A good friend, Ray Dean Salvosa, father of ATTY. PAOLO SALVOSA, a candidate for a seat in the Baguio City Council, passed on to me a facebook article of a certain “GIGO”, a noted businessman, so I am told, regarding the election of Donald Trump, as President of the United States. The article posits that Trump won because of his ability to speak directly to the disillusioned masses – of their frustrations over the economy, a sense of insecurity about immigration, and a yearning for traditional values (?) – his “unapologetic framing of America’s challenges resonated with many who feel left behind or unheard. It did not matter that he was openly immoral, a compulsive liar and has been found guilty of crimes that should disqualify him from public office… Trump’s critics focused on the man himself: his personal indiscretions, his moral deficiencies. But for the majority, as verified by election results, it was his message that spoke louder…” The article continues:
“… Contrast Trump with Vice President Kamala Harris, a candidate of proven decency, experience and respect for democratic institutions. Harris positioned herself as a staunch defender of civil rights, democracy, and a government that serves marginalized communities. Yet her moral character and qualifications may have actually been undermined by her role in the current (Biden) administration, as she found herself burdened with defending the Biden record on issues like inflation and border policies that have disappointed many Americans. Her efforts to frame the debate around the protection of democracy and civil rights, though noble, left some voters feeling disconnected from the more immediate, tangible issues that affect their daily lives…”
The writer, Gigo, further reflected that this also happened in the Philippines when the electorate voted for Duterte in 2016 and BongBong in 2022. Duterte was known for his brutal and illegal approach to crime (described as extra-judicial killings), while his successor is the son of a dictator… “In both cases, voters were not necessarily endorsing Duterte’s or BBM’s values; they were voting for a vision of change, no matter how morally complex or even disturbing getting to that change might unfold…”
The article thus offers a formula for a successful political campaign. Gigo stated:
“… This is the hard truth and lesson that democracies around the world should learn: a candidate’s character, qualifications, and even basic decency may matter less in today’s political landscape than his or her ability to tap into the public’s visceral needs and fears. And while it’s easy to see this as a failure of moral discernment, it is perhaps more instructive to view it as a lesson in political communication.
A candidate who understands and articulates the actual feelings and sentiments on the ground, and who isn’t afraid to channel the frustrations and anxieties of the people, holds a decisive advantage. Morality, essential for governance to be sure, is just an after-thought that can be brushed aside by people struggling to afford groceries, fearing for their jobs, feeling unsafe when walking down the street, or anxious that their way of life is slipping away.
This is not a call to abandon character as a criterion for leadership. It is however a reminder that character alone is not enough, nor decisive.
In both U.S. and the Philippines, we have now seen what happens when morally superior candidates fail to connect with the electorate’s most immediate concerns. The electorate may well choose a deeply flawed leader if they decide that he or she “gets them” and is prepared to fight for the issues that they care about.
If we continue to focus simply on persons (whether by building up our candidate, or tearing down the other) rather than the message, we be revealed as incapable of learning and destined to fail.
Politics today is as much about perception and resonance, as it is about policy. Democracy is not merely about offering the best candidate. It is about giving people the sense that their voices are being heard, and that their fears are being addressed.”
After reflecting on this very interesting and sharp analysis of present-day politics in a democratic setting, I came to realize why movie stars, especially heroes on film, get elected into public office here in the Philippines. The public consider them as their real-life heroes who can alleviate them from poverty, the hardships and the miseries of living. No wonder, a handsome hero like Robin Padilla, could emerge as no. 1 Senator in Philippine elections, despite his criminal record and inexperience in legislative procedures, public service and administration.
