By Dr Indira Rampersaud
(Trinidad Guardian) “The truth is that no one can predict these elections with any degree of certainty as it seems to be a dead heat race in some of the critical marginal constituencies.” Since Prime Minister Patrick Manning’s unexpected announcement of a snap election, the question on everyone’s lips is who will win. The truth is that no one can predict these elections with any degree of certainty as it seems to be a dead heat race in some of the critical marginal constituencies.
Qualitative and
Quantitative
Analyses
Nonetheless, analysts have been making projections based on both quantitative and qualitative analyses. However, quantitative analysis based solely on a comparison with the 2007 election results is not adequate. The combined UNC/COP votes minus that of the PNM give a good indication of the impact that the COP/UNC joint partnership platform can have on the results. The absence of a third party splitting the votes is significant but is only one variable. The 2010 elections bring with it its own peculiar dynamics most of which are qualitative and hence difficult to measure with any degree of accuracy. As such, analysts must resort to extrapolation of the possible impact of these new 2010 dynamics.
Before discussing these new variables, it is important to note that we cannot discount traditional patterns of voting based on race, party affiliation and opportunism which are deeply ingrained in the political culture of the Trinbago electorate and are difficult to change. Neither can we underestimate the value of incumbency and boundary demarcation. The ethnic factor is still very potent for both parties as it actually determines the categorisation of seats into safe and marginal. Party loyalties are also critical as many older voters and their blood descendents are reluctant to switch allegiances.
Moreover, there is always a percentage of self-interested voters across the ethnic divide who veer toward the party in power (PIPs) because of financial and non-monetary gains like office, position and prestige.
All of these would tend to favour the PNM in the upcoming elections partly because of the advantage of incumbency. Hence, it can be projected that both the PNM and the UNC will retain their bases in the safe seats but the electoral contest will really be played out in the ten marginal constituencies. Some would disagree with the list of marginals and may want to include La Horquetta/Talparo, D’Abadie/O’Meara and Tobago West based on the increase of registered voters from 2007 for the 2010 elections.
However, given the traditional voting patterns, the ethnic factor and the value of incumbency, it is safer to assume that these seats will be retained by the PNM. It is important to note that the PNM starts off with an advantage of 17 safe seats to the UNC’s 14 because of the pattern of boundary delineation. Both parties are very likely to retain their safe seats as hard core supporters continue to support their respective parties.
Tidal wave or
tsunami?
We now turn to those critical but unquantifiable qualitative variables which will impact on the May 24 election results. The analysis here is based on the fundamental but realistic assumption of the formation of a “tidal wave” in 2010 to which a number of endogenous and exogenous forces contribute. The use of the term “tidal wave” is deliberate in an effort to assess the swing toward the Partnership as “moderate” rather than “phenomenal” in which case it would have been dubbed “Tsunami.” The endogenous factors include new Opposi-tion and UNC leadership, Kamlamania and the gender factor, the unity platform or coalition, the Rowley factor, issues which are uppermost in the minds of the disgruntled voter including crime, corruption and property tax and Mr Manning’s continued blunders. The exogenous factors include the turning tides in the United States with the 2008 election of President Obama, the wave of regime change in the Caribbean in recent times and the newly formed coalition in the United Kingdom.
Domestic factors
The domestic factors have combined to generate overwhelming, extremely potent anti-Manning sentiments which trump all others in determining the May 24 election results. It can be viewed as a powerful undercurrent propelling the tidal wave in the direction of a victory for the People’s Partnership. The tectonic shifts ushered in by Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s phenomenal victory in the January 24 UNC internal elections triggered a national momentum for change and a renewed sense of hope for better leadership and good governance. It therefore came as a shock to many when Mr Manning defied political logic by dissolving Parliament and calling a snap election in the midst of a national momentum for change. Kamlamania and the gender factor are closely interrelated. It was generated by Kamla’s performance in the UNC internal elections.
The perception on the ground is that her charm, humility, sincerity and seeming commitment to good governance usher in a new kind of politics. The belief is that a woman at the helm would care more about the real issues and people rather than the usual obsession with power, money and office which tend to characterise the male-dominated politics of the day. Moreover, her capacity to launch a crushing ten to one blow to the political institution known as Basdeo Panday and her ability to endure the rigours of the hustings night after night since December 2009 through the UNC internal election campaign until now, under intense pressure and scrutiny, defy attempts of both the Panday and Manning campaign platforms to paint her as a weak, incompetent female. The historic rise of a woman to party leadership would definitely attract some swing and new votes.
The coming together of opposition forces in the form of a coalition has generated considerable debate on the survivability and sustainability of coalitions. This is a natural concern since no one really knows whether the coalition will survive. That is almost completely dependent on the good will and commitment of the various stakeholders. However, by broad-basing the UNC, inviting participation and accepting endorsement from labour, COP, NJAC, TOP, business interests, religious groups and other smaller parties, Kamla aimed to counteract the ethno-based politics and present a Partnership which is representative of all sectors of society, many of whom feel alienated under PNM rule. The role of the COP in bringing on board middle-class Indo and non-Indo voters to make a difference in the marginals is also critical. The image of a joint, broad-based, multi-ethnic platform can override the fear of the coalition cracking.
Anti-Manning voters are prepared to take the risk since the overriding imperative is that “Patrick Manning Have to Go.” Moreover, historically, whenever there has been a unification of forces–1958, 1986 and 1995, the PNM was defeated. The impact of the Rowley factor is two-fold. On the one hand it serves to consolidate the Afro PNM base so the party could retain its 17 safe seats. However, there could be significant backlash amongst the middle-class who has been questioning Dr Rowley’s integrity in his
decision to be part of a movement led by his nemesis, Mr Manning. Besides, his platform rhetoric like “vote PNM not PM,” and the “PNM could lose the elections,” may serve as more of a liability than an asset as the ripple effect of these confusing, ambivalent messages permeate the marginal landscape. Traditional PNM and floating, fence-sitting middle-class voters may opt to swing to the Partnership or not vote at all.
The stench of corruption engendered by the Calder Hart/Udecott issue and the controversial Guanapo church combined with the dreaded property tax have led to mounting national disenchantment with the PNM and Mr Manning. These are amongst the most salient issues impacting the elections, nationally. They are compounded by Mr Manning’s and the government’s continued blunders even after calling the elections. These include the unceremonious deportation of UNC strategist, Bernie Campbell; Mr Manning’s negative response to a national debate; the pejorative reference to Makandal Daaga’s dashiki, the more recent rant that “PM” in construction is equivalent to “Project Manager” the demand for government air-time in the heat of an election campaign and the brand new toll tax announced just a few days ago. Moreover, it is difficult for Mr Manning to convincingly argue that he is more competent to govern when his unitary party government has collapsed three times and premature elections were called in 1995, 2001 and 2010.
