I?M astonished that people insist only on seeing one part of the SWS survey. That?s the part that says 88 percent of the respondents have ?much trust? in Noynoy Aquino. There?s another part that?s just as important, if not more so, which is the one that says 77 percent of the respondents have ?much trust? in Jojo Binay. The first is to be expected, the second not so.

Especially given that Binay was demonized immediately after the elections when he loomed as the new vice president. The charge was not just that he had cheated the voter, or stolen the vice presidential vote, it was also that he had cheated the taxpayer, or stolen taxpayers? money. The latter, his detractors said, had not been sufficiently explained to the voter during the elections, though they did not go on to explain why they failed to carry out so urgent a task. They did go on to say they were doing this now to prevent him from having any place in P-noy?s not-for-the-corrupt Cabinet.

The SWS survey was conducted June 25-28, so the campaign against Binay, which arose soon after election day and escalated up to when the survey was taken, would have had time to sink in. It never did, it just sank like the Titanic. The public clearly has a different opinion of the matter. I myself had thought that even if Binay were not felled by the attacks, he would be debilitated by them in a major way, showing some pretty deep wounds. Surprisingly, not at all. Some 77 percent of the public saying they have much trust in you is as near a categorical vote of confidence as you can get. Indeed some 77 percent of the public saying they have much trust in you is as good an indication, if not a near-categorical statement, of that same public?s lack of confidence in the people vilifying you.

At the very least, it cannot augur well for Mar Roxas? electoral protest, a thing that looks every inch like a face-saving effort, but which is really not going to save face. The SWS survey seems like a slap on it. To go by our experience with Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the public does not normally give high marks to people they perceive to have stolen the vote. In fact, I?d be very curious to know what the public thinks of the prospect of Roxas joining P-noy?s Cabinet next year.

While at that, I?d be very curious to know what the public thinks of some of P-noy?s appointees. Notably Dinky Soliman as social welfare secretary, and Butch Abad and Julia Abad as budget chief and Presidential Management Staff head respectively. Their group has been loudly complaining about the ?Kamag-anak Inc.? trying to horn in on the Cabinet appointments, which they see as their God-, or P-noy-given?it?s certainly not voter-given?turf. What would you call a father-and-daughter tandem keeping watch at the gates of government?

But we?ll have to wait for the next SWS survey for that one, if at all it decides to carry it out.

Right now however, what are we to make of the survey results? Why the impressively high trust ratings not just for P-noy but for V-nay? The latter even after the accusations of corruption thrown his way?

My answer to that is that during the elections and after, the public?s view of corruption was, and is, defined by the kind of corruption that rioted during GMA?s time. That is not just corruption in the sense of the theft of money, which rioted as well during Erap?s time, and Ramos? time, and even Cory?s time. That is corruption in the sense of, along with the mind-boggling theft of money, the theft of the vote, the theft of values, the theft of democracy, the theft of decency, the theft of lives, the theft of hope, which rioted only previously during Marcos? time.

That is the kind of corruption the public sees more than anything else. That is the kind of corruption the public wants something done about more than anything else. The voters made Noynoy Aquino president and Binay vice president because of it: Because Noynoy was the opposite of GMA and because Binay was anti-GMA, and both could be trusted to stop any rule that would extend that kind of corruption. And the public has acclaimed Noynoy by 88 percent and Binay by 77 percent because of it: Because P-noy is the opposite of GMA and because Binay is anti-GMA, and both can be trusted to prosecute GMA and all those who helped her mount that kind of corruption.

It?s the high trust rating given to V-nay rather than P-noy that clinches the argument. Binay?s claim to fame is that he fought GMA for the longest time, longer even than Noynoy, turning Makati into a safe haven for marches and demonstrations against the epically corrupting effects of attempted martial law, attempted Cha-cha, and actual murders and massacres. His high ratings suggest that for the public, the real framework, and the real project, is not running after petty crooks, it is running after the cabal that stole more than our money that in fact stole our future.

Truly, I?d be curious to see how the public will rate P-noy?s appointees who were also once pillars of GMA?s rule. I?d be curious to see if they are not the ones the public sees as corrupt.

That SWS? respondents gave P-noy high marks you can interpret in various ways. That they gave both P-noy and V-nay high marks, you can interpret only in one way. They trust, and expect, the two leaders who have fought GMA to undo her rule, bring justice to this country, and stand the world back on its feet by punishing the guilty and rewarding the innocent. They trust and expect the two leaders who have fought GMA to run after those who helped her trash everything this country holds sacred, wrench this country from its moral moorings, plunge this country into a pit beyond the pale of the very word ?corruption.?

That?s their mandate. It doesn?t get any clearer.