15.37

    +1.17%

  • CMSC

    -0.0200

    24.36

    -0.08%

  • SCS

    -0.1900

    16.81

    -1.13%

  • AZN

    -1.5400

    79.56

    -1.94%

  • BCC

    -3.3300

    85.68

    -3.89%

  • CMSD

    0.0100

    24.4

    +0.04%

  • JRI

    0.1100

    14.23

    +0.77%

  • BCE

    -0.1400

    24.16

    -0.58%

  • BP

    -0.5800

    33.89

    -1.71%

  • RIO

    -0.1000

    62.44

    -0.16%


Milei suffers crushing Defeat




Argentina’s political earthquake arrived in its largest province. In Buenos Aires—home to roughly two out of every five Argentines and a third of national output—voters delivered a decisive rebuke to President Javier Milei’s libertarian experiment. The opposition’s double‑digit win there has redefined the battlefield ahead of the October 26 midterms and raised the most consequential question of Milei’s tenure: has the shock‑therapy project reached its political limits, or can it be reshaped to survive?

The weekend vote was more than a provincial skirmish. Buenos Aires Province is the bellwether of national mood, the place where governing coalitions are tested against kitchen‑table realities. Since taking office in December 2023, Milei has cut public spending, torn up regulations, and promised to “chainsaw” a bloated state. The promise was stabilization and a return to growth. The reality, for now, is disinflation alongside recessionary pain—and a public impatient with the trade‑offs.

The defeat capped a brutal week in Congress. Senators in a rare show of cross‑party force overturned the president’s veto of an emergency law for people with disabilities, the first time lawmakers have reversed a veto in his term. That vote exposed a governing weakness that polls had long foreshadowed: with only a small minority in the legislature, the administration needs allies to pass—or defend—its agenda. Without them, vetoes can be overridden and decrees can be struck down, turning executive maximalism into legislative stasis.

The economic fallout was immediate. Investors who had priced in a tighter race in Buenos Aires marked down Argentine assets: the peso slid, local stocks tumbled, and dollar bonds sank. Those moves do not merely reflect skittish traders; they speak to a deeper concern about policy durability. Stabilization plans succeed when markets, businesses, and households believe governments can stick with them through the next election. A double‑digit loss in the country’s biggest province—on the eve of national midterms—casts doubt on that belief.

Yet the macro scoreboard holds genuine wins. Monthly inflation, once galloping, is now down to the low single digits, with August clocking in at 1.9% and the annual rate falling to the mid‑30s—its lowest in years. That is not trivial in a country battered by recurring price spirals. But stabilization has not felt like relief. Unemployment climbed earlier this year, real wages are fragile, and public services—from universities to hospitals—have become flashpoints in street politics and Senate votes alike. In short, disinflation without growth has proved a hard sell.

Politically, the map is shifting. The Peronist opposition emerges emboldened and more unified in the province that most shapes national outcomes. Moderate center‑right blocs, kingmakers on pivotal bills, now see greater leverage in demanding changes to the government’s approach. Meanwhile, the administration is fending off an ethics storm tied to the disability agency that, regardless of legal outcomes, has further complicated coalition building. Governance in Argentina has always been a game of arithmetic; after Buenos Aires, the numbers look harsher for the Casa Rosada.

Milei’s response has been defiance and focus. He scrapped a high‑profile foreign trip and insisted the program will not retreat “one millimeter.” That message shores up his core base—and markets like clarity—but it also hardens the lines with potential legislative partners who bristle at being bulldozed. If the government wants to avoid paralysis, it faces a strategic choice: continue governing by confrontation, or translate a movement into a coalition that can last beyond a single news cycle.

What would a survivable version of the project look like? First, a pivot from chainsaw to scalpel: prioritize a handful of reforms with broad support (tax rationalization, simplification of import/export rules, and credible, rules‑based monetary policy) over sprawling omnibus fights that unify the opposition. Second, institutionalize the stabilization: codify fiscal rules, improve budget transparency, and pre‑agree social floors (for disability benefits, school meals, essential medicines) that take the sting out of austerity. Third, build a minimum viable coalition: offer procedural concessions in Congress and genuine co‑ownership of reforms to centrists who can deliver votes and legitimacy.

None of this is guaranteed. The midterms on October 26 could narrow or widen the path. A better‑than‑expected result for the ruling party would reduce veto risks and revive momentum; a worse‑than‑expected outcome would turn the next year into a trench war of vetoes, court challenges, and market flare‑ups. In either case, Argentina does not need to “fail again.” It needs a version of reform that is less theatrical and more durable—a politics that trades viral moments for legislative math.

The Buenos Aires result was a verdict on pace, priorities, and tone. It was not a binding judgment on whether Argentina must choose between stabilization and dignity. The question now is whether the president can adjust his method without abandoning his aim—turning a shock into a strategy, and a plurality into a governing majority. If he can, the project may yet outlast the week’s defeat. If he cannot, the defeat may define the project.