On the occasion of the fast forthcoming elections – when the old as well as the young people get together, be they duly registered voters or not – among the usual questions asked among themselves are quasi-infallibly the following: Will you vote? What for? What will you get for voting? Is it worth it? Whom will you vote for? Why? And as may be readily expected, the answers given are different for different reasons, for the different understandings of the problems and needs of the Country, for the different perceptions and attributions or liabilities of the political candidates.
Will you vote? What for? Translation: Elections do not make any difference as to the lot of the people, as to the plight of the Country. Political candidates are all the same. Election and cheating are a forever pairing. Boycotting the elections is the better choice.
What will you get for voting? Is it worth it? Translation: Voting may be worth it if the vote is paid for. To vote can be necessary when the voter is under threat. Voting for this or that candidate can become a must when the latter’s hoodlums are around watching.
Whom will you vote for? Why? Translation: All the political candidates are the same. All of them claim that they will serve the people, they will redeem them from poverty. All of them promise to do away with graft and corrupt practice, make the Country a safe and better place to live in.
In a way, it can be said that just as no candidate has all the personal integrity and administrative competence required by the public office he or she is aspiring for, in the same way, not all the voters have the same perception and judgment who is the political candidate who really fits what political office. So it is ground reality to accept the fact that not all good and responsible, intelligent and wise voters will elect the same political candidates who are perceived capable and efficient individuals for the elective government positions they aspire for.
Unless they are manipulated or in one way or another “doctored” for whatever censurable reason, periodic Surveys are quite predictable that political candidates differ in their respective approval ratings in different Surveys made at different times, in different places, in different occasions. The candidates remain the same persons with the same personal attributions or liabilities and pursuing the same public offices. But the projective voters do not only have different requirements for whom they will vote but also change their options as they come to know more about the persons, the attributions and liabilities of candidates.
At the end of the day, there are wise voters who voted unwisely in the same way that there are bad voters who voted good and capable political candidates. How can this happen? How come such contradictions take place? Answer: That is democracy! Correctly or wrongly, the majority is always right?