For those unfamiliar with the details of Bolivian politics and wondering what the OP is on about, here’s the gist.
Evo Morales, Bolivia’s first indigenous President, was first elected in 2005 under a constitution that did not allow consecutive re-election. During his first term, a new constitution was passed allowing a single re-election. So Evo argued that, even though he had been elected under the terms of the first constitution, he should be able to run again, and he won. Then when he wanted to run for a third term, he argued that his first term under the first constitution shouldn’t count towards the limit. Then during his third term, he held a referendum asking that term limits be eliminated, that narrowly failed. There succeeded a series of court cases and jiggery pokery that led to him running for a fourth term.
I’m not going to go into the details, but there were irregularities in the election that led to widespread protests that forced Morales to step down and take asylum in Mexico. His supporters called it a coup, but in my view the protests were a justified response to Morales attempting to take an unconstitutional fourth term.
Morales’ party has just won the new presidential elections. Really, this is the best result, showing that the protests were more against Morales’ chicanery than his movement.