The President Lost Big in the Midterms, but is there a Bright Spot?

By Joey Salgado

For campaign strategists who take research seriously - for planning and not as a PR tool - surveys show them strengths and weaknesses in messaging and ground game. It provides insights into voter behavior at a specific period, and guide points on what to say and where to go. It shows them the road to victory.

If surveys were an electoral Waze, then this year several candidates ended in the ditch.

The prevailing mood in the administration camp is one of disbelief.

Despite the record-low trust and performance ratings of the President, Alyansa candidates had dominated all pre-election surveys, with at least eight candidates predicted to land in the winning circle. The arrest of former president Rodrigo Duterte in March dented their numbers, but most of the candidates remained in contention. An internal survey conducted a week before election day did not uncover earthshaking shifts in voter preference. Majority of the Alyansa candidates were placed in the “safe” zone.

The post-election reaction can be summed up in two words, expletive deleted. What happened?

The surprising leap made by former senators Bam Aquino and Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan was also greeted with disbelief, but without the soul-piercing ache experienced by the Alyansa.

In 2022, the pink forces repudiated all survey results - favoring Google analytics as supposedly the more accurate gauge of voter sentiment - simply because the surveys pointed to certain defeat for their presidential candidate. The victory of Aquino and Pangilinan is seen as a validation of their distrust.

The hardcore elements, perhaps inebriated with the rare taste of victory, hailed the results as a triumph of pink virtues, as holy writ, a clarion call for all pinks to prepare for 2028. Clearly, sobriety has yet to settle in.

The polls got it wrong

Pollsters now find themselves facing intense grilling from frustrated clients and media. But circuitous explanations and academic language can barely mask their own disbelief at how wrong they were.

When survey firms started conducting pre-election polling late last year, both Aquino and Pangilinan were given poor chances of winning. Pundits and political observers shared the same opinion: the 2022 presidential defeat, and the 2016 and 2019 election routs, sounded the death knell for the Liberal Party and its allies. This election would be no different.

Even when Aquino showed traction in March and April, analysts were asking if he still had time to catch up. And Panglinan? His campaign was already dead in the water.

Bloc voting as a tactical weapon

A shift in tactics may have helped boost their numbers, and this was not captured by the surveys.

The call was made to resort to bloc voting, an electoral strategy commonly associated with the Iglesia Ni Cristo (INC). All pinks were told to vote just for Aquino, Pangilinan, and other adopted pink candidates, to the exclusion of Alyansa candidates who espoused progressive views on certain issues and who could have been allies in securing the conviction of impeached Vice President Sara Duterte. Aquino also got additional votes from the INC, who endorsed him along with several administration candidates and maverick Rep. Rodante Marcoleta.

With election turnout during midterms historically low, bloc voting becomes a formidable weapon.

In contrast, the administration failed to embark on a similarly aggressive call for solid Alyansa votes in their strongholds. And assuming such a call was made, it went unheeded in the absence of incentives or implied punitive actions for non-compliance. In short, the administration failed to instill discipline in its ranks.

One explanation has been offered for the seeming indifference of local allies. Why would they toe the line when the coalition largely ignored presidential sister Senator Imee Marcos and her deliberate acts of political sabotage before dropping her from its line up? Why would they risk political fallout when the administration kept Rep. Camille Villar in its slate even when she secured the endorsement of the impeached Vice President and skipped all the homestretch rallies?

A third option?

In the closing days of the campaign, Aquino and Pangilinan may have also offered a third option for undecided voters disaffected with the economic failings of the Marcos administration yet repulsed by the idea of supporting Duterte candidates. This included “soft” Marcos supporters.

The strong performance of the two pink candidates in administration bailiwicks in Luzon, including the Ilocos Region, Central Luzon, and Calabarzon, tends to validate this observation. In some big provinces, they even edged out leading administration candidates.

As a result, Alyansa candidates underperformed in supposedly secure provinces. “Walang diin,” was how a campaign strategist described the administration’s business-as-usual tact in an election where legacy, mandate, and political survival was at stake.

The surveys also gave the administration a false sense of security. It induced hubris, the confidence that it can overcome the backlash from the Duterte arrest and dissatisfaction over high prices. All the advantages of a formidable machinery and resources turned idle. From March onwards, the administration left its candidates to fend for themselves.

Did youth votes deliver?

Some observers have attributed the Kiko-Bam victory to Gen Z and millennial voters. It proceeds from the assumption, rather sweeping, that the youth, regardless of socio-economic status and life experiences, share the same values and political views by virtue of their age.

In the absence of validation on actual voter turn out for this age group, this remains speculative. But if this view can be validated by research, it would herald a tipping point, a welcome break from the long history of low youth turnout on election day. Then again, the pinks would rather believe Google than research data, so who am I to argue?

Protest vote

There is no doubt that the election of Aquino, Pangilinan, Marcoleta, and Marcos were protest votes against the administration. No measure of rhetorical calls for unity can hide the reality that the Alyansa lost big.

The last thing a President needs in the last three years of his tenure is an obstructionist Senate throwing roadblocks on legacy programs and making life difficult for the executive department. Expect Marcoleta and Marcos, both possessed by a mission to bring down the administration and protect the Dutertes, to lead the charge.

Still there is a bright spot for the President when it comes to the biggest political battle of his life.

The presence of Aquino and Pangilinan could potentially offset the entry of Marcoleta, Villar, and Marcos, who are expected to vote for the acquittal of the impeached Vice President.

The impeachment trial is sudden political death for either the Marcoses or the Dutertes. The result of the midterm elections was a step backward for the Marcos administration. Let’s see if it can summon the courage, the wits, and the will to take two steps forward.

This article also appears in Rappler