Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Research problem: “The 60-30-10 phenomenon in senatorial elections: Is this simply an artifact of law of large numbers?”
I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Dr. Felix Muga III showed that the total votes of Team PNOY (12), UNA (9), and other candidates (12) follow the 60-30-10 pattern for all canvass times. COMELEC explains this phenomenon as simply the result of the law of large numbers. Our aim then is to verify this claim of COMELEC by changing the elements of each 12-9-12 grouping and see if a similar constant ratio of a:b:c still holds for each canvass.
II. METHODOLOGY
A. Listing the Combinations
You have three bins: _ _ _. The first bin has 12 candidates. The second bin has 9 candidates. And the last bin has 12 candidates. The number of combinations for the first bin regardless of permutations or rearrangements is C_1 = 33!/((33-12)!12!) = 33!/(21!12!). Once you have chosen the elements of the first bin, the number of combinations left for the second bin regardless of permutations is C_2 = 21!/((21-9)!9!) = C_2 = 21!/(12!9!). And once you have chosen the elements of the second bin, the number of combinations left for the third bin is C_3 = 12!/((12-12)!12!) = 12!/(0!12!) = 1. Thus, the total number of combinations of 33 senators placed in 12-9-12 bins is
C = C_1C_2C_3 = [33!/(21!12!)][21!/(12!9!)][1] = 33!21!/(21!12!12!9!) = 33!/(12!12!9!) = 1.0429×10^(14).
This listing cannot anymore be done by hand.
B. Computing the ratios
For each combination of candidates in the 12-9-12 bins, compute the total number of votes B_1 in each bin 1, the total number of votes B_2 in bin 2, and the total number of votes B_3 in bin 3. Define the vote vector
V = [B_1, B_2, B_3]/(B_1 + B_2 + B_3) = (b_1, b_2, b_3),
where b_1, b_2, and b_3 are greater than 0 but less than 1. We can see that the only linearly independent variables are b_1 and b_2, because b_3 = 1 – b_1 – b_2. Plot the b_1 and b_2 in the x and y axis. Trace the path of the (b_1, b_2) point as a function of integer canvass time t. If the b_1:b_2 ratio is fairly constant, then the plot will look like a fuzzy ball of a particular radius. Measure the radius of the smallest ball that contains all the points. Alternatively, one may get the root-mean-square value of the distances of the points from the centroid and use this RMS value as the radius.
C. The Bubble Chart
We now have a table with columns defined by (combination in bin 1, combination in bin 2, b_01, b_02, R_0), where (b_01, b_02) is the centroid or the average percentage values of each bin . We plot (b_01, b_02, R_0) in a bubble chart.
D. Clustering
We cluster the bubbles according to bubble radius. We use the 2D standard deviation (or RMS value) of the percentages Team Pinoy-UNA-Others combination as a unit of measurement. We classify bubbles according to sizes and we make a histogram. We compute the probability that a normalized bubble radius is between 0 and 1, between 1 and 2, between 2 and 3, and so on. If the probability for the normalized bubble radius is at its peak at 1, then we have reason to believe that what COMELEC says is true: it is just the law of large numbers. But if the peak is elsewhere and farther from 1, then we have a reason to doubt COMELEC’s statement.
III. DATA
I don’t have data for each canvass. This is simply the number of votes counted for each candidate during each canvass.
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
I need the help of a programmer.
May 2013 senatorial elections: regional bulwarks and weak areas of senatorial candidates
We compute the percentage of votes per senatorial candidate. We then sum these percentages and divide by the number of senators (33) to obtain the average percentage of votes received by each candidate per region. We also computed the standard deviation from this average. We get the difference between the actual percentage received by each candidate per region and the said average percentage of votes. We divide the result by the standard deviation per region so that the percentage differences are measured in terms of standard deviations. With this result, we can classify regions according to their strength of support for each senatorial candidate using the following color scheme:
red: 1 < s : very strong support (includes s = 1)
yellow: 0 < s < 1: strong support
green: -1 < s < 0: weak support
blue: s < -1: very weak support (includes s = -1)
Connect the dots: Obama, Planned Parenthood, and the RH Law
A Summary of past events:
- Obama did not support a bill banning partial birth abortion.
- Obama meets with Aquino and gives development package.
- Aquino supports the RH Bill.
- Planned Parenthood lobbied for the passage of the RH Bill.
- Planned Parenthood is the largest abortion provider in the US.
- Obama speaks at a Planned Parenthood gathering.
Connect the dots.
Planned Parenthood knows what the elite of our country refuses to acknowledge: promote contraception and demand for abortion will rise. If a condom has 1% failure rate then 1 in 100 intercourse will fail and may lead to pregnancy. If intercourse is once a week, then within 100 weeks a condom will fail, which is about 2 years. If intercourse is once a day, then a condom will fail 1 in 100 days which is 3 months and 10 days. Even if you make condoms 0.1% failure rate, 1 in 1,000 intercourse will fail: that’s within 1,000 days or 3 years if you use condoms everyday or within 21 years if once a week. If you don’t want babies in the first place (that’s why you use condoms), then the baby once conceived becomes for you a nuisance that must be removed through abortion. In other words, contraception will ultimately lead to abortion because contraceptives fail. Indeed, as Fr. Hardon, SJ said:
I’m saying much more than meets the ears. What I am saying is that through the widespread, all but universal, practice of contraception, certainly in the once-Christian Western world, the very norms of morality have been changed. Instead of God determining what is right or wrong, it is now each person’s own will which is sovereign! So that, once contraception has been morally justified, and become even laudable and praiseworthy — hear it and weep — there is now no crime, no crime, that the same human mind cannot justify and that the civil laws created by human beings cannot legalize.
This is not difficult to imagine. After the RH Bill was railroaded in the Congress and the Senate upon the orders of President Noynoy Aquino, the RH Bill supporters became more brazen: they are now openly pushing for divorce and same-sex marriage in mocking defiance of the Catholic Church, confidently saying, “There is no Catholic Vote!” Once Pro-RH Bill legislators can destroy the natural family–the family where each baby is welcomed with joy and each old parent is taken cared of until death–as what happened in France, then there is nothing anymore preventing them from passing laws for the legalization of abortion and euthanasia as well.
Planned Parenthood knows the numbers. It has a good business model–by good meaning it churns out profits in millions of dollars. Planned Parenthood knows that if it gets men and women accept contraceptives, then they will soon accept abortion as well, as the experience in US, Europe, and other countries has shown. And for Planned Parenthood, abortion–the killing of the unborn–means money and each pregnant is a potential client. That is why Planned Parenthood is always on the lookout for babies or for countries with many babies, such as the Philippines. And all these with US Government’s financial support.
Planned Parenthood is like the Aswang of Filipino Folklore. The aswang awaits in the night, sniffing the air for the smell of ripe jackfruit–the smell of a pregnant woman. When it smells one, it becomes giddy with the scent, and flies to the house where the scent comes from. And there perched on the nipa roof, the aswang lowers its syringe-like tongue, sucking the amniotic fluid in the womb until the baby is delivered dead, stillborn–much like what happens in abortion clinics where they use syringe to insert salt solution to the amniotic fluid which burns the baby’s lungs and skin. If abortion fails, the baby can be partially delivered with its head still inside the woman’s body, then the baby’s brains are sucked out through a syringe–a procedure called partial birth abortion that Obama supports. And if by chance it happens that the baby is born alive, since the baby is not wanted, he will just be left to die in cold and hunger. If the abortionist is kind like Gosnell, he can simply break the babies spine by puncturing the neck–something short of decapitation–the form of mercy killing in the days of the Samurai code of honor, though this time it is the woman’s code of honor, with the baby as the badge of dishonor that must be removed from the face of the earth, though not from the memory where there it shall forever haunt until confessed.
So let us rethink again our support for the RH law and why we shall vote the politicians who supported such law. What are our real reasons? Is it because I am a big fan of Noynoy Aquino and he is the face of good governance and anti-corruption, so that whatever he says is good? Is it because my teachers in Ateneo and La Salle say so and I really admire them so I will believe anything they say? Is it because the Catholic Church is against the RH Law and anything that the Catholic Church stands for is what I shall embrace to show my rebellion as a true free thinker unbounded by dogmas of a medieval institution? Is it because Lagman is a Bicolano and I am also a Bicolano, so I must also support the RH law like Lagman? Is it because Risa Hontiveros is pretty and well-educated and she supports the RH law, so that’s why I also want to be like Risa Hontiveros and support the RH law? There are many underlying reasons to our support for the RH law. We have to uncover them, unearth them from our subconscious, and put them under the light of day by writing them down. So I suggest we use the Toyota’s 5 Why process by filling in the blanks:
I support the RH law. (Why?)
- because _______________________. (Why?)
- because _______________________. (Why?)
- because _______________________. (Why?)
- because _______________________. (Why?)
- because _______________________.
The last answer is the real reason. Try this exercise. It may be cathartic.
Catholicity rankings of Philippine senatorial candidates and political parties using Catholic Vote data
UPDATE 12 May 2013
These are the Catholicity rankings of senatorial candidates based on the updated Catholic Vote data published last May 12, 2013.
https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-frc1/482644_171759259651048_911604752_n.jpg
The parameters of interest are “Reproductive Health Law”, “Divorce”, and “Same-Sex Marriage”. For each “No” answer, I replace it by +1; for each “Yes” answer I replace it by -1. The sum of the scores is the Catholic Index with +3 as Catholic (agrees with the teachings of the Catholic Church) and -3 as anti-Catholic. I arranged the groups into Team Buhay (+3 Catholic Index), Team Agaw-Buhay (+1 or +2 Catholic Index), and Team Patay (0, -1, -2, and -3 Catholic Index). Please share the table. Thank you very much. Each vote counts. Let us show them that Catholic Vote exists.
Let us vote only those with +3 Catholic Index and forget about the rest. Be sure to include in your list the four senatorial candidates and the party-list supported by Filipinos for Life:
For senators: #9 David, #10 de los Reyes, #20 Llasos, and #23 Magsaysay (Mitos)
For Party-List: #42 Ang Pro-Life.
ARCHIVE 24 May 2013
by Quirino Sugon Jr. [1,2]
Abstract
In this paper, I propose a simple ranking system for Philippine senatorial candidates based on the candidates’ opposition to the Reproductive Health Law, divorce, and same-sex marriage, as compiled by Catholic Vote Philippines. In this system, we replace the thumbs up icon by +1 and the thumbs down icon by -1, then add all the ratings for each candidate get a scale from -3 to +3 at intervals of 1 unit, with -3 as anti-Catholic and +3 as Catholic. We refer to this scale as the Catholicity scale. We then group candidates according to political parties and compute the average party stand on the issues. We add the average party stand to the candidate’s stand to arrive at the party-influenced stand of the candidate. Finally, we compute the Catholicity of the party-influenced stand of the candidate and rank the senatorial candidates accordingly.
Read the full paper:
(DISCLAIMER: The opinions, equations, and senatorial candidate rankings published by the author in this paper may not reflect the opinions of Manila Observatory, Ateneo de Manila University, and the Catholic Vote Philippines.)
[1] Upper Atmosphere Dynamics Program, Manila Observatory, Ateneo de Manila University Campus, Loyola Heights, Quezon City, Philippines
[2] Department of Physics, School of Science and Engineering, Ateneo de Manila University, Loyola Heights, Quezon City, Philippines
Date Published: 25 April 2013, Feast of St. Mark the Evangelist

Catholicity rankings of the stands of senatorial candidates added to the stands of the (average) party persona for the three issues: anti RH law, anti-divorce, and anti same-sex marriage.

Catholicity ranking of the stands of each senatorial candidate on anti RH law, anti-divorce, and anti same-sex marriage.
Senatorial candidate Lito Yap David on Catholic Vote, gun control, senate experience, and political dynasty
[I transcribed the interview of Lito David in GMA's News To Go which was uploaded in You Tube January 23, 2013. I directly translated to English while transcribing. I hope this transcript would be useful to others who wish to know more about the Senatorial Candidate Lito David of Ang Kapatiran Party.]
1. What for you is the biggest problem in our country?
Poverty which is the fruit of corruption is the biggest problem of our country. Thus, we must strive to remove corruption so that we can give solution to the problem of poverty of our citizens.
2. You were are representative or member of the Ang Kapatiran Party which has religious orientation. I assume that you have been an anti-RH advocate?
That is true.
3. Why? So you believe that there is a Catholic Vote?
It was proven in 1995. Senator Flavier should have been No. 1, but he ended up No. 5 in that election. This 2010, the poster girl of the RH campaign and the poster boys of the RH campaign–those three lost: Risa Hontiveros, Nerio Acosta, and Ruffy Biazon. Negative Catholic vote was silent before, and did not became noisy. But it happened.
4. But we can say that there are Pro-RH also won and the RH itself won.
The pro RH’s win, Howie, in the previous months we cannot say was not an honest vote. As far as we know, because we were there, many of them there were intimidated or bribed to vote in favor of RH.
5. So there was bribery?
Yes. It was clear. It was not denied by the palace, even if we said it many times in the TV and radio, that they were there to threaten the others that if they will not vote Pro, they better not come; otherwise their pork barrel will not be released. That was the thing that happened before.
6. Do you possess a gun?
Me, no. Ever since I never had a gun.
7. What is your view on gun ownership and proliferation of guns in the society?
It was due to our allowing this culture. But the Filipino culture is peace-loving. But we only allowed a few to own guns. The stand of Ang Kapatiran Party is not to outlaw guns and gun ownership, but to regulate well the bringing of guns in public. The permit to carry is what should be regulated–that is what we are pushing for.
8. Why are you immediately running for the senate? You have no experience in elections. You have not yet run before.
This is my second time. In 2010 I also ran under the Ang Kapatiran Party as one of the senatorial candidates. I was instructed by the party to run again. If it is experience and competence in crafting of laws, I already have a long experience. I spent 10 years working in the senate, there are many laws that I took part in crafting. There are also many laws that I primarily finished. But because I am only a staff, I could not own the writing of the law. We are the background workers that make these laws.
9. So what are tyourhe priorities if you enter the senate?
We have many priorities: the prohibition of political dynasty, control of ownership and use of guns, the passage of freedom of information law, the prohibition of the pork barre–these are some of the items that we shall really push for. For me, personally, I wish to focus on the creation of frameworks for the use of land and water resources. Up to this time, before I left senate, I already finished that proposal. It was already in the senate floor. But the problem is some senators did not find it important. But for me it is important because this will give us true progress in our country.
10. You oppose political dynasty, but you have a member in Ang Kapatiran, one senatorial candidate, JC delos Reyes who is a member of the Gordon Political Family. Would you oppose his running again if the Anti-Dynasty Law gets passed?
He is the one who said that if the Anti-Dynasty Law gets passed, he said he will not run if Senator Gordon is there.
11. Ok. We have a Miss Universe portion on a lighter portion regarding the character and personality. When was the last time you cried?
Just the other day. When I looked back to the length of time for my fight for the betterment of our society, sometimes I feel tired. I started at 17 years old. Many times I was nearly killed. Before I fought for an ideology for our citizens. Now I am fighting for the Faith for our citizens.
12. What is the trait that you don’t like with your self?
Sometimes, I do procrastinate. I have a problem with that. But I was able to work against it.
13. Do you have something to change in your past, what is it?
There are many things that I wish to change, that is why I am here. This is my way to pay my sins to my fellowmen and to God.
Thank you, Lito David of Ang Kapatiran Party.
Question regarding Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation
Question by May:
I haven’t been in touch with what’s going on with pope benedict. so when i’ve known just the other day that he’s resigning as pope i googled why…then i came up with this article that said said something like at last he’s stepping down because he cant bear his guilt anymore of his hiding or not doing something with those priests, bishops and cardinals guilty f wrong doings (abuse of power and sexual abuse). so i’m pretty sure the writer isn’t catholic. and instead of reading further more of whatever comes up in google, i thought i might as well ask you..if there’s anything more that you can tell me unless it’s just but his age and strength that’s why the pope is resigning. of course i love pope benedict and his focus on evangelization.
Reply:
Regarding Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation, your guess is as good as mine. As far as I know, he already stated about its possibility three years ago:
“Cardinal Ratzinger, in his 2010 book-length interview Light of the World, had told the German journalist Peter Seewald that if a pope “realizes that he is no longer physically, psychologically, and spiritually capable of handling the duties of his office, then he has a right and, under some circumstances, also an obligation to resign” (p. 30). ” (TFP)
The reasons that he stated for his resignation this year 2013 are the same:
“After having repeatedly examined my conscience before God, I have come to the certainty that my strengths, due to an advanced age, are no longer suited to an adequate exercise of the Petrine ministry…In today’s world, subject to so many rapid changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the bark of St. Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me.” (Catholic News)
So I don’t think there is any surprise here. He is only being consistent.
For your comfort in these troubled times, you may like to read Don Bosco’s Vision of the Two Pillars.














