Success of liberal progressive politics and failure of partisan polling
IN this age of politics that is overhyped in social media, dominated by toxic trolls and blind idolatry, and where people are confined to domestic politics, many would rarely pay attention to the international arena, except when it is about K-pop and K-drama.
More people are animated about the conscription of the members of the BTS Korean boy band group into military service than rail against the conscription of unwilling Russian men to fight Putin’s dirty war against Ukraine that causes many of them to flee across the border.
We cannot expect more from a people who would rather watch social media vloggers bludgeon each other about snakes in palaces than be concerned about climate change. I doubt it if there are as many people interested in the climate change conference in Egypt, where world leaders discussed the future or our warming planet, as there are people who would follow their favorite K-dramas. I vlogged about the Egypt conference, and the number of viewers was a pittance compared to when I vlogged about the social media wars between Maharlika and Thinking Pinoy.
We really have to improve on our literacy not only about politics but to expand our focus not only about what is going on locally but also about the events happening in other countries. Failing to do so would deny us the exposure to important learning moments. Two recently concluded elections are examples of how being aware of events happening elsewhere can be very useful.
The recent elections in Brazil, where left-progressive candidate Lula da Silva, a former president, emerged victorious over right-wing firebrand incumbent Jair Bolsonaro, is an important learning moment. Local progressive voices can only be but envious of this feat. One of the things that was crucial in the Brazilian election was that the contrast between the two candidates was very clear, like day and night. And this was made possible because there were only two major candidates, and both candidates carried sharply contrasting ideological platforms.
This is a luxury that we do not have in the Philippines. Not only that there are usually several candidates running, but also that they are bereft of any clear ideological anchor. We end up with people running as Nacionalistas but are not nationalists, Liberals but are not liberal, and recently, our President ran under the banner of a party named Partido Federal, but has not clearly pushed for a change to a federal system of government. It is hard to even locate our candidates in the ideological spectrum. Hence, electoral victory all boils down to personality, optics and a healthy dose of blind idolatry, and never about ideology, policy and party platform.
We can certainly learn a lot from Brazil, except that perhaps our political elites would rather not learn, considering that they thrive in this system that keeps ideology away from politics.
We should also learn a lot from the recently concluded US midterm elections, where despite the populist assault on democratic institutions, sanity and rationality prevailed. The Democrats prevailed over what had been hyped as a red wave, where the Republicans were expected to make huge gains in the Senate, House of Representatives and in the local state elections. Historically, the party of the incumbent president usually loses seats in midterm elections. With President Joseph Biden having uncharacteristically low approval ratings, coupled with an unfavorable economic environment, every pundit predicted not only a red wave but a red tsunami that would sweep the Democrats out of power.
But things proved to be otherwise when even in the direst of circumstances, Democrats outperformed expectations. They held on to their Senate majority and are on their way to forcing a narrow majority in the House to either party. This was not a red tsunami, but a small red splash. And in state elections, Democrats were able to protect their majorities, and even flip legislative chambers that led them to achieve trifecta status where they are now in control not only of the governorship, but both houses of the state legislature. And in states where it was impossible for Democrats to win a majority of the state houses, they were able to win enough seats to deny the Republicans a veto-proof supermajority, thereby protecting the veto power of sitting Democratic governors.
It is obvious that the reason for the miserable performance of the Republicans was because of three things. The Dobbs decision where the US Supreme Court reversed
Roe v. Wade, and the eagerness of the Republicans to codify a ban on abortion not only locally in states but even nationally whipped up the pro-reproductive rights vote that clearly benefited the Democrats. A second reason is that many voters were turned off by the anti-democratic push by the Republicans, where many campaigned on the platform of restricting voting access. And finally, there was Donald Trump, who forcibly inserted himself as the issue in key races.
There is a fourth reason why the Democrats prevailed. And this is something from which we can learn. It is, again, about the significant role of political parties in elections. A robust party machinery that whips up votes, delivers key messages and engages in rational discussion, from the precinct level to the national level, is indispensable.
There is one other important lesson we need to learn from the US elections. Election surveys that pointed to a red wave terribly missed their mark. Democrats projected to lose ended up winning, while contests that were projected to be safe ended up being contested. Pro-Trump firebrand Rep. Lauren Boebert of the third district of Colorado was projected to be in a safe Republican seat. She ended up embroiled in a very tight race.
Some people would be quick to blame surveys as being indeed unreliable. But the actual reason is not the surveys, but the palpable partisanship of many polling firms, amplified by a partisan media. Surveys can only be accurate if they are not weaponized by political partisans.