To be strict the to the ideals of the so called Daang Matuwid (DM) is to abjure any and all indications of politics. Politics in its essence is the art of compromise or quite simply, horse-trading, my due apologies to the horse species.
The practical side of Daang Matuwid i.e. to gather as much political support in time for elections, is prone to the fact of politics. How much this ideal is watered down depends on the players in the political arena.
Already, we have been hearing of local political developments in the countryside that tend to make the “daan” crooked than what it ought to be intended. Due to the practical realities of elections, the LP (self-acclaimed vanguards of the DM) has alienated LP originals due to the gravitation of non-LP members to the LP coalition. Call them turncoats if you will, but in reality, who isn’t?
How the LP handles these turncoats (both inside and out) would test their true adherence to their DM advocacy. Or maybe the DM is just a punchline and the certainty of electoral victory, whatever the cost, may just be the true advocacy.
For the true believers of DM, how can one justify the selection by the LP of certain groups to be their official candidates who were once on the other side of the fence in the past elections? This at the expense of the LP originals who fought and lost the electoral wars of the recent past elections!
Equity of the incumbent is the new mantra for this kind of political accommodation. How can it be that GMA, the claimed epitome of what DM is not, is not even given a challenge by any DM advocate? Conversely, how can a Grace Padaca be left out in the political game where her staunch political opponent has been chosen by the LP as their official candidate? This has been the situation in other provinces and cities.
Yes, political accommodations are essential in ensuring a political victory in the arena where victory matters most, the presidency. But isn’t that what the “Strong Republic” slogan of GMA was practicing? Same with “Erap para sa Mahirap”? So i guess the question is, up to what extent shall DM be watered down by politics-as-usual for it to be still distinguishable from previous slogans of past administrations?
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. Come May 9, 2016, we shall get to see and taste this DM of a pudding, that is if it’s still palatable by then.