The Pulse Asia exit poll, together with quick counts, was the sum of all administration fears (at which the Inquirer editorial took a tart look). For an analysis of the exit poll, see Philippine Commentary. The exit poll and the quick count therefore became the focus of the papers today:
In the Namfrel count, Legarda placed first in tabulations from Metro Manila, Regions 1, 2, 7, 12 and the Cordillera Administrative Region.
Escudero led in Regions 4, 5, 8, 9,10, 11 and the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.
Pangilinan, as of the final report released last night, was leading in Region 6 and Caraga, while Angara was No. 1 in Central Luzon.
Four TU candidates, including Zubiri, Recto, Prospero Pichay and Michael Defensor, were outside the winning circle.
GO’s Sonia Roco and John Osmeña placed 17th and 18th, respectively. TU’s Vicente Sotto and Cesar Montano occupied the 19th and 20th places.
Namfrel’s initial figures yesterday were culled from precincts in Ilocos Norte, La Union, Pangasinan, Cagayan, Kalinga, Bulacan, Nueva Ecija, Pampanga, Tarlac, Batangas, Laguna, Marinduque, Quezon, Rizal, Albay and Catanduanes in Luzon;
Iloilo, Negros Oriental, Leyte, Samar and Southern Leyte in the Visayas;
Zamboanga del Norte, Zamboanga del Sur, Bukidnon, Lanao del Norte, Misamis Occidental, Davao del Sur, Davao Oriental, North and South Cotabato, Maguindanao, Agusan del Norte and Agusan del Sur in Mindanao.
In Metro Manila, Nassa-Namfrel included reports from 71 precincts from Mandaluyong City and 18 from Muntinlupa City.
Foreign media reports are interesting, too: see Reuters, the Christian Science Monitor, the Voice of America, ABC Radio Australia, and GulfNews.
Paul Darwynn Garilao sums up the points and counter-points of both pro and anti exit poll camps. But the surveys might be even more of a whammy because the command vote and machinery may have broken down in the Visayas or been thwarted by poll-watcher’s vigilance in places like Samar and could possibly be yanked out in Davao. In Inquirer Current, John Nery points to Ralph Recto’s suggestion that, unsure if we’d even have elections, candidates had to murder each other to compensate for lost campaigning time.
My Arab News column for this week is Philippine Govt Annoyed by Public Opinion. I must say this summary of what the poll numbers means, surprises me. Coming from Palace booster Tony Lopez as it does:
The people have spoken. They want new faces. They want new leaders. They want change. They want new directions. They don’t want Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. These are the possible conclusions one can make looking at the senatorial race based on early returns from the quick count by ABS-CBN-STI.
And the Palace doesn’t want too many people saying the above. And so… The cheating’s there. There are many options, and they’re being demonstrated by means of news reports and blog entries. You have news reports of how the cheating’s being done in Masbate. Among bloggers, Inblogosphere recounts volunteering to join the quick count in Baguio, and the cheating she’s encountered in looking at electoral returns:
— There’s an FPJm partylist in the Election Return. But in the actual Certificate of Canvasses which is the basis of major Comelec count the same FPJm partylist was totally ignored. I[t] was not in the list!
— There are only 15 votes for Montano, 45 for Richard Gomez for one sample ER. The total result is totally padded for one side – Gomez has now 65 votes. And Montano- Zero votes.
— Votes for Alan Peter Cayetano was added to the other nuisance Cayetano.
— Certificate of Canvasses total results of votes is not the same with the corresponding election returns.
And how Overseas Fiilpino Voters voted: according to The Arab News only a small percentage did, but the results do suggest that that minority felt strongly enough to vote and express how they feel:
ABS-CBN reports on how Filipinos in America voted:
It took the embassy’s election deputies headed by Nolasco nearly 16 hours to finish counting about 700 ballots. Based on preliminary totals, the top 12 were: Francis Pangilinan (456), Loren Legarda (424), Ralph Recto (395), Joker Arroyo (388), Benigno Aquino III (381), Manuel Villar (370), Edgardo Angara (338), Panfilo Lacson (326), Aquilino “Coco” Pimentel (297), Francis Escudero (293), Vicente Magsaysay, Alan Peter Cayetano (281) and Sonia Roco (280).
And at home: see the updated Namfrel and other quick counts, nationally. And quick count results in Cebu as of 10 pm last night, quick count results in Davao as of 5:30 pm last night; and for Zamboanga as of 8:25 am; Surigao del Norte as of 4:45 am; and Pampanga (very thorough report online). A text message I got (I hope Iloilo City Boy or someone can verify this) has an opposition sweep, per Bombo Radyo’s final, unofficial, quick count:
Escudero 454,323
Legarda 434,574
Lacson 427,465
Villar 387,216
Aquino 358,676
Pangilinan 345,564
Trillanes 336,668
Honasan 326,311
Angara 313,080
Cayetano 305,309
Pimentel 291,265
Zubiri 261,093
Ellen Tordesillas gives a rundown of the significant local races.
Honesto General wrote this nice reflection on the whole thing:
The voting was one big social event. Everyone came: the young and old, rich and the poor, the hale and the infirm, the master and servant, the mistress and maid. Everyone had exactly one vote each. We filled up our ballots on two tables that ran the whole length of the court.
We should be proud that everyone who came could read and write. Not too many countries in the Third World can match that.
The Filipino woman won the right to vote almost three-quarters of a century ago. The Kuwaiti women won her right to suffrage only last year. There are many countries whose women are not yet allowed to vote.
Of course, there are still a lot of things wrong with our democracy. The killings are our national shame. But the killings are mostly to fight for control of the illegal lottery “jueteng,” smuggling and the rackets. As they kill each other, the country might be better off — maybe.
A democracy is like a house that is never finished. It is work in progress. The greatest tragedy is to lose hope. As we deplore the dark side of our democracy, let us count our blessings. And there are a lot of blessings that we should be thankful for. We just are not looking for them in the right places.
Technorati Tags: elections, philippines, politics, president, Senate, society, surveys
oh, by the way, buencamino. if you are a communist, or member of a subversive organization, you are inadmissible in the U.S., and cannot emmigrate there.
oh, by the way, buencamino. if you are a communist, or member of a subversive organization, you are inadmissible in the U.S., and cannot emmigrate there.
Bencard,
no I’m not a communist. Are you?
buencamino, read again. I was admitted into the U.S. and now residing here. Now, what do you think, am I?
I don’t know about the generic-label “communist”; I will suspect that a card-carrying member from Mainland China who wants to emigrate to the US and is qualified (e.g. physicist, computer technician, pianist or cellist, diplomat or investor) can get accepted. What is true is that any person that has provided aid to a group on US list of terrorists (like JoMa or the Kurdistan separatist group waging war against Turkey) gets rejected.
‘in the end De Castro will be the next President…’
If GMA is impeached…..
There is no other scenario for a De Castro presidency.
What is also true is once a person becomes a US citizen, taking away the citizenship is very difficult. In Vance v. Terrazas, the Supreme Court had something that the government cannot coerce someone to surrender citizenship. (The most common cases of “stripping of citizenship” result from the citizenship-grant being void in the first place because the applicant lied (e.g. about prior activities as Hitler follower) in the citizenship application.)
Bencard, i don’t think you would want to hear MB’s answer to that question.
UPn stude:
Sec. 212(a)(3)(D) of the Immigration & Nationality Act (U.S.) is explicit regarding inadmissibility of communists (members and/or affiliates of communist orgs.).
and, UPn, revocation and/or declaration of nullity of citizenship due to fraud is different from “coercing” one to surrender citizenship. As to the latter, the court’s decision in Vance makes sense.
cvj, buencamino already answered, and, I don’t know about you, but I was glad to “hear” it.
‘buencamino, read again. I was admitted into the U.S. and now residing here. Now, what do you think, am I?’
I bet you are someone who is a member of the Asperger Syndrome Association.
Bencard… I’ll defer to Section you had cited.
BUT… the meaningful “but” is that the US processes and procedures do have leeway (so a Mainland China “regular bright dude” who got himself the Party card because it was a good way to qualify to get into college probably can get himself accepted as US immigrant if there are no other blotches on his application package, especially if he can get the sponsorship of his state senator and/or congressman).
Now providing aid to the Abu Sayyaf gets to nowhere.
supremo, you lose (your bet).
Point of (minor) interest: Filipino citizens in the US who voted… rejected the 2 senatoriables (Trillanes and Honasan) who used violence to express their political inclinations.
Take it easy everyone, no need to get into name calling.. We’re passionate about politics, but no need to get bloody on the discussion..
UPn student, you’re right with the two senatoriables (Trillanes and Honasan), I can’t stand for their irresponsible actions.. (it should be of major interest, since both are poised to make it into the magic 12)..
You make me laugh MB.
Senate is a a garden of butterflies. They flutter from one party to another depending on what benefit them the most.
Loyalty is a virtue that is totally absent among the senators.
May prediction ka na bang nangyari MB. Ako, marami na.
“There is no other scenario for a De Castro presidency.”
Oh please, De Castro can very well run and win the 2010 election.
Cat,
Madame auring is that you? Eh mukha yata natalo an ex mo na si vixtor wood….meow meow
Bencard, I was expecting you to react to what Jude wrote about Iggy: Iggy Arroyo also won by a landslide and there’s even talk of making him the next Speaker of the House. since you have been very vocal about your abhorrence for political dynasties. Instead you gave what he wrote a blanket thumbs up.
Jeg, actually i think what you pointed out is one of the least distasteful portions of Jude’s post. I hope Pacquiao reads this…
…so he will get a flavor of Gloria Arroyo’s habit of using and discarding people as it suits her.
You can see from the overall tenor of Jude’s post above the absence of any moral sense and respect toward to voters, and that the thrust is, in his words, to “Create the illusion of a choice”.
After all this, he has the gall to admonish Manolo to maintain his integrity.
jeg,
in the rush to be proven right, i suspect compromising on principles was deemed a small price to pay.
or perhaps the abhorrence was for “old” political dynasties. the arroyos haven’t been around to earn his abhorrence.
Jeg, good point. I don’t think PGMA would have any part of that, and Iggy would allow himself to be involved in that kind of intrigue. Either J. de V. or Villafuerte would be an effective congressional ally of the President, and would help her stay the course towards a better Philippines. I think she wouldn’t need Iggy for that purpose. Afterall, every economic indicator is up and she is not pre-occupied with re-election.
In any event, Iggy does not belong to PGMA’s immediate family so his speakership, should it ever happen, would not impinge on my aversion to political dynasty.
bencard, the president can only be charged with plunder once she leaves office. from what i understand. in office, she’s immune from suit.
there you go again, monsignor cvj, moralizing. tell me, who, in Philippine politics do not use or discard people when politically necessary? Only a naive politician would not do that. Show me one who would stick to a political liability, even after “using” the latter and I would show you a loser. Politics, especially the Philippine brand, is devoid of moral sense so you either play the game or stay out of it, or else you moralize and lose.
If Manolo is a candidate and you are his political albatross, do you think he would stand by you?
Politics, especially the Philippine brand, is devoid of moral sense so you either play the game or stay out of it, or else you moralize and lose.
So Bencard, youre actually indicting politics as a whole as an amoral exercise? Or are you giving approval to its practice without a guiding moral principle? Winner=good; loser=bad?
but mlq3, has there ever been an allegation of what could be a viable basis for a charge of plunder when she leaves office, either as a principal, accessory or accomplice (beyond unsubstantiated, but “privileged” innuendoes made in the senate floor)?
Jeg, all I’m saying is that “moral” judgment has no place in politics, for who is conmpetent to judge morality. Bishops Cruz, Tobias, Capalla, the Pope? What sanctions would they use to give effect to their “judgment”? But then secular politicians are not running for religious office.
I think any attempt to judge morality in politics is an exercise in presumptuousness. Therefore, in that context, the formulation you offered (winner = good; loser = bad) is fallacious. Of course in another sense, winning is always good for the winner and losing is bad for the loser.
Jeg, all I’m saying is that “moral” judgment has no place in politics, for who is conmpetent to judge morality. Bishops Cruz, Tobias, Capalla, the Pope? What sanctions would they use to give effect to their “judgment”? But then secular politicians are not running for religious office.
I think any attempt to judge morality in politics is an exercise in presumptuousness. Therefore, in that context, the formulation you offered (winner = good; loser = bad) is fallacious. Of course in a practical sense, winning is always good for the winner and losing is bad for the loser.
Jeg, all I’m saying is that “moral†judgment has no place in politics, for who is conmpetent to judge morality.
In an election, the voter is presumed to be able to judge, that’s why the government gives them the right to choose. Each individual voter then is presumed competent to judge morality. We know what right and wrong is. We know good from evil. That’s why we know cheating is bad, vote buying (and vote selling) is bad. If we dont have a moral compass, then cheating would be ok if it gets the job done, i.e., being elected. What we need in Philippine politics is MORE moral judgement on the part of each individual voter, not less.
I think any attempt to judge morality in politics is an exercise in presumptuousness.
Which sort of answers my original question. You are giving tacit approval to the practice of politics without a moral principle.
bencard, that is best left to the superior wisdom of the lawyers -for the prosecution and defense- who would tangle over potential plunder charges. the probability is very high charges will be filed; it depends on many things, of course, whether such charges would prosper. jarius bondoc seems to think the recent deal signed in china is at the very least, impeachable, if not worthy of a plunder charge.
It is precisely this morality-less ‘the end justifies the means‘ approach that we in the middle class/middle forces should avoid. If we keep at this, then it will be either government by the numbers (i.e. the poor majority) or government by material resources (i.e. the rich few) in the foreseeable future. A middle class without any moral compass will not have the moral ascendancy to navigate between these two forces.
Great points Jeg, I think you’re winning the debate on this one..
bencard, point of information, i’ve long wanted a lawyer’s opinion on this: what is the difference between moral certainty and legal certainty on a question?
Ca T,
You maybe right or wrong on the loyalty issue but that fotunately does not negate the checks that the outgoing Senate has done on the administration with the attempt to revise the Charter for one example.
So we should expect the incoming Senate (should the composition of the the top 12 yesterday be the winners. I don’t know if the line up has changed though) to exercise such checks also.
Singson is topping Maguindanao. Hahahahaha
“Senate is a a garden of butterflies. They flutter from one party to another depending on what benefit them the most.”
This is only true because Filipinos in general do not expect anything of substance beyond the personal posturings and flutterings (from one flower to another) of their politicians.
Look at the discussions here as an example — nothing but gossip on who’s whos and who’s wheres. Issues? Nah. Too hard on the shallow Pinoy mind.
The biggest gas of all is that the concept of “united” (and even funnier “genuine”) opposition has been taken up in tbe lexicon. Jeez. How many “united” oppositions have we had in the last 40 years? They stay united only as a machine for winning elections.
Next election please… (and then the next, and the next, and the next, ad infinitum). 😀
Here is an example of the kind of thinking that determines elections in the Philippines:
“You bet, I am now confident that God is allowing Trillanes to win because his victory is a victory over evil, and that this victory will bring a lot of souls back to God as this ordeal of Trillanes is a test of faith. I would advice Ermita to shut his mouth or he might incur the wrath of heaven for perjuring himself. ”
Taken from a comment from one of Ellen Tordesillas’s biggest fans:
http://www.ellentordesillas.com/?p=1198#comments
Now isn’t that scary? It’s scary because it illustrates how profoundly effective campaign efforts are on the vacuous mind of the average Pinoy.
That my friends is the mind of what determines election results in Pinoy society. We in the elite presume to evaluate — even judge — the mechanics behind election outcomes with our university-trained minds yet fail to appreciate just how convoluted the logical faculties are of the minds on which we entrust the selection of our leaders.
– 😀
Ok I’ll bite.
That my friends is the mind of what determines election results in Pinoy society.
You mean actual results, benign0 or results that those in power would want to put out as the results? Because if we take the last results as basis–the one in 2004–it was the mind of GMA with the help of her minions that determined the results. That poor fan of ellen’s you quoted didnt have a say in the matter, I gather. If you think that ellen’s fan determined the results of that election, I think youre either being naive, or perhaps you don’t believe that there was a malicious manipulation of the results. Who knows what would happen if ellen’s fan actually did determine the result of the election? Could be better, could be worse. What do you think? Worse or better?
If ellen’s fan and those like her dont get to determine the results of elections, I would have to say you in the elite with your university trained minds had a hand in it.
Now isn’t that scary? It’s scary because it illustrates how profoundly effective campaign efforts are on the vacuous mind of the average Pinoy.
Frankly I dont remember any Trillanes campaign ad. There probably were, but I dont remember seeing them. They werent as ubiquitous as the ads of Pichay or Zubiri or Villar or any of the other big spenders. He couldnt have possibly campaigned actively and in person. He’s in jail, you know.
Just out of curiosity, from the tone of your post, I gather you don’t have a dog in this fight and are merely offering your disinterested opinion on Philippine society from overseas, am I correct?
That’s precisely my point. He was in jail.
Erap didn’t win because he had a better platform. He was just of a different background.
Trillianes did not have a significant differentiation from the rest of the rabble. He just happened to be in jail. The underdog. The guy who tried and failed to fight city hall. The Rudy Distrito of politics. Filipinos relate with losers because they can identify with them.
It’s always easy to play the people-in-power-manipulated-the-results card. But that’s a tired old argument that’s, in any case, beside the point. And besides, it’s becoming a bit of a bad habit viewing the efficacy of “democracy” in Pinoy society through the narrow lens of “elections” (which is but one of many features of democracy). “The people have spoken” is such a tired old cliche.
The point is where are the issues? Out of this whole expensive and disruptive exercise, are we any more clear about what course is being charted for our basketcase society in the next several years?
All we get for our trouble is a bunch of new arses warming the seats funded by our tax money.
As for your last paragraph, thanks for your curiosity. I’m flattered. 😉
Benigno0, what is your proof that what you gave out as reason for people’s voting for Trillanes is true? It could just easily be that people are sick and tired of this administration and Trillanes looks like a good solution! If you ask me my proof, I can’t give one either.
Jon Mariano:
There is no proof of course. But then if you are speculating that “It could just easily be that people are sick and tired of this administration and Trillanes looks like a good solution”, I’d ask you this:
Isn’t that the same reasoning voters took when they voted Erap into office?
Kung baga, someone different, for the sake of selecting someone different?
That’s not a ver intelligent approach to selecting government officials. 😉
Erap didn’t win because he had a better platform. He was just of a different background.
That’s true. The people grew tired of the university-trained elite and chose one who they thought would fight their fight for them. The university-trained elite kept giving them empty promises, gave them a sub-standard educational system, kept them tilling soil that they didnt even own, taxed them til their ears bled, then forgot about them til the next elections. Erap let them down of course. He was a crook.
Trillianes did not have a significant differentiation from the rest of the rabble. He just happened to be in jail.
Where have you been? He fought city hall that’s why he’s in jail. And that’s why a lot of people voted for him–because he fought and was prepared to lose his life and freedom. And he didnt fight because of some whim. He fought for something. Surely you can see beauty of that.
And besides, it’s becoming a bit of a bad habit viewing the efficacy of “democracy†in Pinoy society through the narrow lens of “elections†(which is but one of many features of democracy).
I actually agree with you on this. It is even possible to have democracy without elections. Let somebody sit there for life just as long as he doesnt trample the people’s rights. Or else we the people can kick him out with all means at our disposal in a democracy: impeachment, people power, revolution. But if we are to have elections, is it too much to ask for a free and fair one?
The point is where are the issues?
If youre here in the Philippines, look out the window. Take a walk outside. Go visit the rural areas. The issues will stare at you right in the face. You think the Filipino voter doesnt know the issues? He lives with the issues. He doesnt need them articulated or printed on paper. Besides, with the substandard education the uiniversity-trained elite has subjected him to, you think he’ll have the communication skills you have?
If youre not in the Philippines, I can only say what Ive said to the other steak commandoes in this forum: Pasalubong, ha?
benigno,
gloria once said I believe I am her now because that’s God’s plan for me and for us
Jeg, you said “Where have you been? He fought city hall that’s why he’s in jail. And that’s why a lot of people voted for him–because he fought and was prepared to lose his life and freedom.”
You mean THAT is the only basis you’d put forward to recommend that one vote for Trillianes?
We have to find a more intelligent basis for selecting politicians. Any schmoe can walk into a public building wielding a gun. Countless Pinoys die in the name of one hollow-headed cause or the other.
But name one politician who can chart out a convincing vision of where our country should be in the next 5-10 years. Now such a person is a real hero in my book — because he uses his brain. People who use their brains are in such short supply in the Philippines. But gun-wielding jailbirds? I think the sorry state of our prison services speak for themselves.
manuelbuencamino: I don’t blame her for dropping the Big Guy’s name. Because the reality is that Pinoys are suckers for superstitious BS like that.
Look around you. There are thousands of pictures of politicians kneeling in prayer in this and that church. A sick sight if you ask me.
You mean THAT is the only basis you’d put forward to recommend that one vote for Trillianes?
Of course not. He’s running for senator. His fighting skills won’t have much use there. Give us some credit, man.
There are thousands of pictures of politicians kneeling in prayer in this and that church.
I dont think theyre falling for that one anymore. Again give us some credit. The voters do learn.
wow, benign0 is back! at wala pa ring ng kakupas kupas. Its always very refreshing to read a different point of view in this blog.
“The point is where are the issues?
If youre here in the Philippines, look out the window. Take a walk outside. Go visit the rural areas. The issues will stare at you right in the face. You think the Filipino voter doesnt know the issues? He lives with the issues. He doesnt need them articulated or printed on paper. Besides, with the substandard education the uiniversity-trained elite has subjected him to, you think he’ll have the communication skills you have?”
Yun nga ang mahirap eh. Parang parepareho tayong nag lolokokahan. Ayan ang issue halos tukain na tayo lahat. Pero “did any of the candidate really exhaustively and intelligently dicussed the issues during the campaign”?
oh there was one Martin Baustista. But did he won? Dapat ba ikulong muna ang mag taong katulad nya lumbag muna sa batas at makulong para lang manalo?