The Philippine Midterms: Did Youth Really Steal the Show?

By Louis ‘Barok‘ C. Biraogo — May 22, 2025

MANILA’S streets pulsed with defiance on May 12, 2025, as Filipinos delivered a stunning rebuke to the political establishment in the midterm elections. The surprise victories of Paolo Benigno “Bam” Aquino and Francis “Kiko” Pangilinan, clinching second and fifth Senate seats, were swiftly crowned as a youth-driven uprising. With millennials and Gen Z forming over 60% of voters and powering an 81.65% turnout, the narrative of a digital-savvy, pink-clad youth revolution took hold. But sociologist Athena Charanne Presto calls this a lazy oversimplification, masking deeper forces at play. Were Aquino and Pangilinan’s wins a Gen Z triumph, or did strategic maneuvering, electoral flaws, and raw public frustration propel them to power?

Unmasking the Youth Vote Hype

The “youth vote” story is a crowd-pleaser. Imagine a Gen Z voter in Quezon City, scrolling X, sharing pink-hued posts for Aquino and Pangilinan, defying their Marcos-loyalist parents. Media outlets and even Senator-elect Ping Lacson leaned into this, noting that 71% of online political chatter came from younger voters. But Presto, a sociologist dissecting Filipino voter behavior, skewers this narrative. “The youth are not homogenous,” she told Philstar.com, highlighting the chasm between millennials (born 1981–1996, some now 44) and Gen Z (1997–2012). Millennials, scarred by the 2008 financial crisis, prioritize jobs; Gen Z, glued to TikTok, wrestles with cultural conformity.

Consider Marj, a 19-year-old Davao student who wanted to back Pangilinan but feared losing her allowance from her Duterte-supporting father. Presto argues financial dependence mutes many young voices. Rural youth face steeper barriers: the COVID-19 digital divide left people like Juan, a Negros Occidental farmer’s son, struggling with literacy and campaign access. These fractures expose a diverse youth, not a monolithic bloc. Why, then, did media and politicians hype the “youth vote”? Was it to dodge tougher truths about soaring food prices, education gaps, or a political machine built for dynasties?

Outsmarting the Titans: Campaign Genius

Aquino and Pangilinan didn’t just win hearts—they outplayed their rivals. Both distanced themselves from the Liberal Party, vilified during Duterte’s reign as elitist “yellow” politics. Aquino ran under Katipunan ng Nagkakaisang Pilipino (KANP), while Pangilinan, though nominally Liberal, stressed independence, dodging the baggage of past disinformation campaigns. Their messaging was razor-sharp: Aquino pushed for expanded education funding under Republic Act 10931, covering private school subsidies and graduate job security. Pangilinan tackled food security, advocating agricultural investment and a national school breakfast program to fight hunger-driven learning crises. These resonated with voters like Ana, a Cavite teacher watching students skip meals, and Pedro, a Tarlac farmer crushed by fertilizer costs.

Compare this to the Marcos and Duterte camps, banking on dynastic clout and media glitz. Marcos’s slate, featuring stars like Erwin Tulfo, pushed continuity, while Duterte’s allies, like Bong Go, leaned on loyalty to Rodrigo’s legacy. But their public feud—Sara Duterte endorsing Imee Marcos against her brother’s candidates—exposed their chaos. Aquino and Pangilinan, free of such ties, became credible alternatives. Endorsements from local heavyweights like Cebu’s Gwen Garcia and Quezon City’s Joy Belmonte fueled their momentum in vote-rich Central Luzon and even the Marcos stronghold of the Solid North. Did they master coalition-building, or simply ride the wave of elite dysfunction?

Rigged or Resilient? Electoral Flaws Exposed

The election’s integrity is a minefield. Disinformation ran wild, with the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism flagging $860,000 spent on astroturfing via 100 fake Facebook pages posing as news outlets. Pro-Duterte accounts, 30% flagged as bots on X, peddled narratives of Rodrigo as an ICC martyr. Marcos’s camp countered with its own “anti-disinformation” probes, muddying accountability. Did these lies sway voters, or did they stoke distrust that Aquino and Pangilinan capitalized on?

The debut of Miru Systems’ voting tech, replacing Smartmatic, sparked more unease. Machine glitches and vote receipt discrepancies fueled skepticism, especially in places like Silay City, where electoral violence claimed lives. COMELEC reported persistent vote-buying, tarnishing claims of a clean process. Yet the record turnout suggests voters, perhaps fueled by rage, showed up anyway. Could this flawed system have amplified anti-establishment sentiment, boosting the opposition? The chaos likely worked in their favor, but the truth remains murky.

Pink Wave or Public Rage?

Leni Robredo’s shadow looms large. Her Naga City mayoral win and endorsement of Aquino and Pangilinan revived talk of a “pink wave,” echoing her 2022 campaign’s vibrant rallies. Supporters like Sarah, a 25-year-old Naga volunteer, credit Robredo’s moral clarity for galvanizing voters. But was this about Robredo, or a catch-all for broader fury? Soaring food prices, stagnant wages, and education gaps—worsened by Marcos’s politicized budget—fed discontent. The Marcos-Duterte feud, with its public sniping, alienated voters like Jose, a Manila driver sick of “elite drama.” Aquino and Pangilinan, backed by Robredo’s grassroots, positioned themselves as the antidote. Their Solid North gains suggest voters rejected dynasties, not just rallied for Robredo.

Reform or Rebellion? Decoding the Mandate

Do these wins signal a hunger for reform, or a middle finger to factionalized elites? Aquino and Pangilinan’s platforms tackle real crises: 25% of Filipino kids face hunger, and 60% of graduates can’t find skill-matched jobs. Their pledges resonate with middle-class and youth anxieties, but execution is uncertain. Can Aquino secure education funding in a dynasty-dominated Congress? Will Pangilinan’s agricultural reforms survive agribusiness lobbying? Without systemic change, these risk becoming symbolic sops.

The victories also reflect a protest against the Marcos-Duterte split, with only six Marcos-aligned and four Duterte-backed senators elected. Voters like Elena, a Bicol shopkeeper, backed Aquino “because he’s not them.” But protest votes don’t guarantee reform. The danger is that Aquino and Pangilinan could be absorbed into the elite dynamics they opposed, especially with Marcos’s legislative agenda at stake.

Seizing the Moment: A Roadmap

Aquino and Pangilinan’s wins offer a flicker of hope, but it’s fragile. They must institutionalize youth engagement beyond X hashtags, creating town halls to amplify voices like Maria’s despite financial and cultural barriers. They should champion laws to curb disinformation, building on Pangilinan’s prior Senate report. Most critically, they must push anti-dynasty legislation to dismantle the elite stranglehold. The 2028 presidential race looms, and without these steps, their victories could dissolve into another elite reshuffle. Did the youth spark this change, or did a fed-up nation find its voice? Their next moves will decide.

This op-ed draws on reporting from Rappler, Philstar.com, CSIS, and the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, prioritizing on-the-ground accounts.