Cesar Montano for Senator
Now that we know Richard Gomez isn't going to be a senator, we want to consider whether Cesar Montano should become one as well. I think he should, but for a different reason.
Montano, equally handsome and evidently much more talented than Gomez, is currently one-to-two strokes behind the 12-spot in the surveys, along with Mike Defensor, John Osmena and Prospero Pichay. These gentlemen are chasing Honasan, Pimentel, Noynoy, Zubiri and Roco, who all are poised, with one last push before election day, to sneak into the 12.
The reason why you must vote for Montano is that, along with Roco, they are the only "hill" candidates worth your vote. And, if you don't vote for them, it statistically increases the chances of crooks like Pichay and Defensor, trapos like Osmena, or old-rich scions like Zubiri (biodiesel = subsidies for sugar hacienderos) to sneak in -- a result that's a lot less palatable. In more simple words, Montano is a better vote than a non-vote that leads to a Senator Defensor.
Why not vote for, oh say, a Kapatiran candidate? Well, you're wasting your vote, because the surveys say they're miles away -- it's not worth "making the statement" in my opinion. You're better off trying to stop people like Pichay from getting into the Senate by voting for someone who has the same chances of sneaking into the 12 as much as he does, even if it means voting for an actor.
del.icio.us
Digg
it
Furl
ma.gnolia
Newsvine
reddit
Google
StumbleUpon
Comments
This post reminds me of an article I read in Time a week ago when Royal got second place in France's 1st round of presidential elections. Basically, in 2002, France defaulted to Chirac, because they didn't want the other candidate to win, Le Pen, who was sort of anti immigrant. But the French are happy about this election, because this time they actually have a choice, from the left and right.
So, the 12th seems like France in 2002, no?
This looks like another case of picking the lesser of two evils (or the least of many).
It certainly is a case of choosing the lesser evils -- that's what elections are for the most part.
Yet the point here is that you *must* choose a lesser evil, for a non-vote will statistically help another.
Yikes, I had no idea Roco was a leading candidate.
But what would Montano do in the Senate, be controlled by crooks, trapos, and old-rich scions?
Umm, better to gamble on his ethics than let someone that you know has none win a senatorial seat.
Sang-ayon ako sa sinasabi mo BV. Nang mabasa ko ang mga adhikain ni Cesar Montano sa
cesarmontano.wordpress.com
naniniwala ako na may kakayahan syang maglingkod sa ating bansa ng may integridad at katapatan.
Kaya nais kong makatulong sa kanya para malaman ng tao ang kanyang adhikain, ipadala na lang sa kaibigan, kapamilya ang Cesar Montano blogsite cesarmontano.wordpress.com
Pagbigyan natin sya.
Salamat.
BV, I've long been an admirer of your work, albeit vicariously, through the UA&P students whom you've inspired to take a more active role in fleshing out the blogosphere. That being said, I would like to respectfully disagree with your concluding paragraph:
"Why not vote for, oh say, a Kapatiran candidate? Well, you're wasting your vote, because the surveys say they're miles away -- it's not worth "making the statement" in my opinion. You're better off trying to stop people like Pichay from getting into the Senate by voting for someone who has the same chances of sneaking into the 12 as much as he does, even if it means voting for an actor."
Personally, I think that even considering the idea that a vote can be wasted runs counter to the spirit of a true democracy, which derives its efficacy from its basis in hope. However I do agree that all voters have to consider the longterm consequences of their decisions. Again, more power! Peace! :-)
Thanks John-D.
Therese Borra is a colleague. What a small small country.
On "wasted votes": I'm sticking to my guns here. I meander the difference between "voting" and "voting wisely".
Read: Ralph Nader.
Cheers,
BV
He he. Consider Ralph Nader READ. Btw, I don't think I mentioned that I'm a an admirer of Mr. Montano. I do hope that he gets the opportunity to serve, if only because he seems more "real" than Mr. Gomez. Somehow I get the feeling that everything Richard Gomez purports to say is the product of many focus group discussions commissioned by his handlers. For better or worse, Cesar Montano remains his own man, and is probably better equipped to derive something from this experience to prepare him for whatever else life has in store for him. And yes, I'm rambling. :-)