Nobody looked carefully at the SWS press releases published by Businessworld and mindlessly used by leading broadsheet editors, and nobody asked the following question:
The SWS press release on the survey on the next President used the survey result which asked respondents to GIVE THREE NAMES on who could be the next President; BUTfor the vice president survey, it used and released the survey result which asked the respondents for only ONE NAME, or: “Whom would you vote for Vice President should elections be held today?” (asked for only ONE NAME, name of the candidate they would vote for vice president ). Here are the links to the SWS media releases of their “Third Quearter 2015 Social Weather Survey” so you can see for yourself instead of relying on the mindless reporting of the broadsheets:
WHY? WHY? BAKIT? ANO ANG DAHILAN? WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION? BAKIT GANUN? WHY IS THE SWS SELECTIVE IN ITS RELEASE OF INFO ON SURVEY RESULTS?
The “explanation” of an SWS representative that the question they asked for the next President (three names) was the usual question they have been using since 2007, and which they have been using since the filing of candidacy has not started — is NOT availing because: for Vice President, they have a survey result based on a question which asked respondents for only one name for Vice President. The SWS explanation cannot be relied upon —
And no one is asking the SWS: Why is there a disparity in the kind of survey result info being released for the next President and for the next VP.
WHY? WHY? BAKIT? ANO ANG DAHILAN? WHAT IS THE EXPLANATION? BAKIT GANUN? WHY IS THE SWS SELECTIVE IN ITS RELEASE OF INFO ON SURVEY RESULTS?
Those candidates who are “elated” (see inquirer.net) over the released info of SWS should be careful what they are “elated” about.
Nobody asked SWS:
Since you conducted a 3rd quarter survey that asked for only one name for Vice President: IS THERE A 3rd QUARTER SURVEY THAT ASKED 1,200 RESPONDENTS NATIONWIDE FOR ONLY ONE NAME FOR PRESIDENT? (or if none, what is the explanation for the disparity, the inconsistency, lack of sense and logic in difference of questions used for Pres and Vice Pres) Whyyy whyyy whyyyy?
— the audience is bombarded with prime time television advertisements of politicians, storified reports of politician activities, show-of-force dinner parties, “consultations”, “board meetings”, barnstorming, boodlefighting, press conferencing — there is dancing, speechifying, toasting and hand-raising, tears and voice-quivering: but most of all, there will be money overflowing.
The June 5 figures are (with a margin of error of +/- 3%)
Poe 30% Binay 22% Duterte 15% Manuel Roxas II 10% Estrada 10% Miriam Defensor Santiago 6% Alan Peter Cayetano 2% Panfilo Lacson 2%
These figures are from Pulse Asia. (The SWS survey was not for voter preference for president, but a vague name-the-leaders-of-the-country survey, the storification of which was favorable to the cellardwellers because they were framed in the same line or level as the top two presidential contenders.)
None of these politicians, however, have presented any of the following:
A.Strategies for: Poverty eradication and equitable distribution of wealth
B.Program for socio-economic welfare: Health care for all; Housing; Education
C.Blueprint for Governance, Plans for Law-enforcement, Justice : 1.Taxes and infrastructure (infra for transpo, flood control, schoolhouses, etc); Pork and Prosecution, stemming rising criminality, etc.
None of the so-called “political analysts” have taken them to task for being bereft of any detailed answers to socio-economic problems.
We’re just being asked to place our bets. (Umatras ka, hindi ako aatras, mag-VP ka, BP mo mataas, corrupt ka, ikaw makapál, sumagot ka, sasagot ako mamaya).
Hopefully, the demographics are changing, the public will demand more.
