es ▁claimed ▁that ▁the ▁Catholic ▁Church , ▁the ▁local ▁business men ▁and ▁even ▁" fore ign ▁influ ences " ▁had ▁persu aded ▁vot ers ▁to ▁support ▁the ▁P AN . ▁Most ▁important ly , ▁the ▁local ▁P RI ▁stated ▁that ▁the ▁elect oral ▁defeat ▁was ▁a ▁" t rag ic ▁dis aster " ▁that ▁should ▁never ▁be ▁repeated . ▁ ▁The ▁ 1 9 8 6 ▁g ubern atorial ▁elections ▁in ▁that ▁same ▁state ▁[ es ] ▁were ▁marked ▁by ▁accus ations ▁of ▁Elect oral ▁fra ud . ▁Although ▁the ▁P RI ▁candidate , ▁Fernando ▁B ae za , ▁was ▁officially ▁pron ounced ▁winner , ▁the ▁P AN ▁candidate ▁Francisco ▁Bar rio ▁Ter raz as , ▁who ▁officially ▁ended ▁in ▁second ▁place ▁with ▁ 3 5 . 1 6 % ▁of ▁the ▁vote ▁( at ▁the ▁time , ▁the ▁biggest ▁percentage ▁of ▁votes ▁that ▁an ▁opposition ▁candidate ▁had ▁earned ▁in ▁Ch ih u ah ua ) ▁did ▁not ▁recognize ▁the ▁results , ▁and ▁the ▁P AN ▁promoted ▁acts ▁of ▁civil ▁dis ob ed ience ▁to ▁resist ▁the ▁alleg ed ▁fra ud . ▁Many ▁other ▁local ▁elections ▁were ▁marked ▁by ▁accus ations ▁of ▁fra ud ▁in ▁those ▁years , ▁sometimes ▁ending ▁with ▁violent ▁cl ash es . ▁In ▁some ▁small ▁municipal ities ▁of ▁Ver ac ru z ▁and ▁O ax aca , ▁the ▁local ▁population ▁even ▁seized ▁or ▁burn ed ▁the ▁local ▁Town ▁h alls ▁in ▁response ▁to ▁alleg ed ▁elect oral ▁fra ud s . ▁ ▁Elect oral ▁reform ▁In ▁response ▁to ▁these