Manny Villar catches up to Noynoy Aquino in SWS survey

These were the thoughts that ran through my mind after reading in Inquirer dot Net’s breaking news that Presidential candidate Manny Villar had narrowed down Noynoy Aquino’s lead in a Social Weather Station survey.

Here’s an excerpt from that report:

Villar cut Aquino’s lead by eight points – from 19 to 11 percentage points, said the survey sought by San Juan representative Ronaldo Zamora, and conducted from December 27 to 28.

Of the 2, 100 respondents asked by the SWS in Filipino as to who on its list would they most likely vote for if elections were held today, 44 percent said they would go for Aquino while 33 percent for Villar.

Fifteen percent of the respondents chose former president Joseph Estrada while five percent for administration candidate Gilbert Teodoro, the survey said.

Television evangelist Eddie Villanueva came next with one percent, Senator Richard Gordon with 0.5 percent, and Senator Ana Consuelo “Jamby” Madrigal and independent John Carlos de los Reyes tied with 0.4 percent.

I subscribe to the idea that the publication of surveys that shout who is in the lead of one survey or another basically serves a propaganda for the leader in that survey.  It says that the leader of the survey is the one who is most likely to win in the electoral contest and this endows the survey leader with the advantage of a winnable image.

For the second most popular, the advantage of publishing a story that says he is catching up on the survey leader casts the electoral contest as a two way fight.  The other candidates in the electoral contests are cast as also-rans, even before the race is actually run on May 2010.

Moreover, I think that this propaganda of winnability in the form of claiming the lead in certain surveys has an effect on people.  It is a form of mental conditioning that puts blinders on the eyes of the voting public, brainwashing them into believing that the only choices they have are those that lead in the surveys.

Together with the fact that the Comelec makes little or no effort at all at leveling the playing field for all contenders in terms of campaign spending and the amount of political ads a candidate can put out — even before the start of the official campaign period, this creates a situation where in the only candidates that will be present in people’s mind are those that land on front pages because of surveys and those who can have their faces in media 24/7.

If Noynoy Aquino and Manuel Villar are the only names most people get exposed to most of the time, then it becomes most likely that people will think that these are the only contenders in the electoral contest.

On Twitter, there was an exchange between @momblogger (Noemi Dado, blogwatch) and pre-eminent blogger @mlq3 (Manuel Quezon III).  In that exchange, @mlq3 said this, apparently, in response to Noemi’s queries on whether surveys influence a voter’s decision:

@momblogger afaik only about 3% of voters decide on candidates on the basis of surveys

@momblogger If you look at ADMU’s Institute of Phil Culture study of D&E sources of influence on voting decision: http://tinyurl.com/yk4tx3y

Following the shortlink posted by @mlq3, I landed on a matrix showing the result of the Institute of Philippine Culture’s study on “Sources of Influence on voting decision.”

@mlq3 points to the result of a study saying that surveys influence only 3 percent of voters

This tends to go against my position that surveys influence people into voting for the leader in that survey.

That is, until you consider that surveys are published in the media and this forms part of the propaganda put out by the candidate, raising even further awareness for the survey leader.

But regardless of whether or not surveys do or do not influence how people vote, what is clear to me is that electing a leader means choosing the person with the best qualifications for a position and that involves examining a candidate’s worthiness based on a criteria.  Of course, the criteria by itself will not do you any good unless you get to know as much as you can about the other candidates.

If you want to go through various criteria for choosing a President or any candidate, you can go over to @momblogger’s blog.

Recently, MONEYSENSE MAGAZINE came out with an issue featuring Presidential candidate Richard “Dick” Gordon and in that edition, Lynda C. Corpuz wrote a sidebar piece on Gordon’s 10 principles of success.

I am reposting it here because I think it is worth considering.

Asked how ordinary Filipinos can improve their lot in life, Sen. Dick Gordon, who has enjoyed a fruitful and accomplished life, shares his key principles for career and financial success:

1. Be ambitious. Umaasa tayo lagi sa tulong. Kahit anong hirap mo, you have to be ambitious. Being ambitious is not negative.

2. Have the right work ethic. Bawal ang tamad. Lalong bawal ang tanga. Manage by objective. Instead of a quick fix or instant gratification, practice delayed gratification. We should go for meritocracy. Hindi palakasan. Palakasan pa rin dito.

3. Learn a skill. Poverty is an absence of choice. That’s why you have to continue learning. You have to learn a skill. I never tell people “good luck.” I always tell them “good skill.” Be creative. Nasa Diyos ang awa, nasa tao ang gawa. God gave you skills. God will not help you if you don’t help yourself.

4. Work, save, invest, and prosper. You have to work. Address your needs but always save. Get into a business. Get life insurance or a personal accident insurance kung `yun lang ang kaya mo. We need a provident fund especially for our OFWs. We have 11 million Filipinos abroad. You put them and our people here in a provident fund, we can prosper ourselves. Combine GSIS and SSS funds and come up with a provident fund, just like what Singapore did. People have to learn to save something.

5. Help. Find extra time to help. Volunteer with the Red Cross. Kapag alam mong ginawa mo, bibiyaan ka. Helping others is a reward in itself.

6. Lead by example. The Philippines would improve if it elects a leader who can inspire, able to communicate by word and deed, provides a vision, extracts values, and displays integrity. Demand from your leaders. Ask for their qualifications. Look for their record.

7. Be independent. I had to fight big guys but I couldn’t tell my dad. He encouraged me to learn judo to protect myself. You have to learn to survive. You have to learn to stand your ground. Those guys who tried to bully me, I stood up to them.

8. Learn from your mistakes. I learn from my mistakes. I learn from other people’s mistakes. There’s only one thing I can never learn: to be overly materialistic. I don’t pay the media to cover me. I don’t pay for my press releases. If my being straightforward is a mistake, that’s a mistake I’ll keep on repeating.

9. Be assertive. We’re like makahiyas. We shouldn’t be. We shouldn’t be an adapting culture. We’re resilient but we don’t assert ourselves. We’re a happy people. That’s good psychology. We laugh at ourselves. We’re an accommodating culture. We shouldn’t be. We should live by the national anthem, by our oath.

10. Make fear your friend. During the Mt. Pinatubo eruption, I told myself we’re not going to allow ourselves to die here. I prayed, “If you’re going to take me, take me. Please though, don’t make me look bad as I lead.” You must make fear your friend.

I’ve been invited several times to participate in them and here are some of the online polls that I have been invited to.

http://www.philippinedailybrew.com/philippines/poll-who-will-you-vote-for-2010-philippine-president.html

http://apps.facebook.com/election_twenty_ten/

http://presidenteko.com/index.php

http://2010presidentiables.wordpress.com/

http://apps.facebook.com/philelection/

http://professionalheckler.wordpress.com/

http://www.philippineselections.com/presidential-poll-2010

I don’t believe that online polls will have a profound impact on how the real polls in May 2010 will turn out.  They are really just surveys where the results are displayed in real time, online.

In certain instances, these online polls become the battle ground for the online campaigners of various candidates.  In some cases where online polls allow participants to leave a comment, the digital equivalent of a brawl erupts when one campaigner or poll participant engages another in an argument over who is the better candidate.  They trade barbs and insults as if their life and their entire future depended on it.

What I find funny is when an online brawl erupts over the results of an online poll which doesn’t even prevent users from casting multiple votes.

The argument sometimes begins when commenter 1 says “Candidate A is better than candidate B because more people voted for him in online poll X.”  and commenter 2 confronts commenter 1 by saying “Yeah but candidate B is a better candidate than candidate A because he topped online poll Y! And online poll Y has more participants than online poll X!”

Oh brother!  I think such arguments over who is the more popular candidate in whatever online poll belongs in market places and street corners, not on the internet where everybody on earth can see just how loony Filipinos can get over what is in reality a spiffy but petty popularity contest.

The popularity of a candidate shouldn’t even be a consideration among voters.

There is actually an erroneous notion going around that a candidate’s popularity is proof that the candidate can unite the country.  So, going by this false logic, the more popular a candidate is, the more unified a country becomes.

Sorry to break this to those who believe that popularity = unity, but, popularity wanes.

If, God forbid, the popularity of one person becomes the only thing that is holding a country together, we will most likely find our country involved in a Civil War as soon as that person’s popularity wanes for one reason or another.

Think of it this way folks, if a candidate’s or leader’s popularity rating dips by 10 percent are our countrymen then 10 percent less united?

On the other hand, consider what happens when a candidate or leader becomes extremely unpopular, isn’t the country then united against that candidate or leader?

What if a survey says that 99 percent of Filipinos absolutely hate candidate or leader X, wouldn’t this be proof that unpopularity is a bigger unifying factor than popularity?

In truth, I think Filipinos are better at uniting AGAINST something rather than uniting FOR something and this is one of the reasons why the country is the way it is.

We united against Marcos but really didn’t have a better alternative, instead, we settled for the least contentious popular figure to take his position in the hopes that this will unify a fractured country.  What happened? 9 coup attempts, a resurgence of communist rebel attacks, and the rise of muslim dissident groups.  Was that UNITY?

We united against Estrada but really didn’t have a better alternative, instead, we settled for someone who was touted as lesser evil.

Now, we are united against Macapagal Arroyo and again, it seems we are going to settle for someone who is touted as the lesser evil or the only choice.

The lesson that our recent history as a revived democracy is this, if we continue to keep settling for the most agreeable option rather than working to create a correct and better option, we can expect to go through the same bad things all over again — perhaps even worse.

The real task at hand in the following months is not to make ensure the popularity of one candidate or another, but to create a better option for our country and support that better option with all our might while exposing the false “pwede na” options that we find.

It will take a couple of days before my original blog www.pinoybiz.blogspot.com becomes visible again and I am now wondering if it will be worth fixing up after having its traffic redirected.

The process actually broke a lot of links to posts with the URL www.pinoybiz.blogspot.com and these posts generated quite a bit of traffic for me before I joined Asian Correspondent.  I was forced to rebuild my traffic almost from scratch in the weeks after joining the website and it took a lot of work re-promoting the blog.   Now that they are returning www.pinoybiz.blogspot.com to me, I am almost certain that there will be a lot of “technical issues” again and I don’t think I can handle having to start over yet again.

At this point, I am completely drained from fighting “battles” both online and offline.

Offline, I had to deal with Holiday stuff that needed to be done and just when I thought that I had a handle on things, my kid contracted pneumonia.  So, for the past few days, I’ve been playing doctor to a cranky kid round the clock and I haven’t had a decent night of sleep.

Online, I had resolved to stick to putting out criticisms against what I see as an emerging Noynoy Aquino Presidency and just based on who was reacting, I think I was getting somewhere.  However, answering all the comments (some of which were utterly stupid) really look a lot of time and effort.

Just when I thought I was getting somewhere, Asian Correspondent made a decision to let me go because of the complaints it was getting from those who think Noynoy Aquino should be President.  Apparently, they think that it would be bad for Asian Correspondent to have a blogger who is consistently critical of Noynoy Aquino as I am.  Plus, of course, there was a hint that Asian Correspondent may be sued because of what I was writing and may be they weren’t up to dealing with a libel suit.

My relations with the editors of Asian Correspondent was actually great and I received some praise for blogging about disasters such as Ondoy.  In light of the praise they gave me for writing about disasters, I am wondering if they’ll actually miss out on the biggest emerging disaster in the Philippines — The Noynoy Presidency.

In any case, blogging at Better Philippines will give me much more freedom to blog about the things I believe will do my country some real good.

Better Philippines has a great tagline, “blogging for a better philippines/pointing out truths others deny or ignore” and I am glad that I have this opportunity to live out this tagline.

Thanks pareng BP, from the bottom of my heart.

A Debater’s Wet Dream

Imagine this

1. all the candidates running for the office of the President of the Republic,
2. on air over free TV and major AM radio stations,
3. live, with no assistants,
4. for three hours and with no commercial breaks;
5. each candidate will have 8-10 minutes to introduce his/her platform,
6. then be interpellated by one randomly picked co-candidate for three minutes on the speech for the platform.
7. Once all candidates have spoken about their platform, an impartial moderator will then ask pertinent questions about the Presidency, and shall give five minutes for each candidate to formulate a response to each question.

Think this is possible in our lifetime? Think we can persuade GMA7 and ABS-CBN to air this for free?

In response to benign0’s blog post about the power of the mass media over the 2010 elections, I am daring the executives of GMA-7, ABS-CBN, Philippine Daily Inquirer, The Philippine Star, SMART Communications, and GLOBE Telecoms- and good-natured Congressmen and Senators, for good measure- to make this dream come true by March 2010.

We need a smarter method of choosing candidates. And mass media, being the major recipient of campaign expenses, SHOULD BE MADE TO OFFSET THE EARNINGS THAT THEY MADE OVER LEGAL BUT HIGHLY QUESTIONABLE POLITICAL AD SPENDING BY THE CANDIDATES.

Repost this on your blog. Post this on facebook, twitter, multiply- hell, even AdultFriendFinder.com. I don’t care if you don’t credit me as the original proponent of this event. I just want this to happen.

Help me make the debater’s wet dream come true.

* I suggested three hours since we’re still not sure about the number of candidates running for President.

Pagbabago ba ika nyo? O heto. Simulan na ang pagbabago.  Simulan na ang debate.

Much credit goes to the blogger known as BenignO who came up with the catchphrase “Platform, plez!” which will serve as a reminder to all candidates to stop inundating the electorate with motherhood statements, empty promises and all other types of crap. As suggested, bloggers who choose to write about the candidates and their failure to provide any specific platform should just append the phrase to their posts.

Another blogger BongV came out with a similarly commendable follow up. In his post titled “Benchmarking the Presidentials” he attempts to provide a simple way of evaluating the so-called presidentiables. Using tables, BongV gives us an overview of key issues and where some of these presidentiables stand. The data provided by BongV is far from comprehensive and complete but, as I noted, it’s better than nothing and it’s a good start. I’m hoping he will come up with donwloadable pdf versions of his tables. All voters should have their copies.

Related to this, PinoyBuzz pointed out to me that maybe some candidates are deliberately making their political ads as revolting as possible to attract the masa crowd. I agree with his view. It has become quite obvious that many politicians and their media handlers are guided by the public relations notion that “bad publicity is still publicity.” (Come to think of it Former President Joseph Estrada did get himself elected thanks in part to his Eraptions, which as I recall was the brainchild of publicist Reli German.)

Well, I think it’s about time we wisen up to this cheap gimmickry. I had previously recommended villifying any and all silly political ads. I realize now that doing that will just give these stupid political ads more mileage.

In Smoke.ph, blogger Rom wrote a post in which she basically calls on political bloggers to put a stop to all the shallow punditry.

She writes:

And pundits – both on-line and in the mainstream – continuously feed the egos of these wannabees by devoting column-inches and blog posts to their merest utterances. But more than just feeding egos, this predilection to writing up every little off-the-cuff remark, every bluster, and every knee-jerk reaction of these aspirants for the presidency (not presidentiables, mind you, because in the strictest sense of even that made-up word, they are not presidentiable) adds the patina of legitimacy to what would otherwise be dismissed as plain and simple chicanery.

And…

The pundits are no help. When was the last time you read an article that tried to delve deeply into what a Roxas presidency would do for the country? Or an Escudero presidency? All you can read nowadays trivialize the presidency into nothing more than a prize to be won, hence the proliferation of attempts at pseudo-thinktankish analyses of who will most likely win. All that does is engender the belief that it is better to pick the winningest candidate than to support the one that will do the best job.

I’m hoping these ‘calls’ for a more educated screening and selection of political candidates will gain steam.

Candidates take note.

Platform, plez!

The older generations also owe the Comelec gratitude for once again they will see their  right to suffrage disrespected.

Clearly, all Filipinos  should bow down to the Comelec in recognition of its contribution to keeping feudalism alive in this great nation of ours. If not for its inability to insititute electoral reforms, Filipinos will no longer experience how it is to live in a society where guns, goons and gold reign supreme.

Thank you Comelec for not doing your job. You have once again done the Philippines a great disservice.

From GMANews.TV

“Nakakahiya naman yata ang mga Kapampangan kung walang ni isang hahamon, tatayo at hahadlang sa kanyang mga balakin [It would be a shame for the Kapampangans if no one would challenge, stand up and block Mrs Arroyo's plans],” David said in an interview with GMA News.

I wish you good luck Mr. David. Too bad I’m not a voter in that district. If I were I will most definitely vote for you.

I have no insider information on Mr. David’s chances of winning against PGMA. All I know is that he will certainly be in for a tough fight should PGMA push through with running as representative of Pampanga’s 2nd District.

My gut tells me though that Mr. David stands a chance of defeating PGMA. In a fair and level playing field, he might even win via landslide. I sense that the people of Pampanga know deep in their hearts that it is time to put an end to the rule of the Arroyos. I suspect  Kapampangans know that the right thing to do come 2010 is to not vote for PGMA. I seriously feel that this will be the case after all Kapampangans are Filipinos too.

1. government subsidy for election campaigns (Fernando)

2. empowering local government units with increased budgets (Binay)

3. eliminating the “pwede na yan” (that will do) mentality (Legarda)

I am in favor of Fernando’s idea of passing the burden of financing election campaigns to the government. One obvious benefit is that it would level the playing field and give virtual unknowns equal opportunity to make themselves known to the electorate. Voters would then have more choices other than the usual faces.

I’m just not sure if having this set-up could really help put a stop to corruption as some people including Fernando believe. Maybe it could if elected officials only steal to pay back their election sponsors or to recoup their own expenses. Unfortunately, that is not the only reason why graft and corruption occurs. If it were then let’s not allow our politicians to spend another centavo from their own pockets.

Related to this, I think it’s about time  media entities especially the big TV and radio networks consider providing real public service by offering free airtime to all candidates. Anyone care to be the first? Kapuso? Kapamilya? As an incentive, I promise to be a loyal viewer of whoever will be the first to heed this call. Religious stations don’t count.

Moving on…

Binay’s idea of empowering local government units or LGUs by increasing their budgets also caught my attention even though it is nothing new. It’s an idea that has been floated around by other politicians in the past.

In an ideal world, giving local government units bigger budgets and free hand to manage it should be enough to ensure the delivery of better government services. The only problem is — our world is far from ideal. Binay himself has said during the ANC Forum that favoritism still comes into play in the granting of budgets. He noted that if the LGU official is not in the good graces of the powers that be he or she would have a hard time securing the funds he needs to effectively govern his area of jurisdiction.

There is one other issue that should be identified with regards to the disbursement of budgets. It’s about checks and balances. This is an issue that needs addressing even under the present set-up. Without proper accounting and auditing the risk of misappropriation becomes greater. Someone should closely monitor the use of any and all government funds. In fact, those doing the monitoring should be monitored as well. And, if we really want to look at it in the extreme, the monitors of the monitors should also be monitored. It’s that or we come up with a measure that would force corrupt officials to control their thievery.

Finally, let’s look at Senator Legarda’s idea that we do away with the “pwede na yan” (that will do) mentality. If I didn’t have anything to add to the idea I would have simply brushed it aside as just another motherhood statement.

In any case, Legarda correctly identified this albeit indirectly as a flaw in the Filipino character. Many, if not all of us, have been guilty of having such a mentality. It’s sad. As a nation, we should once and for all rid ourselves of this kind of mentality if not we condemn ourselves to an eternity of mediocrity. Unfortunately, purging ourselves of this mindset is  easier said than done especially where older generations are concerned. It is the younger generations who still have a chance of not developing such a mindset. That is, if we, the older generations, will try to create for them an environment that punishes mediocrity and rewards excellence. We should have done this yesterday.

Come May 2010, this “pwede na” mentality will again rear its ugly head. Many of us will vote for panderers, liars, thieves, and their ilk. Some will do so because they  don’t know any better. Others because they genuinely believe their choice. Sadly, most will do so because they are convinced the lesser evil is “pwede na.”

Well, since movements for change seem to be in vogue these days I thought I might as well join the bandwagon.

So here’s my humble attempt.

“Hindi Ako Uto-Uto” Movement

“Hindi Ako Uto-Uto” Movement aims to encourage all Filipino voters to be more discerning in scrutinizing politicians who will run in the 2010 elections.

The discerning voter:

1. is able to see beyond pandering political statements

2. will ignore politicians who do nothing but criticize other politicians to make themselves appear better

3. will avoid all variety shows masquerading as campaign sorties

4. will not accept gifts whether in cash or in kind from politicians

5. will not be content with campaign promises not backed by well thought out, detailed, and clear plans of action

6. will not support candidates who will run their campaign on the strength of song and dance numbers, pageantry and statements pandering to the public’s anger

7. will vilify political ads that offer nothing but motherhood, feel-good statements

8. will support only candidates who are able to provide well thought out and clear platforms or plans for the country

9. will demand from all candidates a clear plan of action to fight government corruption

“Hindi Ako Uto-Uto” Movement believes that by observing the aforementioned ideas the voting public will be able to force political candidates to raise the level of campaigning in this country.

There is no need to sign up with any group to be part of this movement. Just put the ideas stated above into action.

*You may not make changes to this document but you may change how you assess the candidates of your choice.

*You will not receive any fashion accessory in exchange for your cooperation. Be content with the thought that you helped ensure a better future for the Philippines.

www.betterphilippines.com

And here’s the Tagalog version.

“Hindi Ako Uto-Uto” Movement

Layunin ng “Hindi Ako Uto-Uto” Movement na hikayatin ang mga botanteng Pilipino na maging mas mapanuri sa pagkilatis sa mga politikong kakandidato sa halalan sa taong 2010.

Ang botanteng hindi uto-uto ay:

1. hindi nagpapadala sa anumang pambobola mula sa mga politiko

2. hindi makikinig sa mga politikong wala nang ibang ginawa kundi ang manira sa iba pang mga politiko para palabasin na mas matino sila

3. hindi dadalo sa anumang miting de abanse o kampanya na nagmimistulang variety show

4. hindi tatanggap ng anumang regalo — pera man,gamit o produkto — mula sa mga politiko

5. hindi makukuntento sa mga pangakong hindi suportado ng mahusay, malinaw at detalyadong plano ng implementasyon

6. hindi susuporta sa mga politikong idinadaan ang pangangampanya sa pasayaw sayaw, pakanta kanta, pagpapa-cute at pagpukaw sa galit ng mamamayan

7. mapagkutya sa mga political ads na walang laman maliban sa mga mapang-utong pananalita

8. susuporta lamang sa mga kandidatong nakapaglalahad ng malinaw at mahusay na plataporma o plano para sa bayan

9. hihingi sa mga kandidato ng malinaw na plano para sa pagsugpo sa katiwalian sa pamahalaan

Naniniwala ang “Hindi Ako Uto-Uto” movement na sa pamamagitan ng pagsunod sa mga nabanggit na ideya mapupuwersa ng mga botante ang lahat ng mga kakandidatong politiko na itaas ang lebel ng pangangampanya sa ating bansa.

Walang kailangang salihan para maging bahagi ng pagkilos na ito. Gawin lamang ang mga nabanggit sa itaas.

*Hindi mo maaaring baguhin ang nilalaman ng dokumentong ito ngunit pwede mong baguhin kung paano mo kikilatisin ang mga napupusuan mong kandidato.

*Wala kang matatanggap na anumang borloloy bilang kapalit ng inyong kooperasyon. Makuntento na lamang sa ideyang nakatulong ka sa pagtitiyak ng mas magandang kinabukasan para sa Pilipinas.

www.betterphilippines.com

I have uploaded a pdf version of this on Scribd. Feel free to download and distribute.