The China Mail - Milei suffers crushing Defeat

USD -
AED 3.6725
AFN 66.106128
ALL 82.462283
AMD 381.646874
ANG 1.790403
AOA 916.999648
ARS 1451.493897
AUD 1.49923
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.70432
BAM 1.666106
BBD 2.015555
BDT 122.381003
BGN 1.666697
BHD 0.376969
BIF 2960.464106
BMD 1
BND 1.286514
BOB 6.930128
BRL 5.515496
BSD 1.000707
BTN 90.075562
BWP 13.139445
BYN 2.939776
BYR 19600
BZD 2.012659
CAD 1.372555
CDF 2164.999788
CHF 0.793565
CLF 0.022945
CLP 900.139714
CNY 6.996398
CNH 6.978495
COP 3769.96
CRC 497.073782
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 93.933689
CZK 20.586899
DJF 177.719997
DKK 6.36617
DOP 63.090461
DZD 129.565162
EGP 47.707799
ERN 15
ETB 155.306806
EUR 0.85232
FJD 2.273296
FKP 0.741981
GBP 0.74363
GEL 2.694993
GGP 0.741981
GHS 10.508067
GIP 0.741981
GMD 73.999908
GNF 8754.802491
GTQ 7.675532
GYD 209.36909
HKD 7.78393
HNL 26.382819
HRK 6.420498
HTG 130.968506
HUF 327.71975
IDR 16694
ILS 3.186885
IMP 0.741981
INR 89.986903
IQD 1310.962883
IRR 42125.000093
ISK 125.470246
JEP 0.741981
JMD 159.029535
JOD 0.709024
JPY 156.876023
KES 129.089896
KGS 87.443498
KHR 4009.813693
KMF 419.99986
KPW 900.043914
KRW 1444.640112
KWD 0.30769
KYD 0.833994
KZT 507.398605
LAK 21633.571009
LBP 89616.523195
LKR 309.880992
LRD 178.128754
LSL 16.565363
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 5.41968
MAD 9.125364
MDL 16.842652
MGA 4593.353608
MKD 52.457549
MMK 2099.836459
MNT 3559.101845
MOP 8.023887
MRU 39.738642
MUR 46.250079
MVR 15.449811
MWK 1735.285849
MXN 18.022855
MYR 4.057984
MZN 63.910224
NAD 16.565293
NGN 1445.369391
NIO 36.826906
NOK 10.08779
NPR 144.120729
NZD 1.738325
OMR 0.384498
PAB 1.000716
PEN 3.366031
PGK 4.262823
PHP 58.878499
PKR 280.231968
PLN 3.596299
PYG 6569.722371
QAR 3.640127
RON 4.340801
RSD 99.959849
RUB 79.099677
RWF 1458.083093
SAR 3.750501
SBD 8.136831
SCR 13.817056
SDG 601.504632
SEK 9.22704
SGD 1.28666
SHP 0.750259
SLE 24.04992
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 570.932045
SRD 38.126499
STD 20697.981008
STN 20.871136
SVC 8.756506
SYP 11059.149576
SZL 16.560607
THB 31.48804
TJS 9.241824
TMT 3.51
TND 2.91815
TOP 2.40776
TRY 42.955703
TTD 6.802286
TWD 31.384502
TZS 2470.315994
UAH 42.338589
UGX 3623.089636
UYU 39.186789
UZS 12013.255301
VES 297.770445
VND 26300
VUV 120.744286
WST 2.776281
XAF 558.798674
XAG 0.014031
XAU 0.000231
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.803607
XDR 0.694966
XOF 558.798674
XPF 101.595577
YER 238.450275
ZAR 16.57019
ZMK 9001.197117
ZMW 22.191554
ZWL 321.999592
  • SCS

    0.0200

    16.14

    +0.12%

  • RYCEF

    0.1300

    15.58

    +0.83%

  • AZN

    -0.3820

    92.128

    -0.41%

  • NGG

    -0.3400

    77.43

    -0.44%

  • GSK

    -0.2150

    49.085

    -0.44%

  • CMSC

    -0.0199

    22.6635

    -0.09%

  • RIO

    -0.2900

    80.23

    -0.36%

  • BTI

    0.1000

    56.65

    +0.18%

  • RBGPF

    0.3400

    81.05

    +0.42%

  • VOD

    -0.0100

    13.22

    -0.08%

  • BCC

    0.1600

    73.95

    +0.22%

  • CMSD

    -0.0400

    23.09

    -0.17%

  • BCE

    0.2250

    23.795

    +0.95%

  • RELX

    -0.4100

    40.7

    -1.01%

  • JRI

    0.0450

    13.625

    +0.33%

  • BP

    -0.0450

    34.705

    -0.13%


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.