Guatemalan citizen Jose Mejia Abarca petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming an Immigration Judge’s denial of his asylum application. For reversal Mejia Abarca argues that the Immigration Judge erred in questioning the validity of his evidence, that respondent did not show conditions in Guatemala have changed since his arrival in the United States, and that he had demonstrated both past persecution and a well-founded fear of future persecution. For the reasons discussed below, we deny the petition.

We agree with the BIA that Mejia Abarca did not show past persecution or a well- *250 founded fear of future persecution. The discrete incidents to which he testified were not sufficient to constitute persecution, and he did not show a connection between incidents involving family members and his support for a political candidate more than eight years ago. See Regalado-Garcia v. INS, 305 F.3d 784, 787-88 (8th Cir. 2002); Nyonzele v. INS, 83 F.3d 975, 983 (8th Cir. 1996). We also conclude that respondent was not required to show improved country conditions because Mejia Abarca did not establish past persecution. See Kratchmarov v. Heston, 172 F.3d 551, 553 (8th Cir. 1999).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review.