Statistics are no substitute for judgment—Henry Clay, of the Bank of England.
In this short issue
Contra Surveys: History Says 2022 National Election Winners Will Be a Product of a Plurality and Not Majority Votes (Unless the Outcome is Pre-determined)
I. 1986 Constitution Presidential Elections: Majority Vote Defies History and Logic
II. 1986 Constitution Vice Presidential Elections: Same Story Here
III. The 2022 Playing Field: Walk the Tightrope: Team Political Dynasty versus Team Opposition
Contra Surveys: History Says 2022 National Election Winners Will Be a Product of a Plurality and Not Majority Votes (Unless the Outcome is Pre-determined)
Reuters, November 8, 2016: With hours to go before Americans vote, Democrat Hillary Clinton has about a 90 percent chance of defeating Republican Donald Trump in the race for the White House, according to the final Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation project.
Wikipedia: Clinton led in almost every nationwide and swing-state poll, with some predictive models giving Clinton over a 90 percent chance of winning. On Election Day, Trump over-performed his polls, winning several key swing-states, while losing the popular vote by 2.87 million votes. Trump received the majority in the Electoral College and won upset victories in the pivotal Rust Belt region. Ultimately, Trump received 304 electoral votes and Clinton 227, as two faithless electors defected from Trump and five from Clinton. Trump was the first president with neither prior public service nor military experience.
Multiple surveys have exhibited a commanding lead of over 50% by the presidential candidate representing the Team Political Dynasty.
Or, the survey says the winner will represent a majority!
But the history of Philippine Presidential elections shows that this would be an unprecedented event should it materialize.
A first-ever!
I. 1986 Constitution Presidential Elections: Majority Vote Defies History and Logic
History and logic defy such assumptions.
Figure 1
A president with a majority vote of over 50% of the voting populace last occurred in 1986, when the late Ferdinand Marcos Sr. called for a snap election and won against the opposition represented by another late president Corazon Aquino.
Mr. Marcos Sr. acquired 53.6% of the votes, while Mrs. Aquino got 46.1%. The two other candidates accounted for an inconsequential .29% share.
Because the February 7th elections had been rigged or manipulated, the opposition marched the streets of Metro Manila. The protest became known globally as the EDSA I: People Power Revolution, which led to the ouster or toppling of the dictator 18 days after.
Disclosure: This author was a Namfrel volunteer in EDSA I and was present in both EDSA Revolutions.
Ever since the enactment of the 1986 Constitution in 1987, Presidential elections have taken a different shape. Winners have represented a PLURALITY than a majority of the voting population.
There have been FIVE national elections under the 1986 constitution, namely, 1992, 1998, 2004, 2010, and 2016.
The late President Benigno Aquino Jr. accounted for the biggest share of electoral votes at 42.08% in 2010.
The next three shared the second spot: Gloria Arroyo (2004), Joseph Estrada (1998), and outgoing Rodrigo Duterte (2016) with 39.99%, 39.86%, and 39.01%, respectively.
Because the number of voters reflected population growth, Mr. Rodrigo Duterte has the largest number of voters at 16,601,997. The outcome of the 2022 election is likely to surpass this number.
In 1998, Mr. Joseph Estrada’s victory over Speaker Joe de Venecia signified the largest landslide win in history with a 23.99% differential. Speaker Joe de Venecia had only a 15.87% share.
Figure 2
That’s because eight other candidates vied for the same post in 1998. Interestingly, their combined share of 44.28% was greater than that of the President-elect and the runner-up.
In 2010, ex-President Benigno Aquino’s win over ex-President Joseph Estrada signified the second biggest landslide triumph with a 15.83% margin. Runner-up Mr. Estrada had only 26.35% of the votes. A field of 7 other candidates acquired 31.66%, which was more than the runner-up.
In 2016, outgoing President Rodrigo Duterte’s victory over Mr. Mar Roxas accounted for the third-biggest landslide with a 15.56% margin. Runner-up Mr. Roxas acquired a 23.45% share. The cumulative share of three other contestants of 37.54% eclipsed the runner-up.
Here is the thing.
The Presidential Elections of 2022 have the largest number of competing candidates ever. TEN.
A majority elected president occurs only when there are a few entries for the post or when the field of competitors outside the winner is weak.
There is no case in the history of the 1986 elections that this happened.
Yet, the latter has been the premise of most of the surveys.
II. 1986 Constitution Vice Presidential Elections: Same Story Here
The Vice President position tells the same story.
Figure 3
In 1998, VP GM Arroyo shared the biggest landslide win with President Joseph Estrada.
Mrs. Arroyo snared 49.6% of the votes which had a 27.45% difference from the runner-up. While the late Senator Mr. Edgardo Angara took the second spot with a 22.11% share, seven other competitors obtained a larger slice (28.32%) of the voting pie.
Even with the landslide wins, neither the president nor the vice president secured a majority.
In 2004, the VP field became a two-way race since the two other competitors were almost trivial.
Mr. Noli de Castro with 49.8%, bested Mrs. Loren Legarda with a 46.9% share.
Again, no majority!
Figure 4
Meanwhile, the largest voter turnout was in 1998, when both President and Vice President scored overwhelming victories against many competitors.
The next most significant voter turnout was in the 2016 elections.
The point is: Voter turnouts played a role. But it has not been as crucial in generating a landslide win.
III. The 2022 Playing Field: Walk the Tightrope: Team Political Dynasty versus Team Opposition
Ironically, the present battle for the top position is being contested by the same two personalities who vied for the second-highest post in 2016.
Back then, the margin won by the candidate representing Team Opposition of today was the slimmest (.64%) in history! She had a 35.11% share. Yet, aside from the candidate representing Team Political Dynasty today with 34.47% in 2016, four other contestants shared a third (30.4%) of the voting pie!
Needless to say, while the focus of the public was on the top two, the contribution of four other contestants DILUTED the share of the leaders, which led to a nose finish race!
The current surveys suggest that many of those who voted for the VP in 2016 and the rest of the other candidates SHIFTED to the candidate representing Team Political Dynasty today! New voters are also assumed to have gravitated to them mechanically!
Not explained to the public is why and how this dynamic happened.
Our humble guess is that UNLESS the elections have been predetermined by powers that be, the triumphant President (and VP) will remain a beneficiary of a PLURALITY of votes (or less than 50%).
In this case, damned those surveys.
Our impression is that history may rhyme in 2022.
Since the national election represents a marketing event, the candidates who capture the critical territories of NCR, Region 4A, 3, 6, and 7, comprising 52% share of the voting population, will likely win the political race.
But the winner will have to walk a tightrope.
Lastly, as a marketing event, recent surveys appear to be designed to condition the public of a lopsided win by Team Political Dynasty.
As previously noted…
Instead of inducing a bandwagon effect, my conjecture is that the overwhelming lead in the polls of the favorite may be about mind conditioning the public on the electoral outcome.
Deficit Spending Remains a Core Agenda, The Significance of Public Debate of Candidates for the National Leadership April 4, 2022
That is, such mind conditioning represents a justification for the possible next phase of "do whatever it takes" to win. The 1986 Snap Election comes to mind.
Yours in liberty,
The Prudent Investor Newsletters
