August to December 2009, January 2010 Surveys
|Selected Candidates||Aug 09||Oct 09||Aug-Oct||Dec 09||Oct-Dec||Jan 10||Dec-Jan||Feb 10||Jan-Feb|
° Aquino had the same statistical level of preference in February as in January.
° Villar slid down after a two month’s climb from the filing of candidacy in end-November up to the start of the campaign period, probably due to the heavy placements of his infomercials on media. But this could not be legally sustained when the campaign period began in early February; this could be, among others, a reason for his decline of 6 percent.
° Estrada increased by 6 percent from January. It is interesting that he is back at December levels, regaining what he lost in January (possibly to Villar?).
° Teodoro had 2 percentage points more from his January level; however this was still within the margin of error and thus, not statistically significant.
Pulse Asia continues to provide the interesting table on reasons for presidential preference. The respondent is asked ‘Bakit po ninyo iboboto si _____ bilang Presidente ng Pilipinas?’ The findings from the following table may be referenced with the above summary.
|Reasons for preference||May 09||Aug 09||Oct 09||Dec 09||Jan 10||Feb 10||Possible
|1. Tumutulong, matulungin sa ofw/ibang sector [AID/ASSISTANCE]||6.6||11.8||12||11||11||11||Villar, Estrada|
|2. May nagawa, maraming nagawa [ACCOMPLISHMENTS]||11.6||25.3||14||11||16||14||Villar, Estrada|
|2a. Magaling/maganda ang palakad, [GOVERNANCE/EXPERIENCE]||4||8||6||7||Villar, Estrada|
|3. Hindi corrupt, walang kurakot, malinis [NOT CORRUPT]||7.1||6.3||21.2||21||24||26||Aquino|
|4. Mabait, mabuti, reputasyon ng pamilya [GOOD MAN/FAMILY]||5.6||3.7||4.2||12||9||10||Aquino|
|5. Makamasa, pagtingin sa mahirap, galling sa hirap [PRO-POOR]||27.3||20.3||12.2||27||24||22||Estrada, Villar|
° 36 percent of the respondents gave the reasons of choosing their presidentiable because he is not corrupt and comes from a good family. As can be seen, Aquino has a share of 36 percent. In the December and January surveys, 33 percent gave these same reasons. There is sufficient reason to conclude that one-third of the voters believe in the anti-corruption message and that these form the base of support of Aquino.
° The gain of Estrada was the drop in Villar’s. It could be that Estrada’s campaign ate into Villar’s votes since their propaganda materials both highlight the following reasons for preference: pro-poor, accomplishments, experience.
° The number of refused/undecided/no choice has not gone down from August 2009 to February 2010. Rather than be clarified of issues and/or personalities over the past 6 months, this group remains confused, skeptical and/or uncommitted.
Additional PERSONAL (caps and underscoring mine) Notes
° It appears that Aquino has a lock on the non-corrupt/clean image unless his opponents make the issues on Hacienda Luisita and the Subic-Clark-Tarlac Expressway stain his image.
° The opponent of Villar appears to be Estrada since their voters look up to them for the same issues other than those in which voters have assigned solely to Aquino.
° Estrada may have a core base of 18-19 percent, based on the surveys from August 2009 to February 2010.
° Perhaps Aquino’s message of change should not be focused against Villar but against GMA.