I would give 100 to one odds that the combat against drugs will not be the pillar of the PAN campaign in 2012, and not because we'll have won it, but precisely the opposite: the monumental failure of the strategy pursued by Felipe Calderón will be more than clear.I'm not so convinced, regardless of the perception of Calderón's security policies at that point. Issues related to security have a way of making the efficacy of a firm-hand policy obsolete, electorally speaking; voters' response to strategies perceived as strong is not intellectual or reasonable as much as emotional. Look at the States: W got reelected handily largely on the basis of national security, despite making a hash of Iraq and failing to finish the work in Afghanistan, which is also now drifting toward hash. There's actually a fascinating section about studies regarding this notion --that security fears provoke a deep-seated inclination for more hawkish policies, regardless of their utility-- toward the end of U.S. versus Them (at least, I think that's the book).
The PAN's reliance on security as a campaign issue in the present campaign is illustrative. Things won't have to be worse than today in 2012 for much of the country to conclude that Felipe Calderón's security strategy was a failure, yet here the PAN is, admonishing voters not to "leave Mexico in the hands of criminals", i.e. the PRI and the PRD. Put aside whether or not the PAN should be able to enjoy any advantage over its competitors on security issues; clearly, the party thinks that it does enjoy said advantage. Unless things get far, far worse than they are today (say, comparable to Colombia in the early 1990s), I don't see why that would change in another three years.