One out of every six people who went to the polls in the C Level Contact List second electoral round cast an invalid vote. In large part, the massive null vote was due to the campaign of Pérez and Pachakutik, who promoted the "ideological null vote" as a sign of rejection C Level Contact List of the electoral system and the alleged fraud against his candidacy in the first round. The invalid votes came mostly from the provinces where Pérez reached the highest number of votes5, and a C Level Contact List post-election quantitative analysis confirms that around 60% of Pérez's votes in the first round became invalid in the second6.
To understand this result, it is necessary to return to C Level Contact List the interpretive framework. The reasonable expectation was to suppose that the votes that went to Pérez in the first round would be distributed, in majority, between Arauz and the null voteC Level Contact List in the second round. Saying that is not the same as saying that no one who had voted for Pérez was going to vote for Lasso: the conceptual model admitted that a good number of Pérez C Level Contact List voters would vote for Lasso. It was quite probable, for example, that the voters of Pérez de la Sierra Centro would lean more towards Lasso and the null vote than towards Arauz.
That is, in fact, the inertia of those territories in the C Level Contact List last decade. It is noteworthy that in the 2013-2017 comparison, that is, between Lasso's first and second participation as a presidential candidate, where his support grew the most was C Level Contact List precisely in those indigenous territories. In 2021, Lasso fell back in all those provinces, but not because Correismo regained ground, but because Pérez was an electoral alternative. In the C Level Contact List absence of Pérez on the ballot for the ballot, where would a good part of those votes go?