THE recent BusinessWorld (BW)-Social Weather Station (SWS) presidential preference survey, conducted from February 5 to 7, tells us that Vice President Jejomar Binay is ahead of the pack with a 29 percent rating. While this is lower than the 31 percent that he got in the January 8-10 BW-SWS reading, one could conjecture that Binay’s score has actually remained relatively stable because of the margin of error of +3 percent.
Binay is followed by Sen. Grace Poe and Davao Mayor Rodrigo Duterte who are tied with 24 percent. While Poe has maintained her rating in the last poll, Duterte has surged from 20 percent in January. On the other hand, Liberal Party standard-bearer, Mar Roxas, appears to have lost ground, from 21 percent down to 18 percent. Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago has remained in last place with 4 percent, a slight improvement from 3 percent in the last SWS poll.
In stark contrast, the Pulse Asia survey of January 24-28 — only a few days earlier than the BW-SWS reading — had Poe in the lead with 30 percent (up by 9 percent from 21 percent in the polling firm’s December reading) and Binay suffering a 10 percent drop to 23 percent from 33 percent in December.
Significantly, Roxas and Duterte, both rating 20 percent in Pulse Asia’s January survey, were said to be statistically tied with Binay because of the margin of error.
How do you explain the variance between the BW-SWS and the Pulse Asia surveys, which were conducted only a few days apart and ostensibly using a representative nationwide respondent base?
Well, if your head hasn’t stopped spinning yet from trying to figure out the variance, in the Standard-Laylo survey, conducted from January 27 to February 4 (almost overlapping the February 5-7 BW-SWS poll), it was Poe who was on top with 29 percent while Binay and Roxas both rated 22 percent. Duterte was close to 20 percent.
To further add to your confusion, in the Pulse Asia January 24-28 survey, Binay and Poe were virtually tied in Metro Manila (32 percent and 33 percent, respectively), but in the Standard-Laylo reading, Poe was way ahead with 35 percent vs. only 22 percent for Binay.
While I have occasionally been critical of SWS and Pulse Asia, mainly over the issue of methodology (I’ve only been recently exposed to Junie Laylo’s work), I’m not willing to go along with critics who have accused them, and other survey firms, of selling out to political interests.
Even that startling November SWS survey — which had Duterte enjoying a commanding lead of 38 percent, compared to 21 percent each for Poe and Binay, and Roxas’ 15 percent — was explained away (albeit, awkwardly) as having been commissioned by a Duterte supporter who appears to have influenced the way the questionnaire was framed (allowing a leading question that created an obvious bias for Duterte).
SWS made no effort to deny who funded the survey. It could, of course, have protested the media exploitation of the results by the Duterte camp. And it could also have more vigorously clarified that the methodology was not up to its high standards.
But, unless a specific condition prohibits a survey funder from using the results for certain purposes, all is fair in war and politics and surveys happen to be one of the weapons of choice.
How survey results are used for political advantage is obvious. Impressive results for a candidate are supposed to generate a bandwagon effect on voters, motivate bigtime contributors to loosen the purses, and cause the usual political carpetbaggers to jump in.
But the key to unleashing these dynamics is in the hands of media. This is where the astute political operators get to work. By motivating media to banner the results and give them a positive spin, the bandwagon is supposed to start rolling, the money bags are supposed to be loosened and the political ward leaders are supposed to be attracted like flies to food.
At ground level, this scenario does not necessarily unfold.
In the 2010 race for the vice-presidency, Mar Roxas was flying high throughout most of the survey periods. He enjoyed a rating of 47 percent and 39 percent in the SWS and Pulse Asia surveys, respectively, both conducted in December 2009. Loren Legarda was not far behind Roxas. In the same surveys, Jojo Binay was struggling with only 10 percent.
At a certain point in the campaign, Roxas even enjoyed higher poll ratings than Noynoy Aquino, such that some of Roxas’ supporters began making noises that he should not have given up his presidential candidacy in favor of Aquino.
However in the May 2-3 SWS survey, just a few days before the May 10 elections, Binay had overtaken Roxas with a razor-thin margin of .2 percent (37.2 percent vs Roxas’ 37 percent). Legarda was down to only 12 percent. The final results had Binay winning 41.65 percent of the votes against Roxas’ 39.58 percent.
The lesson is obvious to the wise political strategist. Don’t let the current survey results go to your head. The numbers have a way of going up or down and the margin of error may be larger than the statistical calculations of the research firms.
Back in my early ad agency days, we were constantly reminded: “Use research as a lamp to illuminate rather than as a lamp post to lean on.”
The best use of survey findings is as an indicator of strengths and weaknesses. In this regard, it makes no sense to argue that unflattering results may have been due to a biased methodology conducted by mercenaries in research scientists’ clothing.
“Keep running scared,” is a motto that I have heard from veteran politicians. “Never take anything for granted.”
If the ratings are down, the seasoned strategist will take that seriously and find out why. If the ratings are up, he will find out why, too. It’s just as bad not knowing why your candidate is ahead as not knowing why he is behind.
There’s another factor aside from voter preference, as indicated by the surveys, And it could be the game-changer.
In the 2004 presidential elections, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo defeated Fernando Poe, Jr. by a narrow margin of 3.48 percent (equivalent to one million votes). Up to the time she had served her full term, Arroyo never lived down the accusation that she had schemed with Comelec officials, specifically Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano, to pad the election results with the winning margin. The infamous “Hello Garci” phone call of Arroyo has forever tainted her legacy.
In other words, whatever Pulse Asia, BW-SWS and Standard-Laylo say about who is leading in the polls, the usual skeptics believe that a “Garcified” electoral count will determine the final results.
Will someone make a crucial phone call to the Comelec the way Arroyo did to Garci?
Frankly, I don’t think that a phone call will be necessary. The way Noynoy Aquino has been using his presidential muscle to twist the arms of provincial officials and ward leaders, down to the barangay captains, he doesn’t need to make that call. The message he has sent to everyone in his administration – especially those he has appointed to key positions – is that he wants Roxas elected president by hook or by crook.
Who’s really leading in the presidential race? The surveys will tell you from time to time, and the results will keep changing as election day nears. But the big question is: Who’s going to win in the counting?
Take it from one battle-scarred pundit: “If you thought getting Chief Justice Corona impeached was important enough for Aquino to bribe members of the Senate, imagine how important it is for him to see that his presidential candidate will win.” ([email protected])
