"Indicative, not determinative."
"Indicative, not determinative."
In recent months the two largest opinion polling organizations in this country have been releasing the results of their surveys on voter preferences for the May 13, 2019 Senatorial election. Public interest has centered on the 12 most preferred—the so-called Magic 12—among the 62 aspirants for seats in the incoming Senate.
The most recent survey results indicate that the “winning” 12 will likely be composed of four classes of candidates: re-electionists and former Senators, show business personalities, individuals endorsed by President Duterte and persons facing charges before the courts. The selection of the 12 was made by 1,400 survey respondents adjudged by the polling institutions to be representative of the approximately 60 million voters who will be casting ballots in the coming election.
Like the respondents in past pre-election opinion surveys, the respondents for the 2019 surveys would seem to have been heavily influenced by name-recall strength, celebrity status—including the celebrity generated by media coverage of judicial problems—Mr. Duterte’s endorsement and extensive exposure through media and outdoor advertising. The mental processes of the 1,400 respondents, almost certainly were dominated by names like Poe, Lapid, Revilla and Go as they made their selections.
In the wake of the latest election survey results of the leading polling institutions, how do things look at this point, five weeks before the election?
At this point, many registered voters—exactly how many, or exactly what percentage of the 2019 voting population, no one knows—believe that the latest poll survey results are the last word on the subject and that the surveys’ Magic 12 will be the winning 12. Is that really so? Have the 1,400 survey respondents really determined the 12 men and women who will be elected to Senate on May 13, 2019? Is the 2019 Senatorial election all-over?
Not at all. The 2019 Senatorial election is still very much an undecided thing. For the great majority of this country’s registered voters the task of choosing 12 men and women for the next Senate is very much an ongoing process.
The two largest opinion survey institutions, Social Weather Stations (SWS) and Pulse Asia are generally acknowledged to be professional and competent entities. Far be it for me to think of doubting SWS’ and Pulse Asia’s methodologies and motivations in their conduct of the 2019 Senatorial preference survey. This year the two institutions have been doing what they have done in past elections; thus far, they have been doing with apparent professionalism and competence.
But SWS and Pulse Asia are not the 2019 Senatorial election and the results of their periodic voter-preference surveys are by no means definitive predictions of the outcome of this year’s senatorial contest.
SWS and Pulse Asia have been claiming—as they always have—that this year they have done a fine job of putting together a survey sample and that the 1,400 men and women in their senatorial-preference sample are truly representative of the more than 60 million Filipinos eligible to vote in the coming election. That may be true, but is it really reasonable to believe that the rest of the 2019 electorate—all 60 million voters—will emulate the Magic 12 selection of the 1,400 survey respondents? Sixty million voters taking the cue from 1,400 fellow-voters and unthinkingly casting their ballots for showbiz personalities, Duterte endorsees and candidates facing huge cases in the courts? I don’t think so.
For one thing, the youth—the millennials and young voters—are fairly adequately educated and are more cognizant of the changes needed to improve Philippine society, especially their own communities. The youth vote is said to account for approximately one-third of the voting population.
Then there are the other folk, i.e., voters 60 years old and above. They are people who have seen what the politics of the past 73 years have not been for this country. The politics of dynasty, excessive partisanship, regionalism, corruption and fascination with show business has prevented the Philippines from being able to achieve its potential and has kept this country within the confines of the Third World. Most of the senior citizens of this country—especially those who are educated and live in urban areas—are bound to be unwilling to leave the future of their grandchildren to the likes of Lito Lapid, Ronald de la Rosa and Christopher Go.
And how about the millions of voters who voted for candidates other than Rodrigo Duterte in 2016? Together, they comprised approximately 64 percent of that year’s voting population. Can they be said to have abandoned their anyone-but-Duterte sentiments and to have become staunch Dutertards, obediently complying with the dictates and endorsements of the man they did not vote for in 2016? I don’t think so. I think that they will take the opportunity offered by the coming election to give renewed life to their pro-Poe or pro-Roxas or pro-Binay sentiments.
Finally how about the millions of registered voters who are definable as “educated,” especially those who possess college degrees? Can their sentiments be taken for granted? Do the voter-preference surveys’ Magic 12 findings capture those sentiments? Are the educated voters likely to consider the findings as definitive and proceed the Magic 12 names unthinkingly on their ballots. I don’t think so.
The most competent opinion survey institutions will be the first to admit that the findings of their surveys, including those on voter preferences, are merely indicative, not determinative. How can the preferences of 1,400 survey respondents, the size of this years voter survey samples, possibly determine who the rest of the 60 million registered voters will decide to pick for the Senate on May 13?
