SWS poll (march 2011) – aquino satisfaction rating suffers a significant drop, the good news and the bad news
a 13 point drop in the satisfaction rating of president aquino is statistically significant. on it’s value it can be a cause of concern for aquino. malacanang or aquino’s handlers are saying it is a concern. as a knee jerk reaction to the 13 point drop, feeling concerned is understandable but they need to look at the number within the framework of other factors and data that is available to them.
first of all, a drop in satisfaction ratings is expected. no president, even aquino can sustain a high rating through the lofe of the presidency. aquino started at a net satisfaction of +60, then moved up to +64. because it moved up to +64, the most recent +51 took a much larger drop of -13 points. if this was pegged at +60, the +51 would have been just a -9 pts drop only.
previous presidents’ satisfaction ratings also showed drops at different periods of their presidency. that just goes to show it is expected that it is impossible to expect that people will perpetually be happy with the president. the beginning of the term of the president always starts on a high note. the people just elected the president, there will be a halo effect on the satisfaction rating of any president during months after the election. it is called the honeymoon period. after the honeymoon, people see the real president with the halo effect from the recently concluded election campaign.
looking at the satisfaction ratings of past presidents, aquino’s most recent rating of +51 and his highest of +64 may be the lowest compared to the highest ratings of past presidents aquino (+69), ramos (+69) and estrada (+67), these ratings are much higher than the highest rating than what arroyo ever got (+30). in fact arroyo’s satisfaction rating record is the worst among all the presidents with arroyo getting minus satisfaction ratings for 25 out of 43 ratings. arroyo’s best rating is at +30 . aquino’s latest rating of +51 is a much more impressive than arroyo’s best.
what that means is that aquino’s presidency so far is serving the people much better than his predecessor, arroyo.
Ratings drop for Aquino
PUBLIC SATISFACTION with President Benigno S. C. Aquino III’s performance has fallen and controversies such as his purchase of a luxury car apparently have not helped, a new Social Weather Stations (SWS) survey found.
the current COMELEC and GMA7 unofficial partial tally of votes put jejomar binay and mar roxas to close to call with a spread of only 800T votes with binay leading but 6 million votes still uncounted. binay has claimed victory, saying only an electronic garci can change the outcome while roxas says he will win by a squeaker when the votes from visayas are counted, roxas’ bailiwick. both are saying these are based on reports from their supporters who are in the field.
however, both SWS and Pulse Asia exit polls point to a binay win with pulse asia giving it to binay with a 5.3% points margin. with a 1% sampling error, that puts binay a slight winner. SWS gives it to binay a 2.4% points margin.
roxas saying the visayas as his bailiwick is being confirmed by the pulse asia exit poll where he dominates with 54.7% versus binay’s 25.4%. however, binay dominates roxas almost with the same large margin in all other areas – NCR, Luzon and Mindanao.
this survey is now open. please let us know who you voted in this election.
also vote in the exit poll for vice-president here –> Now open – The 2010 Presidentiables Blog Exit Poll For Vice-President (who did you for vice president?)
May 2010 SWS-BusinessWorld Presidentiables Poll – no change among laggards; teodoro doubles Class E rating
the standings of the laggards group, teodoro, gordon, villanueva, perlas, madrigal and de los reyes have not change. their over-all ratings show inability to move. with just 3 days to go before election time, there is really not much these candidates to do to change the outcome of the poll results with the same result most likely will be mirrored in the election results after the may 10 election.
the only notable change is the rating of gilbert teodoro where his rating in the E socio-eco class doubled from previous 6% to this poll period at now 12%. while this is definitely a very impressive showing, it had no impact on his over-all rating. to us it appears teodoro has been stuck at the single digit numbers.
Former Defense Secretary Gilberto “Gibo” C. Teodoro Jr., the ruling Lakas-Kampi-CMD party’s candidate, remained fourth with an unchanged score of 9%.
Bangon Pilipinas bet Eduardo “Bro. Eddie” C. Villanueva was fifth with 3%, followed by Partido Bagumbayan’s Sen. Richard “Dick” J. Gordon (2%), Ang Kapatiran’s John Carlos “JC” G. de los Reyes (0.3%), and independents Maria Consuelo “Jamby” A. S. Madrigal (0.2%) and Nicanor Jesus “Nick” P. Perlas (0.1%)
Six percent of the respondents were classed as undecided. This category included votes for disqualified Kilusang Bagong Lipunan bet Vetellano “Dodong” Acosta and others.
As in three prior surveys, the last BW-SWS poll had respondents being asked to fill out ballots in a simulation of the May 10 exercise. Polled were 2,400 registered voters, divided into random samples of 300 for Metro Manila, 900 in the Balance of Luzon, and 600 each in the Visayas and Mindanao.
(The BW-SWS polls for December and January involved the interviewers providing lists of candidates and asking the respondents to choose.)
The error margins used were ±2% for national percentages, ±6% for Metro Manila, ±3% for the rest of Luzon, and ±4% for the Visayas and Mindanao.
They were asked: “Kung ang eleksyon ay gaganapin ngayon, sino ang pinakamalamang ninyong iboboto bilang presidente, bise-presidente, mga senador at party list ng Pilipinas? Narito ang listahan ng mga kandidato. Paki-shade o itiman po ang naaangkop na oval katabi ng pangalan ng taong pinakamalamang ninyong iboboto. (If the elections were held today, whom would you most probably vote for as president, vice-president, senator, and party list of the Philippines? Here is a list of candidates. Please shade the oval beside the name of the persons you would most likely vote for.)
it’s hard to believe richard gordon do not have an appreciation of surveys and he is that ignorant of it. he has been a politician for a long time and his previous job at the private sector (procter & gamble) must have given him a good dose of knowledge on it.
but he has taken SWS and Pulse Asia to court, so we can assume he does not know a lot of things. mahar mangahas of SWS gives him an answer, for his knowledge:
Ignorant columnists may not be TRO’d
by Mahar Mangahas
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 23:34:00 04/30/2010
ABOUT COLUMNISTS. EVERY THREE YEARS, IN the Philippines, comes a silly season when some columnists excel in misinforming the public about survey science. These are the ones who assert, for instance, that “a survey of only one or two thousand respondents cannot possibly represent many millions of voters.” Despite repeated demonstrations that a properly conducted sample survey is indeed representative of the whole population, they will not accept it, and would rather bask in their ignorance.
Now, is there a way for a columnist who propagates falsehoods to be legally suppressed? For instance, may professional statisticians petition a court for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop a columnist from vilifying statistical research about voters’ preferences? The answer to this is NO.
A columnist has a constitutional right to display his ignorance, without prior restraint. This is because the right of free expression is a preferred right—“prior restraint” and “preferred right” being legal phrases.
The statisticians’ legal remedy for a columnist’s abuse of free speech would be to sue for damages afterwards. But they don’t bother, because a statistically-challenged columnist doesn’t fool the people who really count.
About Gordon’s complaint. Last week, Sen. Richard “Dick” Gordon asked a Regional Trial Court to issue a TRO against Social Weather Stations and another survey entity, to desist from conducting and publishing their election surveys, which he called “false, inaccurate and flawed,” causing him “grave and irreparable injury.”
Gordon’s suit is ridiculously sloppy. Above all, it is ignorant of the Supreme Court’s affirmation that election surveys are constitutionally protected (see my April 17 column). In SWS v. Comelec (G.R. 147571, May 5, 2001), the Court nullified the section of the 2001 Fair Election Act that attempted to ban publication of election surveys. It ruled that such a ban “imposes a prior restraint on the freedom of expression” and forms “a direct and total suppression of a category of expression” during the elections.
Gordon claims that “surveys issued by the defendants … showed him only at the 29th spot,” and yet he won as senator in 2004. Actually, the SWS surveys of the 2004 senatorial race had him as 14th in Jan. 18-22, tied for 16th on Feb. 17-25, 14th on March 21-29, tied for 8th on April 10-17, and tied for 9th (with 29 percent of the vote) on May 1-4. It looks like 29 percent was misread as 29th place. Thus he was already in the winning circle in the last two SWS pre-election surveys.
Gordon’s complaints about methodology are false. (1) My column of March 6, 2010 reported that SWS received two awards from the Gallup World Poll for excellence in field methodology, among all of Gallup’s Asian field providers. (2) Face-to-face interviewing, which we always do, and which Gordon thinks “outmoded,” is part of Gallup’s job order to SWS. (3) We agree with Gordon that sampling should be done by probability, and not by quota. Apparently he doesn’t know that SWS always does the former, and never does the latter.
Gordon calls it “highly improbable” that SWS did two national surveys over as short a period as March 19-30, 2010. Actually, SWS did eight national surveys, not all about elections, over January-April 2010, plus several local surveys.
Gordon alleges that, last April 14, an unidentified SWS pollster in Cebu asked a respondent to choose between only two presidential candidates, instead of among 10. Comments: (1) SWS had no election survey in Cebu on that date; (2) all SWS interviewers have ID cards—tell us her name so that we can check; (3) the published SWS election surveys always feature the 10 candidates; (4) in any case, it is legitimate for anyone to inquire how a voter would choose between two candidates.
Gordon’s claim that SWS fails to disclose its sponsors is false. Check the website, http://www.sws. org.ph. The SWS Survey Data Library is open to the public. Its staff helps visitors, short of serving as research assistants. The library fee is affordable even to students. Users should come personally, and not expect their technical questions to be answered by mail.
Gordon’s citations of survey errors in past elections are very few; they are the exceptions that prove the rule, like the failure of US pollsters to predict Truman’s win over Dewey in 1948, which he cites as though it was SWS’ fault too. My 2009 paper, “The challenge of election surveys in the Philippines,” summarizes our election survey record; see our website. The error of the 2004 exit poll in Metro Manila was investigated by an independent group of scientists, and no fraudulence was found; see their report on the website.
Gordon’s claim that “there are no associations of professional pollsters and polling firms which regulate, control, and sanction defendants … for their violation of the code of professional ethics …” is false. Seems he hasn’t heard of the Marketing and Opinion Research Society of the Philippines (MORES), founded in 1977. Both MORES and the World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR), to which key SWS staff members belong, have Codes of Ethics. Last Wednesday, the MORES board of directors issued a press statement denouncing Gordon’s petition for striking at the heart of our democratic process.
If the SWS election surveys were not true, accurate, and best-quality, I wonder if Gordon would still be interested in a TRO. Maybe he would just grant us the same freedom of speech that we allow to ignorant columnists.
The survey fieldwork was conducted from April 23 to 25, 2010 using face-to-face interviews. Key developments in April 2010 include the following: (1) defections from the Lakas-Kampi Christian Muslim Democrats (CMD) mostly to the Nacionalista Party (NP) and the Liberal Party (LP); (2) election-related issues such as the purchase of ultraviolet lamps (UV) because the UV readers of the Precinct Count Optical Scan (PCOS) machines were unable to read the UV markings on the ballots, the scrapping of the P 700 million contract for the purchase of ballot secrecy folders, and the re-bidding of the contract for the purchase of indelible ink; (3) completion of the printing of ballots for the May 2010 elections; (4) various incidents of election-related violence across the country; (5) Senator Francis G. Escudero’s endorsement of Senator Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III for president and Makati City Mayor Jejomar C. Binay for vice-president; (6) accusations made by former President Joseph E. Estrada and Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile against Senator Manuel B. Villar, Jr. that while serving as Senate President in 2007, Senator Villar used his position to pressure the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE) to decide in his favor on a matter concerning the public offering of his real estate company’s shares; (7) Senator Richard J. Gordon’s filing of charges against two survey groups; (8) petitions from various sectors for a parallel manual count of votes; (9) the Supreme Court’s final ruling allowing President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to appoint the next chief justice (but not the next Sandiganbayan Justice); (10) calls for the resignation and disbarment of Department of Justice (DOJ) Acting Secretary Alberto Agra following his decision to clear two key suspects in the Maguindanao massacre; and (11) increase in power rates despite rotating brownouts in Metro Manila and other parts of the country.
this poll was conducted middle of april, about 4 weeks from election time and it shows aquino’s lead continue to be strong at 38% while villar shows downward trend at 26%. aquino having a strong double digit lead and villar showing a declining trend is good news for aquino and very bad news for villar.
we are reading the poll results with just 2 weeks to go till election time. with nothing new and no remarkable or outstanding efforts done by villar since survey time till today, a 2 week lapse, it is difficult to expect that villar’s down trending trend has been arrested or reversed. in marketing, the way to arrest and reverse a declining sales and market share trend is to some new and heavy marketing efforts. not doing anything new and heavy means the trend will continue. this should be true for villar.
in fact, the past two weeks has not been good for villar. erap estrada and juan ponce enrile exploded a new scandal – the VLL and PSE scandal where both charged villar used his influence and power on the PSE to allow him to sell his shares on the IPO of VLL which was supposed on escrow. rules of the PSE disallowed the release of shares for sale by owners to protect investors.
we have said in this blog that villar is getting hurt by the C-5 corruption scandal since early this year, then it got solidified as a dead weight with the villarroyo charge. this VLL-PSE scandal has the potential to confirm in the minds of voters of villar’s weakness in character where he tends to use his power and position for personal gain. the gain in this particular instance is worth billions of profits in the sale of his VLL stocks.
with the VLL-PSE scandal breaking out in the last two weeks and with no to little new and heavy efforts done by villar, we can expect further deterioration of villar’s ratings.
we are now at the point of no return. the only way the trends will change is doing a hail mary pass. who has the guts or who is most desperate to do it?
i find grave offence on richard gordon’s damage suit against SWS and Pulse Asia. one of gordon’s lawyers said gordon wants me to cast my vote using the “track record and platform” of candidates. while that is a good idea, it is not his freakin business on what i use as basis for the vote i will cast.
he has no say on what criteria i use and it is totally up to me. this is a free country and part of what democracy is all about, in fact elections per se is that i exercise my vote in whatever manner i please.
“We want the public not to base their votes on the candidates’ winnability, but on their track records and platform,” Tagalda said.
what is to richard gordon a “credible and correct survey results”? is it one where he is leading in the poll or where he is not getting a 2% rating? gordon is lodging this suit for one and only one reason – he is failing in this election campaign as seen by the survey results.
surveys are a measure of voters sentiments and in this case the voters are speaking plainly – the voters are rejecting gordon where he is getting very low ratings across the board, across all demographics, socio-eco classes and geographies.
it is hypocritical for gordon to speak of “public interest” when in this case, it is obvious public interest has no bearing on it but only his personal interest. he is on this route because he wants to defend his personal interest. he thinks survey results is killing his campaign when in truth he is just denying the fact that it is himself who is killing his chances in this election.
“While it is true that surveys are part of our freedom of expression, such freedom is not without limits especially where, as in this case, public interest during election periods warrants that these survey companies at least publish credible and correct survey results,” Diaz said.
this first paragraph at the PDI story on his suit says it all – he is suing the companies because he is doing poorly in the polls. if the results were different, we will probably not hear any complaint from him and he will probably make a big deal of it.
being a senator himself, he should know the value and power of public opinion. he is perhaps shocked by the current results where in this one, public opinion is going against him.
what does gordon want to do? force everyone to think like him? deny the voters a variety of information and data? take out variety and force everyone to think the same?
gordon also has an inflated ego – if everyone used “track record and accomplishments” as basis for this election, he probably thinks he will get elected. if that is the criteria used, gordon will NOT be the first choice, it will probably be manny villar or erap estrada.
we think it is too presumptuous of him to say others are not using stringent criteria in their selection. how can he say such things? it has not occurred to him that voters are probably using very stringent criteria, some may even be “track record and performance” but voters are seeing him as failing in those.
perhaps gordon has a severe case of superiority complex where he thinks everyone who does not agree with him are inferior to him. he thinks there is something wrong in others just because he is not a front runner at the surveys.
Presidential candidate and Senator Richard Gordon has filed a P650,000 damage suit against two survey firms for their allegedly false and misleading survey results which have not shown Gordon as among the top contenders.
gordon’s logic is fatally flawed. he says surveys are flawed and yet he uses the survey results. his poor showing in particular for saying it is making him lose the election. if the surveys are flawed, then he should question the methodology and design of the surveys, have them changed and conduct the surveys again to get good results. there is no need for him to stop the publication of the results to the people, just have the methodology and design corrected to his specifications. he can even get a research agency to conduct the poll using his ideas.
gordon needs help. and he does not deserve our vote.