Which vote is a wasted vote? The one used to give the best candidate a fighting chance, or the one used to let a supposed front-runner’s backers control the outcome with unscientific surveys? Having generated the largest business portfolio for my previous company using market research, it really bothers me that the methodologies behind the various election surveys seem so loose that the results are practically useless except for whatever agendas those who paid for the surveys may have.

For example, if Noynoy A is really the front-runner, how come most people I speak with are supporting Gordon?

Obviously since I’m not a Villar-ionaire I can’t do a proper survey myself at this point, but it’s very worrying – look at the financial crisis caused by believing too much in credit ratings paid for by the companies being rated themselves – how much misery has been caused by this ill-placed compianza? Should we peg our faith in getting the leaders we deserve on unscientific surveys, or should we peg our faith on finding the best fit candidate for our country’s needs?

What would you like our country to have achieved 6 years from now? How do we measure the achievements we would like our people to have accomplished in 6 years, 12 years, 24 years, and what kind of proven accomplishments let us know which candidates are the best choice?

I am sure different voters will have different criteria, and different results, but I hope you’d help spread the word to let the best candidate win, and not necessarily the ones pre-selected by paid-for survey companies. Personally, I’m impressed with this platform and the values, qualifications and experience behind it http://bit.ly/cABGn9

Just to share, where I’m from, I can go jogging at night, there’s a functioning public library, LTO transactions take 15 minutes, public school students have international-standard classrooms, and it doesn’t even need to collect the same taxes as Makati. Do we want to just survive in our country, or really live?

I believe our people will make the right choice if we just remind ourselves to stay focused on what this election is about – our future, our dreams, and our loved ones.

May the best candidate win.

What do you think? Please spread the word to everyone you care about also

Cheers :)

I’ll take up your invitation. I disagree mainly with your point that “we should unite the opposition and kick out Gloria.” Anti-Glorianism is a mind-numbing religion based on mere hatred against the figurehead. But I see the problem as a whole range of politicians working together on their schemes – and the people willingly voting them in. Gloria is set up by them as the punching bag. Booting her out won’t solve the problem. Why not boot them all out? Like, abolish the Senate? Or, I say, change the election system and government to electorate or parliamentary, it creates a system that reduces election cheating and non-performance a great deal. But also needed is to help change the culture and thinking of people.

“Why should we help the administration enemy (divided into Villar and Teodoro) by dividing our own house into Aquino-Erap-Perlas-Villanueva-Gordon?” Are you sure this helps the administration enemy? Is the administration *always* the enemy? What’s wrong with going for one’s preferred candidate no matter the “enemy”? A vote is a statement for what one believes in. I believe voting for an opponent just to get the incumbent out is a shallow and pointless reason. As many say, you get Gloria out, who’s gonna sit in? Don’t be too sure the replacement is who you want. I know your goal is to get people to unite for Noynoy for a strong number to keep Villar, Gibo and Erap out of office… but my choice is mine. Yours is yours. I also want people reading this comment thread to be aware of anti-Glorianism and that they’d better think twice, thrice or more before getting into it. It’s a politics of hatred.

Well, there’s my opinions, that’s that. Thank you.

sa australian open.

As pathos descends into bathos, more words of wisdom from our illustrious colleagues.

But alarm bells start ringing when contributors to this site go out of their way to be unnecessarily rude to those with differing views, and when they start becoming personal (why write about my Mom at all?; why not just focus on… ME?). Where is the need for this when we’re just discussing our own respective views? Simply because someone is voting for Gibo or Villar (or voted for George W Bush back in the day) doesn’t necessarily mean that they automatically become objectionable human beings. There’s no reason why we can’t agree to differ in a civil manner, after all. Nor is there any reason why we need to agree on anything at all, for that matter, even as we keep our long-term relationships cordial. And someone supporting a different candidate may still have a lot to contribute with respect to specific issues, so I would suggest that we in this site don’t now throw out the baby with the bathwater altogether.

On the antipinoy site, Chino suggests that those who support Noynoy r hate-mongerers who r guilty of slander. But if u read how I have been described as moronic, etc, u will agree that, if anything, they could pretty easily be accused of the same thing. More importantly, the only person I accused of being a hack was BenignO (aka, The Real Deal, the self-same person who authors these various sites). I came to that conclusion not because of his ideas but because of his TONE, which a number of people in this thread and elsewhere have found to be objectionable anyway. It just sounded like the type of harangue one hears from Villar supporters, that’s all.

And the whole point of having a non-partisan, multi-sectoral site like this one is so that we can all air our views. So: if Nicki Perlas is in fact your candidate, then say so, and say why — so the rest of us can learn. As I’ve already said, I am still open to having my opinion changed. I think Nicki (who is a kind, gentle and thoughtful soul, and one who happens to be quite inclusive) would be shocked and offended by the style in which u purport to defend his views. As a matter of fact, I am fairly certain that he wouldn’t welcome BenignO’s attacks of everyone who happens to be for Noynoy here, and he has since been apprised of this unfortunate fact. Because, in fact, Chino, it is BenignO who was hate-mongering in the first place. In an argument, when u dissect someone’s views, u explain your terms and defend your position; u don’t slither off to your little hole and write a blog about their family background, if u see what I mean. Nietzsche would have called this “ressentiment” (the rancor and malice of one who feels disempowered). But no one was stopping him from defending Nicki or Villar or anyone else, see? I was just exasperated because I wanted to understand what alternatives he had to propose.

The main reason I felt he was for Villar was because it’s a rudeness I’ve seen among other Villar supporters before, that’s all. I could very well have been wrong about that initial assessment. But the point is that u do Nicki a DISSERVICE if u think u r winning anyone over to his side this way. And if, as Bert and Abe suggest, u r not necessarily for anyone at all, really, and just enjoy being objectionable, then I would suggest that that is the saddest possibility of all. Because if it’s just anarchy you’re peddling here, then it might be a good idea if u were to ply your dubious trade elsewhere.

Again, people should not be demonized for having different views. If your thesis is that Noynoy is no answer for the country, why not propose your alternative (Perlas, Villar) IN THIS SELF-SAME FRAY? Why go into your personal site (which appears to be incestuous more than anything else, since I see no one with dissenting views among your readers, so I gather u discourage this) and then expound on who u think has a vision? That anti-thesis would have been more than welcome here and might have even led to the type of educational synthesis Mario refers to above. So, by all means: let’s dialogue. But let’s be educated about our capacity to listen to dissenting views. It’s the primary Socratic moment, after all.