Surveys as anomalies

Like in the US, preelection surveys in the Philippines have become a permanent fixture of the
contests for the Senate and the presidency. The similarity ends there
though. For while the surveys in the US largely reflect the voters’
appreciation of the candidates’ stand on the dominant issues of the
day, the same cannot be said of the ones being done in this country.
The former are an extension of public opinion shaped by an intelligent
discourse, the latter a caricature of the Filipino as a Neanderthal
political species.
If the surveys in the Philippines mirror public opinion, it is of the
kind formed by a warped set of criteria on who should govern in the
next couple of years, if not for eternity, in the case of dynasties
that have invaded the political landscape like a medieval plague. Yes,
it’s part of public opinion, only that the public has lost the
diligence for serious scrutiny, content with name-recall and
fortuitous events like the death of a mother that catapulted an
incompetent senator-son to Malacanang.
Research institutions that conduct the surveys may brag about the
science that they use. But the science is confined to technical
controls, e.g. choice of respondents and methodology. There is nothing
in these exercises that explain why the respondents choose this or
that candidate. The choices are devoid of any logic in that they
simply prove the advantage of being an incumbent, having a familiar
surname and being seen on TV often.
And this is precisely where the danger lies. Surveys tend to fill the
vacuum created by an environment where debates on issues have taken a
backseat in favor of mudslinging and intrigue-sowing. Credential no
longer counts as shown by the presence of clueless entertainers, coup
plotters and unrepentant beneficiaries of the Martial Law regime in
the Senate, a chamber once reserved for the brightest minds of
Philippine politics. (Forget the shameful presence of a pretender who
has insisted until now that he had no hand in the cheating in
Maguindanao in May 2007.)
It’s as if one’s high standing in surveys could make up for the lack
of intellect, let alone integrity and statesmanship. A candidate may
no longer expect to be judged by his or her ability and stand on
specific issues. He or she just needs to appear on media often and get
a popular entertainer as endorser. Having a familiar surname is a
bonus especially if it happens to be the incumbent President’s and
Vice President’s. Or make yourself look like a martyred ex-senator,
and the voters are sure to throw caution to the fetid political air.
Will the voters ever realize that for all their “scientific”
pretensions surveys should not take the place of informed, critical
choices? Maybe, but there’s no telling when. [MindaViews is the
opinion section of MindaNews. H. Marcos C. Mordeno can be reached at
hmcmordeno@gmail.com]