When it comes to promoting something, people tend to show signs of grandeur or to some extent, eccentricity, to capture attention and attract human favor. In the case of elections, it is tempting for certain politicians and their respective supporters to sell themselves as unique, special, or someone who brings something exceptionally new to the table claiming to carry never-been-ever-discussed principles and platforms.
However, this drive to deviate from the ordinary to impress and impose new ways of thinking misses the view that the general populace is dominantly composed of ordinary voters who have ordinary preferences, mundane motivations, and stick to familiar perspectives.
Ordinary voters’ preference for ordinary candidates
Ordinary voters are inclined to prefer candidates who are reflective of their own persona. In various conversations in social media or non-virtual interactions today, we can see how people express their enthusiasm and support for politicians who behave and talk like them. A relatable individual who appears to be similarly ordinary easily connects to ordinary voters. This kind of relatability sometimes translates to an individual candidate’s humor or unbothered character. In the Kalye Surveys posted on YouTube by some concerned groups and citizens, interviewed people express their favor for a specific candidate because of their “dedma” or “walang pake” attitude amidst different controversies. Moreover, one who is fond of reading the comment sections of some Facebook posts or eavesdropping on casual street conversations would know that even a politician’s acts of vulgarity and contempt can strengthen people’s association and liking to them, as these are often taken as proofs of authenticity.
Ordinary voters also appreciate simple and understandable rhetoric, a plan of action that is concrete and something comprehensible as it is relatable to their daily experiences. Sure, forwarding ways to defend the state’s sovereignty is great, but the concept can be too abstract and elusive for someone who just wants to feed their family three times a day or send their children to school. Ordinary voters tend to be rational, and in a society that is far from providing equal opportunities to everyone, they are forced to prioritize their own survival.
Of course, these voters also want to address societal inequalities, but for most of them, they see these as far-fetched visions. One could recall how netizens made fun of and negatively reacted to a candidate’s promise to house every homeless Filipino. As mentioned, ordinary voters are thinking individuals. While they want to see changes which is expected for a normal person to feel after years of constant poverty, corruption, and neglect, they also calculate what is achievable and not, and are able to intuitively think if a promise is not a fair way to end existing problems or will most likely be broken again just like the previous ones.
Ordinary voters’ motivations for voting
They say the only time ordinary people are given a chance to become agents of change is when they become voters. This notion is so popular, and ordinary voters are probably aware of this. That is why we can see many people lining up to the COMELEC office for voters' registration and to the precincts during the actual elections, despite the inconvenience these processes may be causing them. For one, the concept of voting is the dominant thing one would consider as the manifestation of democracy which we claim our country embodies. There is general knowledge about the importance of voting to maintain people’s rights and chances to take part in collective decisions. We can see this in people’s affirmations to various materials released not just by the COMELEC but also by different groups and individuals, campaigning for all eligible voters’ registration and effort to vote this 2022.
This decision to take one’s opportunity to vote during elections and appreciation of what a vote can do still goes back to the notion that their chosen leaders will address their needs as ordinary citizens. Ordinary voters are expected to mainly factor in their materialist concerns when selecting a leader. In the national survey conducted by Pulse Asia Research Inc., Filipinos' top concerns are avoiding illnesses and having a secure and well-paying job. These personal concerns cannot be disregarded when talking about ordinary people’s motivations for voting as socioeconomic interventions are perceived as part of the government’s obligation to the people.
Moreover, the 2020 Unisys Security Index gave the Philippines the title of “the most concerned country” compared to 14 others, about security which includes that of national, financial, internet, and personal security. The Philippines is still a highly conservative country composed of ordinary people who desire order and security. Hence, this may explain people’s sentiments about wanting to have a leader who can eradicate crimes or protect them from the threats of terrorism.
Ordinary voters’ perspectives
In acknowledging an ordinary voter’s perspective, perhaps we are seeing a transition of what we see as ordinary. A new and different persona is perceived to be the ‘real one’ who can address their needs like financial and physical security. From having an ideal Filipino leader who is explicitly principled, upright, and God-fearing, we see a wide disillusionment with politicians and candidates who appear to be “too clean” or goody-goody. Decency is automatically interpreted as artificial and pretentious, while straightforward rudeness, albeit unjustified, is considered truth. One could say that this is because righteousness or superficial perfection is often associated with traditionally elite politicians who brought little to no impact on people’s lives and even committed dishonorable acts that are opposite to what they seem to embody. Thus, we are seeing the rise of populism where charismatic leaders capitalize on people’s existing sentiments against these elites and claim to be the ones who can truly represent the masses. These leaders are welcomed despite, and even because of, their unhidden flaws and imperfections. In Wataru Kusaka’s Moral Politics in the Philippines, he points out how a different kind of morality is established outside the familiarity of the ruling order, one that is formed from the collective memories of the oppressed. Moreover, some imperfections of certain politicians can be ignored as these are perceived to be tolerable compared to seemingly “major misdeeds of the rich”. Therefore, ordinary voters may not always be after perfection as they experiment for a better leader; being assured of changes in aspects of living that are local and important to them can be enough.
Knowing how ordinary people vote reminds us of the significance of the ordinary, which we sometimes overlook or take for granted when we give too much focus on grand ideas and sometimes detached plans of action.
Having an understanding of their possible preferences, motivations, and perspectives should enable us and different entities to effectively engage in discussion with them and to genuinely create steps to address their needs, not to merely pander to these instincts in making impossible promises for a personal interest in winning an electoral seat. After all, what ordinary voters need is just basic justice and kindness.
Comments