The papers belted out the first senatorial survey results since the campaign actually began. See the Inquirer, and the Star, for example.
Here are the results:
And by way of comparison, how they compare with the previous surveys before the campaign season.
The Palace will of course pooh-pooh the results (it only appreciates surveys when the findings are favorable to it), except it seems to have commissioned its own and found they’re really getting a clobbering.
If you recall the conversation I had with a PR Expert recently (and some additional explanations in the discussion in Newsstand), the first survey of the campaign period tells us who are in play during the campaign. I assume only those who have double-digit figures are still in play; so besides the top 12 in the list, the candidates from Angara to Oreta in the list are the only ones who still have a fighting chance.
The trajectory of candidates enters the picture. According to SWS,
Individually, the gainers from November 2006 to February 2007 were: Pangilinan, who moved from third to first; Villar, from seventh to third; Cayetano, from tied for fifth to tied-fourth; Escudero, from tenth to tied-sixth; OsmeÃƒÂ±a and Aquino, both from tied-twelfth to tied-ninth; Arroyo, from tied-twelfth to solo twelfth; and Roco, from seventeenth to sixteenth….
Candidates who lost ground between November and February were: Legarda, who went from first to second; Lacson, from second to tied-fourth; Sotto, from fourth to eighth; Recto, from tied-fifth to tied-sixth; Honasan, from tied-eighth to eleventh; Pimentel, from tied-eighth to fourteenth; Angara, from eleventh to thirteenth; and Pichay, from eighteenth to twenty-second (due to the entry of fresh candidates Zubiri, Gomez, Montano, Magsaysay, and Coseteng).
It seems to have helped a candidate more, to be an oppositionist, than to have affiliated with the administration. These and other results are the grist for discussion: Newsstand says that the other problem the surveys help identify is who is liable to “dropping” when the counting takes place. Philippine Commentary also has some observations and predictions based on the present survey results: he expects Cayetano and Lacson to improve their rankings; Legarda to keep losing votes (because of her former husband’s murder case).
Here’s something I’d like to point out, too.
The harm nuisance or misleading candidates can cause is best demonstrated by looking at four names. Let’s input the margin of error (3%) into their current standing in the survey:
Benigno Aquino III 27-33% (in the survey, 30%). At 30%, Aquino III is tied with John Osmeña. At 27% (the low range), Aquino III drops out the winning 12; at 33% (the high range), Aquino III overtakes Sotto III and places 8th.
Theodore Aquino -1-5% (in the survey, 2%). If we assume (reasonably, I think) that his presence simply takes away votes from Aquino III, the “bonus” he could provide ranges anywhere from nothing, to 2%, to a maximum of 5%. A sort of blurry area with the range Aquino III already operates in; but at a maximum benefit of 5%, the addition 2% could firmly entrench Aquino III, for example, in 8th place were the elections held today.
Alan Peter Cayetano 40-46% (in the survey, 43%). At 40% he slides down below Lacson and fights for 6th to 7th place with Escudero and Recto; but at 46%, he’s at least firmly in 4th place.
Joselito Cayetano 3-9% (in the survey, 6%), a formidable showing which I think only goes to show the strength of the real Cayetano’s campaign. The numbers for the fake Cayetano are the “fuzzy” voters whose votes could be manipulated to drag down the real Cayetano. If you simply add back the fake Cayetano’s votes to the real Cayetano’s, in a best case scenario, the real Cayetano would regain up to 9 points, bringing him from 46% (his current best possible) to 55% (more accurately his real best at the present time), which would make him no. 2!
Basically, looking at these four candidates, two real candidates and two spoilers, shows you how dagdag-bawas works.
The results of the survey will frustrate some people even as it makes others happy. Relevant readings, courtesy of the PCIJ: how the poor vote, and why elections are covered in sporting terms.
In other news: the President was heckled this morning; women marchers were beaten up; Supreme Court orders the Pandacan oil depot closed (see nifty pictures in Philippine Commentary); two charged in nursing exam mess (see what blackshama has to say about the whole thing). Palace says soldiers should leave slums; well, maybe not (see Patsada Karajaw for a look into the doublespeak). The Peso improves, but stock market falls some more; and Gov. Singson sues an editor who managed to post bail, but four others are still in legal limbo.
In the punditocracy, my column for today is Indefensible in Plaza Miranda. In his column, Billy Esposo explains why he opposes the offer by some businessmen to host a debate. Geronimo Sy endorses the administration while Alex Magno believes this election is a non-event and that the main event so to speak, will be the 2010 presidential race (if we have one).
In the blogosphere, commentary on the survey results comes from Atheista, who finds the results for Pimentel III unfrigginbelievable; The Purple Phoenix, who has some interesting observations of her own to make on the results, and also, Istambay sa Mindanao. Observations on the campaign from Read This and Die, and see amor rebelde’s blog for an account of how some opposition and administration candidates did in a UST student forum.
An OFW Living in Hong Kong observes the pressures Filipino males face overseas.
Bunker Chronicles on a silly censor’s decision.
Technorati Tags: Blogging, elections, media, philippines, politics, Senate, society, surveys