I’ve been rethinking my suggestion of a Third Flank after re-reading Patricia Evangelista’s Sunday column. It is the time for Senate slates to be drafted and announced (January 15 is the magic date), and some people are already speculating, as was last November, about possible candidates for senator. John Marzan is already in 2nd draft of his list of candidates to vote for.
But what resonates more to me is Evangelista’s comments. Putting the elitist tone aside, she have made valid points about Guingona, Legarda, and Joker Arroyo (Evangelista still thinks EDSA 2 is right) being in the United Opposition (UNO), throwing principle aside. She even blasted the idea of Richard Gomez (and Edu Manzano) running as senator. I believe her thinking represents the thoughts of the majority of the undecided.
The problem with her idea is that it places the likes of Guingona and Legarda in a political limbo. Taking “principles” into consideration, the two cannot join either slate. What would the two do, aside from running as independents?
Her thoughts, however, fall in line with what I think will be the administration’s selling point regarding its Senate slate – 2007 is a proxy war between Estrada and Arroyo; that the opposition is still more of the same; and when push comes to shove, it is better to side with the lesser evil.
While both slates not yet final, it is futile to speculate about the chances of winning. Yet the spectre of the “more-of-the-same” thinking, for me, will work for the administration’s benefit. Hence the idea of a Third Flank. But the main disadvantage of a Third Flank is that it will cut into the votes of both sides, and might lead into any side not gaining majority. But the beauty of this is that the Third Flank will deny the admin candidates who, in principle are against Arroyo and had opposed Estrada, might join the admin slate out of principle.
The key here, as other pundits have already said, is the swing vote. All parties will appeal to this group. And the Third Flank is well positioned to capture this group (although of course it will not be enough). The Third Flank must clearly be different from the two, yet may share similarities with the two, as what should really happen in three-party systems.
Here’s the ideal situation. Pack the admin slate with known admin allies; it cannot afford to draft a candidate whose loyalty is suspect. It has already been badly burned by its 2004 slate. Pack the UNO slate with known Estrada allies. Out of principle, the names of Legarda, Guingona, Pangilinan, Villar, and Arroyo should be stricken off the UNO list. Either they join the admin slate, or go Third Flank. This will satisfy Evangelista’s criteria.
To sum up: Evangelista believes that the admin slate is pure-breed Arroyo loyalists; UNO is unmistakably an Estrada proxy; and guys like Guingona joining UNO insults the intelligence of the middle class. The end is more-of-the-same. Give her a slate that is based on principles, and she might vote for it.
(This is still inconclusive; will update as soon as the two slates are announced.)
As i commented in mlq3’s blog, I disagree with a ‘third plank’ style slate although i can see where you, Evangelista and Esposo are coming from. Still, i’m interested in where you’re going with this and am looking forward to your updates.
As of now, the third plank is still an idea, and we don’t know if this is going anywhere. There is resistance to such an idea, and I can’t blame them.
If you like Joker Arroyo, then here is a scenario that he himself has started. He has hinted that he is not going to run this year. His reason: money. My thinking is that given his principles, if ever he would run this year, he would have to go independent, and that would cost him a lot financially. He is disinclined to join the admin and opposition slates. That’s how I read his situation.
And one reason why a third plank is doomed is that historically, the third plank loses. Think Bull Moose.
Anyway, this election has a short-term objective in mind, and that is the impeachment of Gloria Arroyo. Some are turned off by this, and might vote admin. How many of them would do so, we do not know.
Thanks for dropping by. You know, you should be blogging too. You express your thoughts well, and your points are all valid and logical.
Thanks Arbet. I hope to eventually be able to work up the discipline to do that.
It’s a shame to disappoint well meaning voters like Patricia Evangelista, but i believe this is one of those times when the middle has to lose in order to win. That’s the bind that Arroyo has put us in. If the Opposition believes that the undecided vote is indeed a swing vote, then their strategists should look into the matter more closely. My hunch is that the undecided is too small a segment to be a swing vote, but big enough to muffle any post-election protests. As i told Schumey, it is the same segment that will look the other way when cheating operations similar to the one in 2004 are carried out.
Politics and principles don’t really mix that well, do they?
It has come into this. It’s sad that sometimes we have to sacrifice what we believe just to correct the systemic damage wreaked upon our institutions.
I believe MLQ3 believes that the undecided/swing vote is not that large but enough to give one side a convincing win. We will probably see that this year, if the elections are clean, of course.
Come on, you are disciplined enough to comment on several blogs. You can actually create blog posts among those comments that you make. All you have to do is to expound on them.