An electoral script that could be rewritten
President Claudia Sheinbaum has just dropped a bombshell in the middle of her tour of Colima. His government is seriously considering postponing one of the most anticipated acts of the national political drama: the second stage of the election of the Judiciary and the consultation to revoke the mandate.
The postponement, from 2027 to 2028, is on the table. The reason? Avoid logistical chaos and, paradoxically, save resources.
“We are analyzing, it has its pros and cons,” Sheinbaum admitted with that calm that always precedes a strategic move.
The dilemma behind the curtain
The initial logic was clear: bring all the elections together in 2027 to use the same infrastructure and personnel. Just one great show. But recent experience showed them a different reality.
It could require different polling stations, more hiring and, in the end, complicate the life of the voter with a pile of ballots. Imagine: in some states mayors, local and federal deputies, governors… and judges would be elected.
“So, that’s why we’re analyzing… maybe it’s worth moving it to 28,” he commented.
Now comes the crucial part. The final decision will not be made on a desk in the National Palace. The National Electoral Institute (INE) is being consulted to give its technical verdict on costs and operation.
Sheinbaum announced that the formal modification proposal could be presented next week. The clock is ticking.
This is not just a calendar issue. It is a masterstroke that redefines the pace of his electoral reform. Postponing these processes gives fresh air to your administration, avoids premature wear and tear, and concentrates citizen attention where it decides.
As my father taught me, politics is pure theater. And Sheinbaum has just proposed a change of act. Now it’s time to see if the public—and the INE—buy it.




