Edward Seaga, ContributorI have avoided commentaries of a political nature in the past in order to ensure that I do not cast any political shadows. But there are some observations that I should make for greater clarification on at least two matters which are causing a lot of eyebrows to be raised and heads to be scratched.
A new team is at work in the Stone Polls. Their current survey shows some results that, to many, are very puzzling. The size of margins between responses which favour the Prime Minister over the Leader of the Opposition are unexpectedly large and in some unexpected areas.
What is being overlooked in understanding these large margins is that the political climate has changed significantly in the last six months. Political opinions are now being dominated by an image factor which is so strong that it is distorting reason. Hence, answers to questions are not necessarily going to be rational. They will reflect a heavy emotional content.
Sinking the ship
This has happened before, during the 1970s. In the greater part of that decade voting was mostly an emotional exercise which was so overwhelming that the electorate had substantially become sailors who were cheering while the captain was sinking the ship.
It took six years of the Michael Manley regime in that period for the electorate to throw off emotions and get hold of their senses.
The toughest fight in politics is trying to overcome a negative image or fight a positive one. Images are amorphous. They are not susceptible to reason. Generally, the best tactic is to wait until they drift away. But sometimes they don't. They get firmer and stronger until they become a part of legend.
Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller has been enveloped in an image of devotion to the well-being of the people which has attracted strong emotional attachments to her.
In such circumstances, don't expect fully rational answers from those who are members of her huge fan club. The answers are going to be mainly emotional. The responses are going to reflect positive responses out of love whether or not the position is, in reality, quite different. This, in colloquial language is like saying, "is just so me like her and me nah say nutting but good 'bout her."
This is a wonderful position for any politician to be in. It's a win-win situation. But it is very difficult to sustain unless there is a sufficient flow of feel-good and beneficial rewards.
Gender factor
Analysis of the make-up of this electoral fan club is not difficult. The present poll has identified the gender factor as one of the main contributors. Women are giving the Prime Minister heavy support not only because they are of the same gender and 'is woman time now', but because women are the burden bearers of the society and any leader with a strong image of looking after the people is going to draw substantial support from women, especially if the image includes a record of past performance. The credibility of expectations of future performance is always strengthened by past performance.
But there is one area in this poli-tical phenomenon of the magnetic pull of a strong image which has not been incorporated into the polls: It is determination of the extent of the pull across political boundaries.
This works both ways because where there is strong aversion to the Prime Minister from her own supporters because her image does not fit their image of what her image should be, there will be a rejection factor.
Two tides
In such circumstances, there will be two tides running in opposite directions: People's National Party (PNP) supporters switching to Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), and JLP supporters switching to PNP; 'power' people switching to 'shower', and 'shower' people changing to 'power'. This is a 'show-pow' effect.
There is no doubt that this is happening. The question is in which direction is the flow stronger?
Subject to the result of any poll analysis, it would be reasonable to conclude that in the lower socio-economic level of the electorate there is some shift in support from 'shower' to 'power', while in the middle and upper levels some are moving in the opposite direction - 'power' to 'shower' (or to don't know).
The relative strengths of these two flows of 'show-pow' could be the missing link in explaining the margins of difference in the strong showing of Portia Simpson Miller over her opponent, Bruce Golding.
This would mean additional support for Portia in poor urban and rural areas and stronger support for Bruce in the urban middle-class residential areas.
Shift
This has happened before, and when it did in the 1970s, I predicted to my colleagues that the JLP would gain a number of constituencies in upper St. Andrew and urban parish capitals while the PNP would be strengthened in the inner city.
This is exactly what happened. All the constituencies in northern St. Andrew swung to the JLP. Many poorer areas swung to the PNP. The difference now, however, is athat the shift has already occurred in the middle-class area. There are no new constituencies to win as the JLP already holds all these seats. The only impact would be further strengthening. On the other hand, significant shifts in poorer constituencies could lead to a gain in seats for the PNP.
The large differences between party leaders are not necessarily reflective of party positions. The parties could be close in their polls although there is a wide gap between the leaders. If this happens, it will mean that either the JLP is performing better than its leader or the PNP is not performing as well as its president.
With surprisingly high margins of difference showing up in the polls, it is most important to know the true reasons so that the parties can create the appropriate strategies for their campaigns. Polling the 'show-pow' factor could undoubtedly make everybody wiser.
Edward Seaga is a former Prime Minister. He is now a Distinguished Fellow at the University of the West Indies. Email: odf@uwimona.edu.jm.
