Who's the most corrupt Philippine President ever SURVEY!

[radiostar]

---

padung lang gihapon diay ni anti gloria thread? what a waste... if you want to start a poll, don't be mad
if it didn't come out what you like... that the result will always show what the istoryan's think and not
"the people" that you think . so peace... this is not supposed to be "who hated gloria's guts poll".

wala man mi nasuko... na.a raman tao diha na nasuko namo kay di mi ganahan ni gma lels

^^^

OT : Hehehehe kayasa gyud niom oi !

@RADIOSTAR ...

Honestly I dont know about . Please pasabta ko , provide links that will show studies , stats , convictions , findings etc . Please also relate it as a piece of claim nimo why it subjects PGMA as the most CORRUPT oki doki ?

kung mo basa ka sa mga newspaper mga last month or the previous months na.a didto... mo post rako unya... wait sa

[more than just talk]

is this paid by senator osmena? haha.

[balatucan]

Newsbreak estimates the amounts involved in the alleged major corruption cases under the Arroyo administration. (In US dollars; based on a US$1=42 pesos exchange rate)

IMPSA deal $ 2 million
Diosdado Macapagal Blvd. 14 million
Piatco 20 million
Jose Pidal account 7.6 million
US properties 7.1 million
Fertilizer scam 17.3 million
North Rail project 50 million
NBN-ZTE deal 32.9 million
Jueteng collections 10 million
Palace cash handouts 3.8 million
TOTAL $ 164.7 million

[omad]

Who's the most corrupt Philippine President ever SURVEY!

Its Gloria 3 years breaking the record of 20 years by MarcosGMA’s $164.7 million “loot” no match to Marcos’s $10 billion

if you know a little bit of math, you would know which amount is bigger.

[balatucan]

is this paid by senator osmena? haha.

Osmeña explained how the survey results became public.

“Last Tuesday when I was in Bacolod to visit my 94-year-old mother in the hospital, I got a text from Pulse Asia’s Ana Tabunda. She was briefing ABS-CBN on the regular periodic survey findings of Pulse. That survey had included questions on corruption. I did not know that and I commissioned a handful of rider questions on trust ratings of some leaders and the most corrupt and most honest President,” Osmeña said in a text message.

“Ana asked if I could lift my embargo so that she could disclose my data to ABS... When I agreed, ABS later called me up to ask if they could announce my poll findings on their newscast and ABS inquired why I had commissioned the poll. I replied that the opposition office takes regular surveys to feel the pulse of the citizenry. We have alternated between using Pulse and SWS. Our cost for this rider was in the low six figures,” he said.

Ana Tabunda of Pulse Asia explained.

Are they saying the data are incorrect because he commissioned it? We get the results as we get them, irrespective of who commissioned it. The only difference is that sponsors have the option not to release the data if the results are unfavorable to them,”

[balatucan]

Who's the most corrupt Philippine President ever SURVEY!

GMA’s $164.7 million “loot” no match to Marcos’s $10 billion

if you know a little bit of math, you would know which amount is bigger.

The survey is perceived who is the most corrupt and NOT WHO'S STOLEN MORE MONEY.

[omad]

This thread is another waste of bandwidth. Can you not get it? The Filipino people has spoken. Gloria Arroyo is the MOST CORRUPT PRESIDENT IN PHILIPPINE HISTORY!

Even how try you will do it, your survey will just be another, unscientific, unreliable, bias and a pitiful copycat of the genuine Pulse Asia survey.

Please accept the truth. by the way, do you have Pulse Asia's breakdown of the 1,200 respondents as far as age is concerned? my contention would be if more than 60% of the pool is younger than 30 years old then that means majority of those surveyed would be 9 years old or younger during the last year of the Marcos regime (1986).

why is age significant? it's for the basic reason that it would be difficult for a 9 year old (during Marcos' time) to remember or better yet understand what's going on during that era. common sense tells me that if one of the option in a given survey is kinda sketchy because (1) someone was barely a kid or worse, (2) he or she might not have been born yet to witness the corruption in the government during that time.

by that simple reasoning, Pulse Asia's survey on this particular topic is suspect.

if 100% of those surveyed were 40 something (at least 19 years old during 1986) then the result would be more scientific and more reliable because ALL were ADULTS when they experienced Marcos, Cory, Ramos and PGMA's presidency.

if you can show me PROOF that Pulse Asia's respondents were all 40 something then I will accept the truth.

[balatucan]

by the way, do you have Pulse Asia's breakdown of the 1,200 respondents as far as age is concerned? my contention would be if more than 60% of the pool is younger than 30 years old then that means majority of those surveyed would be 9 years old or younger during the last year of the Marcos regime (1986).

why is age significant? it's for the basic reason that it would be difficult for a 9 year old (during Marcos' time) to remember or better yet understand what's going on during that era. common sense tells me that if one of the option in a given survey is kinda sketchy because (1) someone was barely a kid or worse, (2) he or she might not have been born yet to witness the corruption in the government during that time.

by that simple reasoning, Pulse Asia's survey on this particular topic is suspect.

if 100% of those surveyed were 40 something (at least 19 years old during 1986) then the result would be more scientific and more reliable because ALL were ADULTS when they experienced Marcos, Cory, Ramos and PGMA's presidency.

if you can show me PROOF that Pulse Asia's respondents were all 40 something then I will accept the truth.

it woul be better for you to confirm first if there are 60% younger than 30 who are interviewed.

Without it, we are engaging in speculations.

[balatucan]

by the way, do you have Pulse Asia's breakdown of the 1,200 respondents as far as age is concerned? my contention would be if more than 60% of the pool is younger than 30 years old then that means majority of those surveyed would be 9 years old or younger during the last year of the Marcos regime (1986).

why is age significant? it's for the basic reason that it would be difficult for a 9 year old (during Marcos' time) to remember or better yet understand what's going on during that era. common sense tells me that if one of the option in a given survey is kinda sketchy because (1) someone was barely a kid or worse, (2) he or she might not have been born yet to witness the corruption in the government during that time.

by that simple reasoning, Pulse Asia's survey on this particular topic is suspect.

if 100% of those surveyed were 40 something (at least 19 years old during 1986) then the result would be more scientific and more reliable because ALL were ADULTS when they experienced Marcos, Cory, Ramos and PGMA's presidency.

if you can show me PROOF that Pulse Asia's respondents were all 40 something then I will accept the truth.

The ongoing poll results had Marcos leading followed by Erap with GMA a close third. I dont think more than 70 percent of people posting here are more than 30 years old.

Most people here were not even born in 1986 but look at the results!

They choose Marcos even if they had no first hand experience of living under that regime and I didnt hear you complaining about the age bracket of people voting here. Why? Because the results are favorable to Gloria Arroyo?

Which makes this poll here totally baseless and unreliable.

[omad]

The survey is perceived who is the most corrupt and NOT WHO'S STOLEN MORE MONEY. how do you define corrupt? so we would be on the same page before we continue this discussion.