They Vote Actors, Don’t They?
The 2007 Voters Defy the Popularity Paradigm

They came, they sang and danced, and then they lost. It is an apt epitaph for the phenomenon of actors, sports figures, and other people of fame in fields other than politics who blithely entered the 2007 elections. They thought their fame and name recall are enough to sweep away the opposition and get themselves into power. They thought wrong and the electorate in many places reminded them of it.

It was a massacre. Among the more prominent losers were Manny Pacquiao (South Cotabato 1st congressional district), Tito Sotto (senate), Cesar Montano (senate), Richard Gomez (senate), Mark Lapid (Pampanga governatorial), Arsenio Gadang (Cavite governatorial), Jimmy Yaokasin (Leyte governatorial), Christopher de Leon (Batangas vice-governatorial), Daniel Fernando (Bulacan vice-governatorial), Nadine Montenegro (Caloocan 1st congressional district), Ricardo Puno, Jr. (Muntinlupa 1st congressional district), Danilo Mesias (Leyte 1st congressional district), Jestoni Alarcon (Antipolo 2nd congressional district), and Angelika Jones (Laguna provincial board).

Others who won—like Vilma Santos (Batangas governatorial), Iskho Moreno (Manila vice-mayorship), Herbert Bautista (Quezon City vice-mayorship), and Teri Onor (Abucay, Bataan mayorship)—won because of their additional political and/or governance record.

The one thing that stood out is the fact that mere popularity will not get you into power nowadays. It is not anymore a ticket to electoral victory.

Anatomy of the Political Actor

Movie and other media personalities are attracted to the political arena not only by personal ambitions but also by the demonstrated opportunity for winning a popular election. Media exposure and image buildup, which has become the staple of all candidates for important offices in the information age, is a natural asset of the actor-politician. One might add, so are make-believe promises and public demagoguery a natural talent for a bad actor-politician.

Genuine public service and governance skills are unfortunately only a function of public perception of a candidate’s image. A governor may be good in governance but if the public perceives him or her as corrupt, human rights violator or anti-people, that is the end of his or her candidacy. Conversely, an inept administrator, a gambler, or a womanizer can get elected into office riding a skillful public relations campaign that portrays a pro-people image.

This built-in popularity and good public image of a “bida” media personality places an actor in an enviable position of at least a dark horse or possibly a front-runner in our national elections. The higher the position, face-to-face contact or direct knowledge of a candidate and his qualifications lose their importance—media exposure takes their place as source of voter perception.

Thus, the actor can easily be tempted to enter a career as a politician. In past elections, the popular image was enough. It elected action actors, sports figures, newscasters, and even notorious media personalities to elective positions. A 1995 study by the Institute for Political and Electoral Reform put popularity as the top determinant in people’s vote.

The road to debacle in the 2007 elections

The term of President Joseph “Erap” Estrada can be considered the height of the trend of popular figures in politics. Many of them, like Robert Jaworski, Tito Sotto, Ramon Revilla, Noli de Castro, and Loren Legarda, ended up in the Senate. A lot more crowded the local governments.

Ironically, the Estrada term also proved to be the start of the decline of this trend. Erap Estrada eventually left the presidency under a cloud of charges of corruption and incompetence. The Senate performances of many popular figures were forgettable. In the local governments, except for a few notable ones, the same picture of political mediocrity abounded.

The people took note of these. In a 2003 update of the same IPER study, simple popularity already slipped to third position as a determinant for the voter’s choice, behind voter benefit and political machinery. Although the actual result proved to be very controversial, the best that can be claimed by Fernando Poe, Jr., the top action star who ran against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, in the 2004 elections, was a close win.

The 2007 elections proved disastrous to many media personalities for two reasons. One of them was the obvious identification of these personalities to the administration. The other was the dimming political luster of pure popularity.

These two factors were both present in the case of Manny Pacquiao, Cesar Montano, and Richard Gomez. When the supposedly “hugely-popular” Manny Pacquiao lost to Darlene Antonino, these two factors combined to develop the thinking of many South Cotabato voters that Darlene is an underdog and that Pacquiao should confine himself to boxing. Cesar Montano, on the other hand, reputedly was a student activist before and may have the political background for politics but this did not get through to the voters. Richard Gomez, for his part, was perceived as a balimbing from the opposition and lost much of his previous constituency.

Maturity of the Filipino voter?

Have the Filipino voters got over their starstruck syndrome? Have they “matured?”

The 2007 elections proved this much: sheer and simple popularity is not anymore in vogue among the Filipino voters. They demand much more from incumbent and new candidates alike—their perceived capability to deliver benefits to voters and their families in terms of daily needs such as jobs, education, health and the like. A political machinery is also essential, particularly in campaigns targeting a regional or national constituency.

Unfortunately, most voters still perceive benefits as an image by-product. Distinguishing the real leader from the smooth-talking charlatan is still beyond today’s electorate. To be sure, this is still from the intellectual voter who will have the capacity already to distinguish merits of any candidate or party platform or program of governance.

Popularity in the next elections

The personalities who won in the 2007 elections did their homework and achieved rapport with voters through their governance record, leadership qualities, or pro-people image. It also helped that they developed the requisite political machinery to turn potentials into real votes.

The next elections may well see the lessening of the number of movie and TV stars in politics. Most of these chastened media personalities may well decide to stick with their successful careers. Those who do will have learned their lessons and prepare well for their political careers—just like any other would-be political wannabe. They may well find out that popularity works—when there is political material to work with in the first place.

Entertainment is for actors but politics is for political leaders. When Philippine voters stop looking at elections as entertainment, the divide will be clear.