>his opponent was winning, results stopped being published and he proclaimed himself the winner without even finishing the count? First, his opponent was never

>his opponent was winning, results stopped being published and he proclaimed himself the winner without even finishing the count? First, his opponent was never winning. His opponent was barely inside the 10% margin needed to secure a runoff election. And though Morales claimed himself the winner before absolutely all the votes were counted, he still left open the possibility of the runoff election being held. No significant fraud was ever found to have occurred, but after bogus claims of fraud Morales agreed to hold new elections. Morales was ousted from power before any further elections could happen though. If you want to claim the election was corrupt, his opponent Mesa should have become president. What happened was clearly a coup.