The China Mail - Milei suffers crushing Defeat

USD -
AED 3.672499
AFN 63.50349
ALL 81.288822
AMD 376.301041
ANG 1.789731
AOA 916.999881
ARS 1396.457299
AUD 1.412459
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.698816
BAM 1.648308
BBD 2.013148
BDT 122.236737
BGN 1.647646
BHD 0.376821
BIF 2948.551009
BMD 1
BND 1.263342
BOB 6.906578
BRL 5.225205
BSD 0.999486
BTN 90.53053
BWP 13.182358
BYN 2.864548
BYR 19600
BZD 2.010198
CAD 1.361525
CDF 2254.999705
CHF 0.76852
CLF 0.021845
CLP 862.579708
CNY 6.90865
CNH 6.892545
COP 3662.29826
CRC 484.785146
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 92.92908
CZK 20.44945
DJF 177.984172
DKK 6.296735
DOP 62.26691
DZD 129.063197
EGP 46.643602
ERN 15
ETB 155.660701
EUR 0.84288
FJD 2.19355
FKP 0.732487
GBP 0.73324
GEL 2.675013
GGP 0.732487
GHS 10.999115
GIP 0.732487
GMD 73.503759
GNF 8772.528644
GTQ 7.665922
GYD 209.102018
HKD 7.814698
HNL 26.408654
HRK 6.351399
HTG 131.053315
HUF 319.344052
IDR 16830
ILS 3.09073
IMP 0.732487
INR 90.65305
IQD 1309.386352
IRR 42125.000158
ISK 122.230347
JEP 0.732487
JMD 156.425805
JOD 0.708994
JPY 153.0855
KES 128.879905
KGS 87.450315
KHR 4020.092032
KMF 414.999926
KPW 900.035341
KRW 1442.914976
KWD 0.30661
KYD 0.832947
KZT 494.618672
LAK 21449.461024
LBP 89505.356044
LKR 309.057656
LRD 186.346972
LSL 16.041753
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.301675
MAD 9.139185
MDL 16.971623
MGA 4372.487379
MKD 51.950241
MMK 2099.386751
MNT 3566.581342
MOP 8.049153
MRU 39.835483
MUR 45.903383
MVR 15.405015
MWK 1733.150163
MXN 17.168203
MYR 3.897992
MZN 63.910017
NAD 16.041753
NGN 1353.450014
NIO 36.779052
NOK 9.50245
NPR 144.854004
NZD 1.658525
OMR 0.382786
PAB 0.999536
PEN 3.353336
PGK 4.290645
PHP 57.949981
PKR 279.547412
PLN 3.548825
PYG 6555.415086
QAR 3.642577
RON 4.282501
RSD 98.962503
RUB 77.230393
RWF 1459.237596
SAR 3.750102
SBD 8.045182
SCR 13.539914
SDG 601.498647
SEK 8.92804
SGD 1.262309
SHP 0.750259
SLE 24.449772
SLL 20969.49935
SOS 570.751914
SRD 37.753973
STD 20697.981008
STN 20.648358
SVC 8.745818
SYP 11059.574895
SZL 16.038634
THB 31.024499
TJS 9.429944
TMT 3.5
TND 2.881716
TOP 2.40776
TRY 43.718801
TTD 6.784604
TWD 31.345004
TZS 2604.330122
UAH 43.104989
UGX 3537.988285
UYU 38.531878
UZS 12284.028656
VES 392.73007
VND 25970
VUV 119.056861
WST 2.712216
XAF 552.845741
XAG 0.013254
XAU 0.0002
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.801333
XDR 0.687563
XOF 552.845741
XPF 100.512423
YER 238.349858
ZAR 15.935705
ZMK 9001.202915
ZMW 18.166035
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    0.1000

    82.5

    +0.12%

  • CMSD

    0.0647

    23.64

    +0.27%

  • BCC

    -1.5600

    86.5

    -1.8%

  • JRI

    0.2135

    13.24

    +1.61%

  • BCE

    -0.1200

    25.71

    -0.47%

  • GSK

    0.3900

    58.93

    +0.66%

  • CMSC

    0.0500

    23.75

    +0.21%

  • BTI

    -1.1100

    59.5

    -1.87%

  • RELX

    2.2500

    31.06

    +7.24%

  • RIO

    0.1600

    98.07

    +0.16%

  • NGG

    1.1800

    92.4

    +1.28%

  • AZN

    1.0300

    205.55

    +0.5%

  • VOD

    -0.0500

    15.57

    -0.32%

  • RYCEF

    0.2300

    17.1

    +1.35%

  • BP

    0.4700

    37.66

    +1.25%


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.