Front-runners

One paper, the other day, headlined an item about the Movement for Good Governance (MGG). This is a citizen’s movement aiming to influence the outcome of the 2010 elections by consolidating within its fold 10 million voters willing to participate as a bloc.

The people associated with this movement, including former Finance undersecretary Milwida Guevarra, are well-respected in the community. The movement itself is a novelty. It is, by far, the most notable attempt by ordinary citizens to break into patterns of traditional politics.

MGG presents itself as the rallying point for the widespread public disgust over politics-as-usual, with its propensity for money politics and dependence on the oligarchic powerbrokers. The reception to this initiative has, so far, been warm. In the e-groups I participate in, individuals are readily volunteering to work for this movement.

But the movement itself remains nebulous. It represents an ideal, but has not moved ahead to recommend the personalities who will embody these ideals.

In our personality-driven electoral culture, that might seem to be putting the cart ahead of the horse. The way we have done things in the past is for the lead personalities to emerge first and the political campaigns build up around those personalities.

Since MGG is without precedent, we have no way of determining at this point its prospects. It is running against the traditional wind flow of Filipino politics.

At the moment, the name of the game is still top-of-mind voter choices.

In the US, the presidential contest begins with party primaries where voters affiliated with one or the other major party conduct voting to select their respective standard-bearers. That is how the presidential contenders emerge.

In the Philippines, we have a largely informal and unorganized process. Potential candidates are “rated” through privately commissioned surveys. Those who score well in the surveys begin to attract financing support, enabling them to push ahead of the others even more. They are eventually “nominated” by one or the other registered political parties.

In the first quarter of this year, vital decisions will be made all around. Interest groups will begin affiliating with the emerging front-runners. Potential candidates will begin meeting with electoral “investors”, cutting deals to help finance campaigns.

Those who rate high in the popularity surveys are considered more “bankable”. It would be worthwhile for electoral “investors” to risk some money to benefit their campaigns. These are favors extended for which some return might be expected when the candidate acquires power.

The state of play at the moment shows three candidates leading the pack of potential presidential candidates. These are: Sen. Loren Legarda, Vice-President Noli de Castro and former Senate President Manuel Villar.

In one survey conducted between October 14-27 by Pulse Asia, a hypothetical tandem with Legarda running for president and Sen. Francis Escudero as vice-president was preferred by 28% of respondents. Comparatively, a hypothetical tandem with Sen. Manuel Roxas running for president and Sen. Francis Pangilinan as vice-president was preferred by 10% of respondents.

In that survey, a reversal of roles between Legarda and Escudero, with the latter at the top of the ticket, would be preferred by only 20% of respondents. That is significantly lower than if Legarda led the ticket.

In an earlier survey, conducted between July 1-4 this year, that compared top-of-mind preference among respondents for hypothetical tandems produce the following: a Legarda-Escudero tandem rated 40%, a Villar-de Castro tandem garnered 26% and a Roxas-Pangilinan tandem 13%.

That survey also tested individual presidential contenders pitted against a hypothetical field.

In a three-way contest, Legarda rated 37% while both Villar and de Castro turned in 29% apiece.

In a five-way contest, Legarda took 27%, de Castro 24%, Villar 23%, Lacson 13% and Roxas 10%.

In an eight-way contest, Legarda ekes out 27%, de Castro and Villar are tied at 20%, Escudero takes 17%, Lacson 9%, Roxas 7%, Makati mayor Jejomar Binay 3% and MMDA chair Bayani Fernando 1%.

Remember that all the ratings quoted above are merely top-of-mind voter preferences. They do not include political organization, party support or grassroots capacity. But they are not unimportant. These ratings guide other decision-makers who will figure in the selection of candidates and the electoral coalitions that might emerge.

The Pulse Asia numbers allow Legarda to make a case before her political party — the Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC) — that she, more than Escudero, is the more viable standard bearer. That is assuming, of course, that the NPC itself decides to field candidates independent of the broader multi-party coalition it is now part of.

If the MGG turns out to be a dud, or fails to gather support beyond its native middle-class base which constitutes only 3% of the voting population, then the traditional game of personality-based electoral alliances will continue as usual. Should that turn out to be the case, those now leading the popularity ratings, will likely play leading roles in shaping the alliances for 2010.

The first quarter of the new year should determine whether a new dynamic will dawn in our electoral politics.