‘I am told that political history shows that leaders in surveys this early in the game never end up winning.’
SURVEY after survey after survey, whether conducted by SWS or Publicus or lesser-known outfits (many of which sprout during the election season like mushrooms during the tag-ulan) consistently show one thing: If the elections were to be held today, Ferdinand Marcos Jr. would cakewalk into Malacanang next year.
This prospect sends many people I know I to apoplexy. Not only are they revolted by the idea of another Marcos in the Palace; they are doubly revolted by the fact that it is the son and namesake who will most likely be the next president, and they are triply revolted that it will happen on the 50th anniversary of the declaration of Martial Law. That declaration, according to one view of contemporary Philippine history, plunged our country into a political, economic, and even a moral spiral from which we have yet to emerge completely.
If the surveys are to be believed, this is a view of history not embraced by a considerable segment, maybe by majority of our population.
And that is what is at the root of the appeal of Bongbong Marcos: he is unburdened by the baggage of the past as much as his political opponents insist he should be.
This should not be baffling, if you ask me. It’s not unique to the Philippines, this apparent “amnesia” that some people decry, or “historical revisionism.” It’s an ongoing struggle everywhere: in Germany the government has to keep tabs on Neo-Nazis for whom the Reich represents the apex of German national pride; in China, the Communist Party had to clamp down on indicia of Maoist cult of personality, at least around Chongqing parry head Bo Xilai; in Cambodia, a grim museum in the center of Phnom Penh exists to remind Cambodians of the killing fields lest they forget and it happens again; and all over America — with a big one next to the Smithsonian chain of museums — the civil rights struggle is commemorated and immortalized lest people forget.
Because people do forget. Time passes, you see, as do generations. So yesterday’s hero becomes forgotten (or is wiped off the face of a P1,000 bill!), while today’s hero becomes tomorrow’s heel.
Furthermore, Bongbong benefits from a few more “arguments.” First, no one should bear the sins of his father, especially if his participation in their commission is disputable.
Second, it’s been 30 years; many ordinary Filipinos ask why if the case versus the Marcoses was airtight, why was the book never ever thrown at them, including on that most controversial matter of who ordered the killing of Ninoy? Third, because a politician pocketing government funds never ever angers us as much as a pickpocket pocketing our wallet, allegations of stolen funds – or of corruption for that matter – has never truly sunk any political career in our corner of the world, at least as far as I know. And then there’s the fourth which I think lurks beneath the surface – it’s again the ordinary Filipinos reacting to what they think is an elite attack on Marcos, first provoked by his effort to break their hold on the Philippines in the 1970s. That Marcos vs. old oligarch battle has never ended and I have heard some ordinary folks say that these attacks on Bongbong are but a continuation of that struggle. And in 2022, as in 2016, it seems the ordinary people are ready to take sides — the other side.
All these are why I think survey after survey show Marcos on top. I am told that political history shows that leaders in surveys this early in the game never end up winning. That may be true, but “there’s always a first time” may just be as true as well.
