You are a voter. You want to choose a leader who will
represent your interests and values, and address the problems facing our
country. You want to make an informed and rational decision based on your research
and analysis. But then, you read a headline: “SWS survey puts Sara Duterte,
Raffy Tulfo as 2028 presidential front-runners.”
How do you feel? How do you react? How do you decide? Have
you ever wondered how reliable and useful are the presidential election surveys?
Do you trust the survey results that show the popularity and preferences of the
candidates? Does it reflect the true preferences or opinions of the electorate?
Is this the best way to choose a leader?
The headline tells you that among 1,200 people
surveyed, 708 responded, 492 (41%) either refused to pick a candidate or were
not sure who to vote for, and 336 would vote for VP Duterte.
UNRELIABLE
Presidential election surveys five years ahead of the
actual date of the election are unreliable, as they are affected by many
factors such as sampling error, non-response bias, question-wording, and timing,
among others.
To illustrate, let’s take the non-response bias.
Non-response bias occurs when people who respond to a survey differ
significantly from people who do not respond to the same survey. This can
happen when people are unwilling or unable to respond due to a factor that
makes them different from respondents. Why? Amid the culture of fear as an
offshoot of the war on drugs, most Pinoys have refused to answer surveys. UP
Professor Randy David explained: “Interviews are conducted face-to-face. The
respondent’s name and address are known to the interviewer. The interviewer’s
true purpose may be suspect to the respondent. A sizeable majority of those
surveyed admit to being afraid that they could be indiscriminately tagged as
drug offenders.” On top of that is this screaming headline: “Red-tagging in the
Philippines: A License to Kill” (Human Rights Foundation, April 10, 2023) which
speaks volumes about our country’s culture of fear.
The phenomenon called “bystander apathy” could be
another reason why respondents refused to pick a candidate. Psychology Today’s Leon
F. Seltzer, Ph.D. said they are “demotivated and lacking enthusiasm… they don’t
care that they don’t care.” (Could this spell out a loss of trust due to
Comelec’s dubious handling of the last presidential election?) A Pinoy with “bystander apathy” most likely
will respond “I’m not interested” – a chunk of such non-response will result in
a “non-response bias” that can invalidate the survey results.
Even to those who responded, David propounded this
incredulity: “When asked by opinion polls where they stand on issues, they
will, out of courtesy or conceit, confidently give answers to questions that
hold no real meaning to them… How many respondents in such survey can claim
enough knowledge of the achievements of the president, the vice president, the
senate president, or the chief justice – or what their roles entail – to be
able to honestly rate their performance?”
No wonder SWS messed up with the following telling survey
discrepancy:
SWS Survey 1. Fourth
Quarter 2021: 75% of Filipinos said they were satisfied with PRRD’s
performance.
SWS Survey 2. Second
Quarter 2021: 77% of Filipinos feel poor including borderline poor.
SWS Survey 3. Second
Quarter 2020: 83% of Filipinos said their quality of life has
worsened in the last 12 months.
At a glance, we can figure out 1 contradicts 2 &
3.
With 41% of the respondents refusing to make choices or unsure what to answer, such a non-response bias factor can invalidate the latest SWS presidential survey, as its sample is not representative of the voting population.
PREMATURE AND IRRELEVANT
Presidential election surveys five years ahead of the
actual date of the election are irrelevant as they do not reflect the actual voting
behavior or outcome of the election. These surveys may differ from actual
voting behavior or outcome due to factors such as voter turnout, voter
registration, voter education, voter mobilization, voter fraud, and voter
preference change.
Voter turnout affects how many eligible voters cast
their ballots on election day, which may depend on factors such as motivation,
convenience, accessibility, or coercion. Voter registration affects how many
eligible voters can cast their ballots on election day, which may depend on
factors such as awareness, availability, documentation, or verification. Voter
education affects how informed voters are about the candidates and their
platforms, which may depend on factors such as media exposure, campaign
activities, civic engagement, or critical thinking.
Voter mobilization affects how motivated voters are to
support a particular candidate or party, which may depend on factors such as
endorsement, persuasion, incentive, or pressure. Voter fraud affects how valid
and honest votes are counted and reported on election day, which may depend on
factors such as integrity, security, transparency, or accountability. Voter
preference change affects how voters change their minds about their choices
before or during the election period, which may depend on factors such as new
information, persuasion, satisfaction, or disappointment.
PREDATORY
Presidential election surveys five years ahead of the
actual date of the election, like early birds, are, for lack of a better word, predatory.
A saying goes: “Early bird catches worms.” The problem lies in the “worms” –
the "vulnerable" poor voters.
I cited in my past ATABAY article a 1995
study by the Institute for Political and Electoral Reform which had identified this
leading factor in election – Pinoy voters choose a popular candidate -- which
may change for the better only when the following underlying conditions (which
I think remain the same today) transform:
Electorate Profile:
5 in 10 unemployed
4 in 10 high school graduates
6 in 10 class C & D
General Profile:
1 in 4 below the poverty line
Global Democracy Index (2020):
Out of 167 countries PH ranked 55th as a “flawed
democracy”
What’s more, an election survey, undoubtedly, is the
most effective campaign medium that projects popularity nationwide. Despite its
unreliability, sad to say, most Pinoy voters believe the election survey and
would vote for a top candidate because of his or her popularity.
Finally, the SWS presidential election survey being
premature, let alone, unreliable, irrelevant, and predatory, one can’t help
thinking that it is being put in motion, which in the advertising context (shying
away from using the infamous political term “propaganda”) -- to get off the
ground this early in reshaping VP Sara as a “household name” like Colgate.
But, here’s the caveat. As a “household name,” VP Sara
may build up a loyal and large voter base and a competitive edge over the other
candidates. On the flip side, she has to grapple with more scrutiny and
criticism from the media, the opposition, and the public (Exhibit A: "[H]onesty should not be an issue now." - VP Sara). She has to deal with
more pressure and responsibility to deliver on her expectations. She has to come
to grips with more conflicts (Exhibit B: Tambaloslos fracas) and
compromises with other actors and interests in the ever-changing political landscape.
VP Sara's arduous quest for the presidential throne will take five grueling years and has just gotten her show on the road.
Content put together in collaboration with Microsoft
Bing AI-powered co-pilot
Head collage photos courtesy of A.F. Branco, Inquirer,
Lopez Memorial Museum and Library, & Dreamstime
Video clips courtesy of YouTube
No comments:
Post a Comment