The China Mail - Milei suffers crushing Defeat

USD -
AED 3.672497
AFN 66.191377
ALL 82.409158
AMD 382.364716
ANG 1.790403
AOA 916.999862
ARS 1451.506198
AUD 1.49525
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.703383
BAM 1.665914
BBD 2.01862
BDT 122.588394
BGN 1.66625
BHD 0.377016
BIF 2964.783244
BMD 1
BND 1.285929
BOB 6.950537
BRL 5.494202
BSD 1.002283
BTN 90.035945
BWP 13.176948
BYN 2.893477
BYR 19600
BZD 2.015724
CAD 1.370035
CDF 2165.000046
CHF 0.79243
CLF 0.022955
CLP 900.500141
CNY 6.996399
CNH 6.97764
COP 3763.9
CRC 497.606514
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 93.921687
CZK 20.59865
DJF 178.480775
DKK 6.35704
DOP 62.97167
DZD 129.572322
EGP 47.662699
ERN 15
ETB 155.747822
EUR 0.85116
FJD 2.273301
FKP 0.741981
GBP 0.743625
GEL 2.694971
GGP 0.741981
GHS 10.52376
GIP 0.741981
GMD 73.999778
GNF 8762.276301
GTQ 7.682217
GYD 209.69157
HKD 7.784455
HNL 26.423114
HRK 6.414597
HTG 131.173792
HUF 327.450499
IDR 16713
ILS 3.186799
IMP 0.741981
INR 89.867965
IQD 1313.021184
IRR 42125.000022
ISK 125.290498
JEP 0.741981
JMD 160.866769
JOD 0.708996
JPY 156.601021
KES 129.000046
KGS 87.417704
KHR 4016.132673
KMF 420.000148
KPW 900.043914
KRW 1444.380263
KWD 0.30753
KYD 0.835257
KZT 503.189922
LAK 21666.581489
LBP 89765.84726
LKR 310.693174
LRD 177.901569
LSL 16.67544
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 5.418988
MAD 9.124028
MDL 16.822541
MGA 4580.841894
MKD 52.399683
MMK 2099.836459
MNT 3559.101845
MOP 8.035536
MRU 39.932028
MUR 46.250192
MVR 15.450259
MWK 1737.960171
MXN 17.96393
MYR 4.058037
MZN 63.910138
NAD 16.675582
NGN 1448.290373
NIO 36.882296
NOK 10.059301
NPR 144.058398
NZD 1.732395
OMR 0.384518
PAB 1.002291
PEN 3.374247
PGK 4.269093
PHP 58.932035
PKR 280.708421
PLN 3.59082
PYG 6579.956048
QAR 3.663938
RON 4.337802
RSD 99.823995
RUB 81.750344
RWF 1460.287986
SAR 3.750298
SBD 8.136831
SCR 13.813735
SDG 601.471583
SEK 9.194009
SGD 1.285321
SHP 0.750259
SLE 24.049785
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 571.798486
SRD 38.126497
STD 20697.981008
STN 20.868469
SVC 8.769942
SYP 11059.149576
SZL 16.670074
THB 31.632504
TJS 9.255969
TMT 3.51
TND 2.91437
TOP 2.40776
TRY 42.964602
TTD 6.806586
TWD 31.336504
TZS 2470.316002
UAH 42.512564
UGX 3628.589194
UYU 39.241574
UZS 12052.708239
VES 297.770445
VND 26300
VUV 120.744286
WST 2.776281
XAF 558.729658
XAG 0.013944
XAU 0.000232
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.806373
XDR 0.694877
XOF 558.727279
XPF 101.583462
YER 238.449909
ZAR 16.538603
ZMK 9001.220636
ZMW 22.2756
ZWL 321.999592
  • SCS

    0.0200

    16.14

    +0.12%

  • RYCEF

    -0.0700

    15.49

    -0.45%

  • BCC

    -0.7400

    73.79

    -1%

  • NGG

    0.3200

    77.77

    +0.41%

  • CMSC

    -0.0190

    23.051

    -0.08%

  • CMSD

    0.0300

    23.13

    +0.13%

  • RIO

    0.1200

    80.52

    +0.15%

  • RELX

    -0.2700

    41.11

    -0.66%

  • RBGPF

    0.3400

    81.05

    +0.42%

  • GSK

    0.1900

    49.3

    +0.39%

  • BCE

    0.1900

    23.57

    +0.81%

  • JRI

    0.1000

    13.58

    +0.74%

  • BTI

    0.2791

    56.55

    +0.49%

  • BP

    0.3000

    34.75

    +0.86%

  • AZN

    -0.0100

    92.51

    -0.01%

  • VOD

    0.0800

    13.23

    +0.6%


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.