Elbow Room | Rapido Commentario || By: Richard Santiago || The recent decision of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) to nullify the nomination of Mayor Samuel Laynes as the official candidate of Lakas-CMD following a petition by incumbent Congressman Eulogio Rodriguez has sparked intense political discussions. Observers and analysts are now weighing the possible effects of this ruling—both for Laynes himself and for the broader political landscape of Catanduanes. Will this setback weaken his candidacy, or could it actually work in his favor?
Belonging to a major political party like Lakas-CMD provides significant advantages. Firstly, it offers a strong political machinery that includes organized grassroots networks, access to campaign funding, and established connections with national leaders. A party-backed candidate benefits from the endorsement of powerful political figures, increasing voter confidence and strengthening their campaign narrative.
Another advantage of running under a well-known party is the shared resources and coordinated campaigns with other candidates from the same slate. Being part of a team effort ensures better visibility, as party-list representatives, senatorial bets, and even national leaders can endorse and campaign for their local bets. This strategic alignment can significantly boost a candidate’s chances of winning.
However, being part of a party also has its disadvantages. Party loyalty often comes with obligations, including adhering to party policies, supporting national candidates regardless of personal preference, and sometimes compromising personal political stances for the sake of unity. In cases where internal conflicts arise, as seen in the dispute between Laynes and Rodriguez, party affiliations can become a source of political tension rather than strength.
On the other hand, running as an independent candidate has both risks and rewards. Without the backing of a major party, an independent candidate must rely on personal networks, grassroots movements, and individual supporters to sustain their campaign. This means greater freedom in decision-making, no obligations to align with party interests, and the ability to craft a unique campaign message that resonates directly with the people.
Historically, independent candidates who have strong local influence and credibility can turn their unaffiliated status into an advantage, presenting themselves as true representatives of the people, free from political compromises and party dictates. This could be a strategic move for Laynes, who may frame his campaign as one that is purely for the people, not dictated by political alliances.
Nonetheless, the biggest challenge for an independent candidate is the lack of a well-funded party machinery. Campaigning requires extensive logistics, including advertisements, rallies, and mobilization efforts—all of which are significantly harder without the financial and organizational support of a political party. This could put Laynes at a disadvantage, especially if he faces a well-funded and highly organized opponent.
Ultimately, whether running under a party or as an independent, the most critical factor remains the candidate’s credibility, track record, and the trust of the voters. If Mayor Laynes can capitalize on his experience and solidify his grassroots support, the absence of a party nomination may not necessarily spell defeat. In some cases, it can even become a powerful symbol of independence and genuine public service.
As the election season intensifies, the real battle will be not just about party affiliations, but about who can truly connect with the people and present a compelling vision for the province. In the end, the decision lies in the hands of the voters—and their choice will define the future of Catanduanes. (Bicol Peryodiko newspaper weekly | Photo credit to the Catanduanes Government)
