AT THE HALFWAY MARK

 To understand Trinidadian and Tobagonian politics you have to realize that both are very different and that the things that motivate voters in Tobago are not the same things as in Trinidad. We are very roughly at the halfway mark of the present Government's term and it might be useful at this stage to take a look at things the way they are - and not how we would want them to be.

Let's take Trinidad first: the island is cursed with two major races that are very roughly equal in size. If you belong to one race you will vote , say, for the UNC, and if you belong to the other race you will vote, say, for the PNM. At least, that is the mantra. But it ain't as simple as that! That rather blanket statement applies to very, very roughly only sixty percent of the registered voters. In other words UNC has a base support of approximately thirty percent of registered voters and PNM has (again, very roughly) an equal amount of supporters who will vote for "their party" no matter what. Race trumps everything amongst these rather rabid supporters on both sides who will vote for "their" side no matter what. Allegations of corruption and incompetence etc., whether true or not, matter little to these people.

Then you have (again all figures are very rough) about fifteen percent of the electorate who lean towards the PNM and the same amount who lean towards the UNC. These voters can be persuaded to either switch sides or not vote at all as their sympathies, although coloured a little by race, are influenced by other factors such as, for example, the economy, corruption, etc.. That leaves  a "floating" vote of approximately ten percent, and it is this section which makes the difference. Put another way, the two main parties have to convince this section of the electorate, who will not vote or be influenced by race, that they can do better than the other side. Last time around in 2020 the PNM's rather obvious unspoken mantra was "we are not the UNC". The UNC's mantra was "we can do it better". The UNC managed to eke out a small victory in Trinidad but lost out when the two seats in Tobago were handed to the PNM.  The UNC failed to provide enough voters in either island with reasons to believe that they (the UNC) could make the lives of the voters better and the PNM managed to sell to enough people that they, not being the UNC, were the natural party to govern in default of there being a better alternative.

Now, Tobago has a very different racial make up. For one thing, the electorate is almost one hundred percent African, so the Indian/African thing is relatively non-existent. In addition, in Tobago the voters tend to be rather clever with their vote; they will go wherever they think that they will have the most leverage and upon whom they can rely the most. It's all about self-interest - and you know what? They are right to think this way. Oh! A minority will vote ethnically - that's a given, but the average Tobagonian will look to see where he can get the most butter for his bread.  The UNC has signally failed historically to understand this and has relied instead on support in Trinidad (and the occasional Tobagonian who can muster enough votes in Tobago) to defeat the PNM, in order to get hold of the reins of power

So? Back to Trinidad! There are a small handful of marginal seats in the forty-one seat Legislature (of which thirty-nine are in Trinidad), such as Barataria/San Juan, where the PNM/UNC voters" till ah dead" are roughly equal to one another and so the winners will be chosen by the real floating voters in those constituencies. A very small movement in any of those marginal seats could spell victory or defeat for either of the two main parties. At present, there are about four or five marginals and a swing in one will not necessarily mean that all will swing the same way. The quality of the respective candidates in terms of persuading people to support them will make the difference.

As for the fringe parties like the People's Empowerment Party (PEP) or the one led by Gary Griffith, they will continue to struggle and are unlikely to be able to garner much support even though their leaders may continue to talk a lot of sense. Unfortunately, money talks and neither of these fringe parties has enough money to run any type of campaign that can persuade voters to support them. The PEP's leader is certainly trying though and has been quite innovative in his use of social media. Will his efforts succeed? Highly unlikely at the present time.

Of course, as former British Prime Minister Harold Wilson once said, "a week is a long time in politics", and we have not weeks, but more than two years until the next elections are due! In that time any number can (and will probably) play. 

One final point: whether we admit it or not, our politics are more presidential in nature than most people realize. It is a given that voters will compare the two leaders, Dr. Rowley and Mrs. Persad-Bissessar, and cast their votes accordingly. In this regard, voters will look carefully at both leaders and make their judgements accordingly. Rabid supporters on both sides need to look at this particular point and think very carefully: "can my leader garner enough support in the country in order to win?" is the real question that needs to be asked after a cold and unemotional look at the situation as it continues to play out. That is, of course, assuming that they really do want "their side" to win! Heated emotion has never defeated cold logic - something that the rabid supporters on both sides fail to understand.