Shalman Scott, Contributor
What does the voting pattern in the recent PNP presidential elections really say? – Carlington Wilmot Photo
THE TOTAL number of PNP delegates that voted on Saturday, February 25, in the presidential race was 3,808. When the number of votes received by Prime Minister-designate Portia Simpson Miller 1,775 is taken from the 3,808 it leaves 2,033. Accordingly, this 2,033 of the 3,808 delegates who did not vote for Portia Simpson Miller represent 53.3 per cent or more than half of the total PNP delegates density. Simpson Miller received 46.7 of the votes.
So, banner headlines about 'Portia crushes her opponents' appearing in one newspaper exposes once again the lack of attention to detail which exhibits itself time and time again, not only in the media, but elsewhere.
Then, there was a firebrand supporter of Portia Simpson Miller referring mockingly to the 'Solid as a Rock' campaign defeat on a TV programme as a 'Humpty Dumpty Fall'.
Counts in the six regions of the PNP should also have had patient scrutiny. In the West,
St. James gave a huge win to Peter Phillips and, by extension, region six comprising the parishes of St. James, Westmoreland and Hanover. Portia Simpson Miller had big wins in the parishes of Clarendon, Manchester and St. Elizabeth (Kenneth 'Skengdon' Black and Roger Clarke country) in regions four and five swinging the election in Simpson Miller's favour.
LONG AND HARD GAZE
Peter Phillips' 40.5 per cent which put him in second place behind Portia Simpson Miller need to be gazed at long and hard as this result was what the mainstream of the PNP organisational machinery could produce a response from the delegates of less than half of the votes. So, as a winner and losers were declared in the PNP presidential race, the first and second place winners have one thing in common they both have received less than a half of the PNP delegates vote.
Consequently, neither the claim of a more experienced and superior organisation nor the claim of overwhelming love and popularity materialised in terms of a decisive victory or a decisive loss among the delegates.
This crucial observation must not escape either the victor or the vanquished. All sides have been the victim of the sleight of hand by the delegates, and one suspects the four campaigns, despite innocent claims to the contrary, paid for their political lessons before voting day!
A quick glance at Omar Davies' campaign revealed Dr.
D. K. Duncan and his daughter Imani as field marshals. Perhaps the best way to look at this campaign is to hope that young Imani, whose energy I really admire, would have learnt some useful political lessons.
There is not much to say about Dr. Carl Blythe's campaign, as during the whole period people were asking why was Dr. Blythe wasting his time! However, Portia Simpson Miller, receiver of the largest number of votes of the four contenders, is an outcome for which Simpson Miller and her team must be commended. It was a hard-fought campaign with Portia Simpson Miller coming under serious pressure, but she survived and eked out a win. And so the adulation and celebrations are quite in order.
THAT ONE RIGHT
Any campaign that had won would be celebrating, so Team Portia must celebrate! That is one right that any winning team ought not to be denied. But Team Portia must recognise the right of the losing teams to be sad and to continue to hold their beliefs that led them not to support the Team Portia candidate in the first place. In other words, the 2,033 delegates out of a total 3,808 who did not support Simpson Miller, while accepting her victory intellectually, will not immediately emotionally abandon the beliefs that precipitated that non-support.
In the interregnum between victory and the swearing in of the new Prime Minister, supporters of Simpson Miller by their utterances seem to be suggesting that the 46.7 per cent of the delegates votes received by Simpson Miller closed all doubts and arguments about her ability to manage the present difficulties facing the country.
Well, those doubts and arguments will not go away simply because of how loudly Sister P's supporters quarrel and scream, but will only go away when Portia Simpson Miller's performance, in the broadest sense, removes those arguments and doubts.
The economy, crime, corruption, unemployment and the operating of the justice system are but a few of the problems that are now in "Mama's" lap! It is amazing how within the twinkle of an eye the political ball game can change. For example, the pollsters in assessing Simpson Miller's popularity in the future will ask the Jamaican people less of what they BELIEVE and more of what they KNOW!
I find rib-tickling the fact that some of the Prime Minister-designate's supporters are so anxious to get persons across Jamaica to express quickly what is believed ahead of what they will see and know. The media is inundated with wonderful expectations being expressed in an apparent attempt to charm the rest of us into taking our eyes off the 'ball of reality'.
POLITICAL LANDSCAPE
I wonder what the political landscape will look like for Portia Simpson Miller, say, by the end of 2006? We must recall that prior to her victory, she consistently conveyed the impression that everybody would have been better off in Jamaica only if she was in charge. She is now in charge.
Which leads me to my final point of how all of the foregoing links to the need for healing and unity within the ranks of the PNP. There is more than a whisper in some quarters of revenge against particular people in the party and in the Cabinet a somewhat unusual development within the bowels of the PNP.
There should and has to be changes with a new Prime Minister in charge, but such changes must not be seen as accompanied by rancour and recriminations. There is no doubt in my mind that the euphoria of Simpson Miller's victory has begun to blind the eyes of those calling for blood.
These are those who have failed to see that victory in its proper perspective.
The numbers, as outlined earlier, demand that Simpson Miller ignore those with the political knives and daggers and instead pay attention to those who vehemently opposed her, but who are now extending the olive branch and so create genuinely a space for peace and unity within the PNP.
In simple terms, she should stick to her promise. If she allows herself to succeed in this regard that will be her greatest tribute to the women of this country.
Shalman Scott is a political analyst.
