Principled people are the ones we should be voting into public offices. People who will stand by what is right and moral for the benefit of the majority. What we mean was embodied in the comment of an elder from Batangas regarding a national politician province mate of his. While the politician was highly educated, thus, highly qualified academically, according to this elder, he was not worth voting for. He said it all in one sentence—“Walang tikas, eh!” It meant he could not stand against the tide to uphold what he believed in. He did not have the stamina for that. He was always playing safe and, above all, was only interested in protecting his personal and family’s vested interests.
Another thing to keep in mind is the competence of a candidate to undertake the duties required of him if he wins. For instance, will he be able to debate with others if he wins as a senator or a legislator or will he just be the chairman of the Committee of Silence like somebody I knew who was a Cordilleran congressman. Or, is his competence limited to making jokes only or just being a comedian?
Yes, a candidate’s capability must fit the competence required of the office he is running for. If he wants to be an administrator and yet he cannot lead people to accomplishing things, he would surely turn out to be useless. He won’t accomplish anything for the people. While he might be the most beautiful or the best looking among aspirants, he would be useless if he does not have the leadership to lead his constituents to higher economic grounds. Or to enable them to upgrade their well-being.
Such choices can only be made if we can go beyond our personal interests and objectively consider only what is good for the majority of the populace. If we cannot do this, then we have no right to demand a kind of governance or leadership that is good for us. Corruption and incompetence in elective offices will continue. And we will only have ourselves to blame.**