You go, Amlo!

Mexican presidential candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador is pushing for a recount in the election that may have been stolen from him, and Ginger Thompson, or her editor at the NY Times, waits until the very end of the story to get to the point:

“They have a real case,” said John M. Ackerman, an expert on electoral law at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. [He] argued that a recount would strengthen democracy by removing public doubt about the transparency of the process. He said he believed that Mr. López Obrador had shown enough evidence to raise the tribunal’s attention.

Further up the page:

Election authorities announced last week that Mr. Calderón, a former energy minister, had defeated Mr. López Obrador by a slim margin of 243,000 votes out of 41 million cast. Those results have not been ratified by the Federal Electoral Tribunal, which has until Aug. 31 to rule on whether it will grant Mr. López Obrador’s request for a recount. Until it does, Mexico remains without a settled heir to the presidency.

That last bit allows the reader to sense Ms. Thompson's lower lip beginning to tremble with concern, echoing her earlier plaint that Lopez Obrador's screening of videos showing election fraud "added to Mexico’s strong sense of political uncertainty."

There, there, darlin'; unclench. As it happens, Mexico has -- by design and as a matter of completely normal routine -- a very long period between elections and certification, and between certification and the actual transfer of power. Nice try at getting the readers all verklempt, but we're not buying. Nope, we're sitting back in the chaise, sipping a cool one, and looking forward to the recount.