Fidel Castro, Bolivian President
In Bolivia, Castro obtains the first place with 21% of the preference. This is the same preference that allowed Sanchez de Lozada to win the presidency in 2002. The runner-up is Hugo Chavez, with 19%. Thus, the Castro-Chavez axis gains a 40% voter preference.
The article ventures two explanations for the support to Castro. First, positive association with Che Guevara. Second, Castro's defiance to the US. While the first seems weak, the second explanation, combined with the inflammatory rhetoric that has been Morales' trademark for the last few years, may be more accurate. According to Morales, the "neo-liberal" system is the culprit for all of the world woes, so it is not impossible to picture people yearning for radical change.
The article explains the support to Chavez with his anti-neo-liberal position. Morales' influence is also notorious here.
Another possible reason why these two leaders would be the most voted may be their media exposure. Fidel Castro has been the cuban dictator for eons and is well known in all the region. In the case of Chavez, he has appeared often in the press for the last 8 years. Both leaders have also visited Bolivia and staged popular appearances. So, some respondents may have chosen these options just because they did not know the rest.
However, instead of looking for explanations, let's take a look to two important implications. A first implication is the election of two leaders openly opposed to democracy, human rights and economic development. Bolivian political system has been severely weakened in the past few years and the last thing we need is supporting authoritarian practices. Also, being the poorest country in the region, we don't need anachronistic ideologies to bring us back to the 1800s.
A second implication is how this translates into Bolivian politics. Support for either Castro or Chavez tranlates into support for Morales. Morales is already first in voter preference surveys. This means either one of two things: First, he wins the elections, but is not elected president in the congress, in which case he will take the street and paralyze Bolivia ance again (if he were to lose the elections, he will also be quick to yell "fraud" and take the streets). Second, he wins the elections and becomes president, in which case he won't leave power for generations (remember: one of the main points of his government programme is drafting a new constitution), will make coca legal, effectively turning Bolivia into a pariah narco-state and destabilize the region.
So, it seems that the wishes of those who want bakcwardness are about to be granted.