At an online event organized by the Asian Institute of Management, Social Weather Stations' head honcho Linda Luz Guerrero talked about how Rodrigo Duterte, by their metrics, has not left the honeymoon period - that point immediately after an election when the winner enjoys wide popularity. His approval ratings throughout his time in office has remained high; it's at 60% as of their latest survey, conducted last December.

Citing a review of past surveys they conducted, she said there's no one clear reason why Duterte remains popular. There's his strong base. There's satisfaction over how he has dealt with specific policy issues. But what seems to be most critical is the perception of the president's character. The study specifically cited his perceived diligence and decisiveness. Those who see that in him tend to be satisfied with him.

Of course, not everyone sees that. Depending on where you are, the president may be the worst thing to ever happen to the Philippines - well, second worst, or third worst, considering what's very likely going to happen in May - or the best thing. Of course, this all depends on the people that surround you, the social media posts that you're served on your feed - but whatever the case, the bubble you're in is so comforting, so you don't really bother going out of it. A 60% approval rating? Whatever, you say. The SWS is biased anyway. What's true is what I know, and what I know everyone around me knows as well. I know Duterte is a bad president, and that's that!

Well, yes, he spent a lot of his time in office crafting the image of looking like he's delivering on the change he promised. He's pretty much obsessed with his legacy from the beginning of his term, something really evident in the past couple of years, with his weekly taped addresses and his doubling down on controlling the narrative. Some of his pet policies have been arguably disastrous for the country, while others have just been confusing. But you can't deny that to a good chunk of Filipinos - dare I say, the majority? - the president has been delivering, and with things they can see, at that.

That's quite a challenge for other presidential aspirants as the campaign season officially kicks off tomorrow. How do you appeal to voters who generally believe the current president is doing a good job? How do you assure them that you won't break what's not broken, while promising to fix what is? It's an even bigger challenge for Leni Robredo and her campaign. Their main point is to be diametrically different from the incumbent: more compassionate, more empathetic, more involved. But if your political lineage is that of the very things people opposed in the previous elections, how do you say you're not just going to break everything all over again?

Personally, I think it's a lost cause, not when Leni's boosters are adamant to act without some degree of empathy for the people they hope would support their cause, too. And I say this as someone who's likely more inclined to embrace whatever the pink team puts out. Once I asked an open question about her pandemic response plan, which is, understandably, pretty basic. One of my social media contacts gave me what I'd class as a condescending answer. Go to the website. It's all there. She has a plan. Yes, I know, but how will she implement that plan once she's president, and she has to navigate a legislature that decides on the budget, and local governments that are minded to interpret nationally-mandated guidelines their way? She has a plan, dammit.

Sure, maybe it is too early to have an answer to that question, considering the campaign period will only begin tomorrow. But having worked with (again, with, not for) government in the past few years, I can't help but have that question in mind. Executive action works for some things, but lasting reforms are best accomplished when they are codified into law. But, yeah, maybe it is a difficult question, and I got thinly-veiled rage for daring to ask a question. What more the aforementioned "good chunk" who is happy with Duterte, who think he's doing a good job, who think a vote for Leni would unravel everything? Do you just tell them they're stupid for falling for "fake news" and that you really know the score?

But maybe I am being too early with this. The campaign period starts tomorrow, after all. Maybe by then their campaign would have figured out the secret sauce to communicating with that good chunk without making them feel stupid for their decisions. Maybe by then they'd understand that people are not inclined to vote their way because of their perceptions of the vice president's character, and address that. Maybe they'd stop assuming that "anti-Leni" equals "pro-dictator". But the social media posts I've seen today - of her supporters going pink - suggests that they're still intent on playing this campaign out as an us-versus-them affair. What advertising agency types call "roadblock advertising" is what others people would perceive as being surrounded. That triggers a defense mechanism.

Either that, or the only people who'll see those pink posts are those who are already inclined to support Leni anyway. You know social media and its algorithms. You don't see what others might say, especially if you've already unfriended and blocked them for your head's sake, supposedly.