Ferdinand Marcos Jr. poised to become the Philippines’ 17th President with the first majority mandate since 1965

The quick count via the COMELEC’s transparency server shows Marcos Jr. on track to winning a 59% majority of the vote, a first since his father did it in 1965 with 51%.

Key to this commanding landslide victory is his alliance with Sara Duterte-Carpio, the daughter of the incumbent and soon-outgoing President of the Philippines, Rodrigo Roa Duterte. This alliance with Duterte allowed Marcos to cement support in Mindanao, crowding out Robredo from Regions 10 and 13 which she won in 2016.

Marcos also beat Robredo in key vote-rich areas which she won in 2016 particularly Region 4 (A and B) and Region 6 (Cebu), while consolidating his lead in regions that could have been competitive such as Region 3 (Central Luzon) and 8 (Eastern Visayas).

Central to this historical feat was a controversial election strategy where Marcos and Duterte shunned public debates and relied solely on command vote politics and savvy social media engineering to drive their narrative and build support.

More fundamentally, the Marcoses have been hard at work at revising their family’s historical record, presenting themselves as the harbinger of a lost golden age, luring in potential voters as early as 2010. Twelve years later, they reap the rewards in what is thus far our largest election with a 20% increase in registered voters from 2016 (54.4 then to 65.6 now) and a projected turnout of 80% which is on the high-side of our historical range of 75-80%.

Robredo put up a brilliant fight, especially in the latter stages of the campaign, with sterling rallies, inspiring volunteer mobilizations, and creative works of art and expression of all things pink. The intensity of the efforts however all came against the lingering sense that this has all come late, and that she and the opposition failed to build an effective coalition and to challenge the disinformation being built up against her during her six years as Vice-President.

So where do we go from here?

Procedurally, the votes will need to be officiated and certified. Provinces, cities, and municipalities shall be preparing their Certificates of Canvass which then get tallied again by the COMELEC. Then the results are submitted to Congress for them to certify and officially declare the President and Vice-President. By law, this process should be done in 30 days.

Barring wide scale anomalies or irregularities, we don’t foresee the result changing. Nevertheless, the process has been marred somewhat by reports of vote counting machine (VCM) malfunctions and errors, many well-documented and amplified on social media. Many precincts have had to deal with crowd control issues as well, a confluence of the sheer number of voters, the higher turn-out, and a pandemic that has kept many on edge.

What’s imperative now is for the COMELEC to maintain the trust of its main clientele: us citizens. While the Commission will explain that there have only been 1,867 recorded VCM issues out of 106,174 machines (1.7% error rate) the magnitude of the impact is much higher as almost a million voters (933k) stood to be affected by those issues (VCM machines times 500 or the average number of people in a clustered precinct). In a high-stakes election such as this where every vote counts, the integrity of the process matters.

By all accounts however, we’re looking at a President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. come June 30. What does that mean for us? There’s quite a lot to unpack.

We can talk soon about the Marcos restoration project and what we’ll need to be vigilant about. Our history will be rewritten — that is guaranteed — but what what can be more fundamentally changed are the institutions put in place by the 1987 constitution. Them changing the fundamental law of the land is in the cards given their sweeping mandate.

The longer view is that we are now, officially, an illiberal democracy. This is a term I first encountered as a political science student in college. Illiberal democracies hold elections but not much else beyond that; rule of law is weak and representation does not work as designed. Then we used Iraq as an example. So what does this mean now for our people and what can we expect?

If past is prologue, we know what we’re about to get into. To co-opt a now popular turn of phrase, we may not be getting into the exciting part.

Four Scenarios for May 9

Let me start with this caveat: I’m not an oddsmaker. As much as I’d like to assign odds to the following scenarios, any attempt on my end would be too amateurish and arbitrary. Perhaps it’s something another can add or suggest.

But with how things are currently tracking, these are the four possibilities for May 9. Let’s go through them and see how things can play out.

1. A BBM landslide (50% of the vote and up)

Pulse Asia has put him at 56%, a dominant majority position to win the Presidency. This, as I’ve illustrated in a previous post, will be a historic event given how previous Presidents hovered around 40%. Hence, there is some pressure on him to deliver given the trendline established by the surveys vis-a-vis the historical precedents. Can Marcos Jr. do it?

For this to materialize, BBM has to really drive turnout among young voters and those below 40, the main consumers of their revisionist project over in Facebook, YouTube, and Tiktok. He will also need to consolidate the bases that the likes of Cayetano, Escudero, and Honasan previously occupied (as pointed out by a colleague).

A BBM landslide would also have some far-reaching implications beyond his win. Elections will never be the same (if we still have them in 6 years). It would be interesting to see the Kakampink movement grow into a civic movement that will keep Marcos Jr. in check. But they will need a leader or guide to help them through the heartbreak of the loss. Political leadership will be needed for the Kakampink to sustain what they’ve started. Otherwise we will have more of the last 6 years but much worse.

2. A tight BBM plurality win (43% vs VPL’s 38-40%)

BBM could win with about 22-24M votes with Leni competitive at 20-22M. Both of these scenarios are improvements over their 2016 numbers. This result will assume that they more or less split the youth vote, while Leni somehow closed the gap in NCR and Central Luzon (see the recent article by John Nery where he outlined VPL’s path to 22M votes: https://www.rappler.com/…/newsstand-leni-robredo-needs…/).

This can be a potentially perilous situation especially if there are documented incidents of cheating, voter suppression, and fraud. However, the tilt towards BBM could complicate things. With the COMELEC stacked with Duterte-appointees all the way from the bench to their logistics companies, it will be too easy for Marcos Jr. to press his advantage.

3. A tight VPL plurality win (43% vs BBM’s 38-40%)

I think this is the likeliest to happen. However, I also consider this the nightmare scenario.

For VPL to achieve this she will need to do better with the youth and over-perform in areas where she is perceived to be weak (NCR, Region III, Davao). A higher turnout will also favor VP Robredo as there is a straight-line to be drawn between the strength of her volunteer movement and voter turnout. Marcos Jr. will also have to be weaker than expected with the Undecideds who will decide on election day.

However, this can become potentially very, very messy. With how Marcos Jr. has campaigned these past months, a tight loss won’t be acceptable. Expect trolls to go on overdrive as they ‘flood the zone’ with so much misinformation that the Kakampink themselves might question the result. Expect some calls to be made to Governors. Expect some ‘delays’ and ‘glitches’ in the tallying of result. Cases will be filed. COMELEC will be put under the microscope. Pressure will be put on Congress as they certify the results.

Donald Trump losing to Biden is still fresh in my mind. The onslaught of allegations of cheating and made-up claims of voting irregularities grated on for days, weeks, and months. The craziness culminated in an attack on the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.

The Kakampink will need to mobilize and move smartly, meeting each case head on. Now would be the time for professionals and political operators, who have been largely on the sidelines, to rise up and help VPL fight back and be aggressive (not her usual stance). Robredo will also need to start consolidating political support in Congress, especially if Macros Jr. intends to drag things out all the way to the certification of results.

This scenario will require VP Leni to expend a lot of political capital early on, which can be a downside. Critical too is that she has a friendly Vice-President who cannot be wedged against her. I understand people have other reasons for voting someone other than Kiko Pangilinan. As this scenario is increasingly likely, it is important that they reconsider and keep the Leni-Kiko tandem all the way through.

4. A VP Leni landslide (50% of the vote up)

I would still expect Marcos Jr. to put up a fight but the commanding margin would muffle his efforts somewhat. Trolls will still make some noise, cases will still be filed, but all this would have less credibility. Political consolidation (falling in line) would happen more easily. What would be interesting to see next is how all those who pledged support for the Uniteam start wearing pink shirts and polos by June.

But how likely is this scenario?

For this to happen, VP Leni will need most of the youth vote and a higher turnout in areas she won in 2016 while winning or at least drawing level in NCR and Central Luzon. Our elections will also need to be, dare I say, generally clean, fair, and free from coercion.

A ‘survey’ made the rounds the past few days showing VP Leni at 53% versus Marcos Jr. This was even posted on the Senate website for a while. While I have reservations about the research question since it only assumes a one on one contest, it could offer some indication that VP Leni is now much more competitive versus Marcos Jr. than she was at the beginning.

This VP Leni landslide scenario would also validate Google Trends as a predictor of the result. She is currently at 53%.

End note:

Thank you for reading so far. Thank you for indulging my election anxiety.

This may be my last post in this accidental series as tomorrow we begin traveling home so we can vote on Monday.

A Happy Mother’s Day to all our moms, our wives, our mother-figures. Happy Mother’s Day sa ating Inang Bayan; let us vote for her on Monday.

On Opinions, Respect, and our Divisive Times

There are two types of claims: objective and subjective.

An objective claim may be true or false. It is something that can be verified through observation, inspection, or investigation. It is raining outside. The butler did it. The family embezzled government funds. These claims can be tested. Corollary to this: an objective claim is not always true since what we may now consider as fact can become otherwise when presented with new evidence or information. Pluto was a planet for most of my elementary school days until it wasn’t.

On the other hand, a subjective claim cannot be proven true or false by any general standard or criteria. These claims include statements of opinion, preference, judgment, values, feelings, or taste. Here are examples:

DC is better than Marvel.

Rafael Nadal is the GOAT.

I like to vote for somebody God-fearing.

Social media is dividing us.

While these statements may seem true, the converse may be equally so:

Marvel is better than DC.

Novak Djokovic is the GOAT.

I believe in the separation of Church and state.

Social media is only amplifying what is already there.

In reading the above statements, you may have felt the ‘twinge of truth’; this twinge is triggered by your values and context. Maybe you’ve watched and enjoyed the MCU movies more. Perhaps you consider yourself secular. Or maybe you don’t feel for tennis; when you read GOAT you may have thought of Lebron James or even Michael Jordan.

Hence, subjective claims are not automatically false for being subjective. There are specific criteria that allow it to be true or false while being completely neither. Philosopher Zosimo Lee put it well once: critical-thinking is thinking in boxes. We first must agree as to what criteria we use in judging information. Then we weigh them ruthlessly according to these criteria.

Moreover, objective and subjective claims complement each other. Opinions can be strengthened with facts. Arguments over the GOAT can be settled if we agree on what to count: Grand Slams, Masters, Year-end championships. While the questions won’t be completely settled, the interplay of objective and subjective claims allow us to come to some consensus, agreement, or at the very least a common understanding. Hence, the art of debating, negotiation, and politics.

Thus, the belief that every person is entitled to an opinion does not mean that every opinion is as good as any other.

Some opinions are better formed, have more substance, and are subjected to criteria that are more valuable, practical, or important. Other opinions are ill-formed, have no practical value, or have little evidence. Furthermore, some claims are made with integrity and a willingness to be corrected, others are made from a position of mistrust or power over.

What do we make then of the appeal to ‘respect my opinion’?

First, remember that an opinion is a subjective claim that is neither true nor false.

Second, recognize that the subjective claim is a reflection of a value or preference.

Third, the facts used to support an opinion are driven by the need to validate a value or preference.

Social ethicist Jonathan Heidt writes: “When it comes to moral judgments, we think we are scientists discovering the truth, but actually we are lawyers arguing for positions we arrived at by other means.” People make judgments first and only then find the facts to support them.

Thus, I find the appeal to ‘respect my opinion’ not so much as an appeal to accept a subjective claim as true but to accept the person making the claim. This means accepting their value or preference as valuable and preferrable even if we come from a completely different value system.

This is the gist of political philosopher Michael J. Sandel in his groundbreaking work, ‘The Tyranny of Merit’ — that the social and economic divides that have defined the past decade now manifest as a moral divide as well. Simply put, people are no longer divided just along race, class, or social status but by moral universes too.

This is what makes our time so fraught with peril and possibility.

Lies and fake news need to be challenged and corrected, but we must also understand the forces that led others to subscribe to misinformation. But we must always be aware that challenging these claims is an affront not just to the claim itself, but to the very identity and value system of the person holding the claim.

This is clearly borne out in online debates when ‘the educated’ may think they’re attacking an idea when in reality they are attacking a person. This act exacerbates the very division brought about by unequal levels of education and access that is already there.

What we need to figure out is a new ethic of engagement. Clearly, technology has played a vital role in shaping our present modes of talking to one another. The technology can still evolve, yes, but my intuition is so must we. Speaking of love and kindness in more realistic and practical terms is a good place to start. Recovering spaces where we can meet and share values is important so we can come to an agreement again of how we move forward. We feel this now as we slowly go back to work and meet face to face: there is this profound sense of recovering ties we once had. Where we go next is still for us to claim.

On Surveys and Probabilities

The latest Pulse Asia survey has kept Marcos Jr. firmly in the lead at 56% with Robredo a distant second at 23%.

A lot has been said and can still be said about the methodologies of Pulse Asia. I would just like to highlight one item which I’ve seen touched on in passing but which I think is most critical in assessing the reliability of these surveys.

In Operations we’re trained to do sanity checks — sometimes we need to look at our numbers from another point of view to see whether they can really be borne by reality. Percentages can be misleading. From time to time, it helps to look at the absolute figures.

If we assume that Pulse Asia can predict the outcome at this point, what does this mean?

Assumptions:

1. There are 65.6 million voters in the coming elections. Of this, about 6.9 million are new.

2. We have had a historic participation rate of 80%.

3. We use the latest Pulse Asia results as probabilities to project the probable vote share.

Here is what it looks like:

65.6 million x 80% participation = 52.5 million actual votes

52.5 million actual votes x 56% for Marcos Jr. = 29.4 million votes

Hence, using the above assumptions, Marcos Jr. can be projected to win with 29.4 million votes.

Now, how probable is this, in reality?

Let’s look at the actual votes over the last few elections:

2016: Duterte, 16.6 million votes

2010: Aquino, 15.2 million votes

2004: Arroyo, 12.9 million votes

1998: Estrada, 10.7 million votes

We know these to be plurality votes, not majority votes. The plurality vote is the threshold by which the winner has garnered the most votes versus the competition to be declared the winner.

Here’s what’s interesting. By what rates have our pluralities grown through the years? (Let’s take the percentage growth of one election year from the election year that preceded it.)

From 1998 to 2004: 20%

From 2004 to 2010: 18%

From 2010 to 2016: 9%

Taking the projected win of Marcos Jr. of 29.4 million versus the result of Duterte in 2016 of 16.6 million, BBM is projected to garner 12.8 million more voters than Duterte. This means that the growth rate from the previous election will be a staggering 77%!

From 20% to 9% to 77%!

This will indeed be an impressive result by Marcos Jr.! It will be truly historic. But — and here’s the rub — is this possible?

Where is this growth coming from?

I won’t be surprised if the next President wins with about 18 million votes. But 29.4?

How can Marcos Jr. be outperforming Duterte by 12.8 million votes? This is much more than the total new voters of 6.9M assuming all of them break for Marcos.

So frankly, I don’t have a clue. I’m scratching my head. But here are some initial lines of inquiry:

Has our electorate shifted by that much over the past six years? Are people really less democratic now, more autocratic?

Is the Marcos disinformation machine THAT good? Have they by and large succeeded with their historical revisionism and family rebranding?

Or, most probable, are his competition — from Robredo to Moreno, from Lacson to Pacquiao — that weak, poor, and unformidable?

Offhand, with a projected win that beats the previous populists’ by 77%, something is off. Perhaps we have misplaced our assumptions or gotten one or all of them wrong.

Viewing the numbers this way, I am convinced that the final result is really still up for grabs. At the very least, I cling to the probability that it is.

So, vote.

A World Teachers’ Day Letter, 5th October 2021

As sent to the faculty of PHINMA Araullo University on this day.

5th October 2021

To our Dearest Teachers,

Magandang ArAU sa lahat!

Today is our second World Teachers’ Day in this pandemic world. It’s been more than a year since the pandemic changed the way we do things. It hasn’t been easy. So let me start off by personally thanking each one of you for your sacrifice, perseverance, and love for our work. 

Nevertheless, through all of this, I have come to the conclusion that teachers are more important to society than ever. Our work of mentoring, coaching, and guiding our students is more indispensable than ever. Allow me to share a reflection.

In this pandemic time, I summarize the three noble callings of a teacher through three C’s — Care, Connect, and Co-create.

First, we are called to Care. These are rough times. With Covid-19, families are made to live through sickness, loss of work, and even loss of loved ones. We encounter students who miss out on our exams because they tested positive for Covid. We have colleagues who struggle to balance working from home with running a household. We know too well the stories of our students who lost the means to continue school; we dread the day that debilitating disease means we can’t continue living.

Thus, the teacher’s first call these days is to Care. This does not mean compromising our standards for what our students need to learn, but perhaps spacing out the work so that everything is manageable. It also means that we are mindful of our own mental health and overall well-being. After all, we cannot give what we do not have.

Second, we are called to Connect. We may not realize this, but the viral pandemic has led to another crisis: the crisis of isolation. I have two young sons; both turned pre-school age during this pandemic. While we use Zoom every day for work, having my sons talk to other kids through a computer is not how I’d like to raise them. I imagine there are many other kids who are also growing up now without the social environment of Church and school that teaches someone the virtues of empathy, kindness, and generosity. This work now falls by and large to us parents (and it’s hard work for sure!); now they fall on us teachers, too.

We see our own students craving for connection in how they use Facebook and our group chats. The desire for them to be with their classmates is valid and real. Through our sessions with our students we do our best to create that environment of community and connection. This is also what drives them to be engaged and ultimately, to learn.

Which leads me to our third calling: to Co-create. Our main challenge now as teachers is to deliver the education our students need and deserve. Even after we provide them the care and community they need, how then do they learn best? The impulse we have seen in the past year is to teach how we used to, only virtually. But over the past year we’ve seen our students become more creative, more hungry, in using the content we provide in more creative ways.

Co-creation is all about being open to new possibilities. One of my favorite educators, Sir Ken Robinson, used to describe traditional education like an industrial factory. There are inputs, there are outputs. There is a process and an expected product. But human beings are not created this way.

Instead, education should be more like agriculture. It should be like a farm. We know this well here in Nueva Ecija — whether it be an agriculturalist or a farmer, their main work is to create the conditions that allow for the crops to grow. It means adjusting the amount of water or heat in the environment. It means providing for pest control when needed; it means reaping when the time is right. The work of farming requires care and connection to the Earth, the environment, and the community in which these crops grow.

Thus, let’s create that environment for our students, one where they can learn and grow as good humans and citizens. This is our calling as teachers. I salute all of you who are responding to this call. And together, as one University, let us strive to create this environment for our teachers and staff so that we may continue to work on our mission each day as well.

Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. On behalf of PHINMA Education, I hope you are in good health today and for the rest of your days. Happy World Teachers’ Day!

Sincerely,

Martin