Citizens lost the debate | David Ordaz

David Ordaz

Yesterday the first debate took place between the three presidential candidates: Claudia Sheinbaum, Xochitl Galvez and Jorge Alvarez Maines. In two hours of a format that tried to be interactive but proved stifling as always, neither the two candidates nor the candidate managed to come up with a single serious topic or proposal.

In particular, Sheinbaum tried to propose (unsuccessfully), but at times he was caught up in Galvez’s attacks, while Galvez was completely focused on the attack rather than the proposal. For nearly two hours, his expression showed irritation and discomfort.

In the case of candidate Alvarez Mainez, his noticeable lag in the polls forced him to resort to complaints, accusations and criticism, relying on Galvez, and although he tried to present proposals, he ended up with a series of phrases and actions such as: his greeting in Spanish, signs who only made fun of him.

Of course, there were moments that will be remembered, such as poorly made cardboard and complaints for a short time, however, the truth is that these debates tend to be rather mediocre and boring spectacle and serve only for photography.

Just as in Rome they threw gladiators to fight each other and the public enjoyed the violence, blood and the way they killed each other, today these events are a grotesque spectacle, more like a “reality show”, where social networks have become a meter of popularity and pogroms between rivals.

Some experts noted that this type of exercise is not enough, mainly in terms of time, for the candidate to present and deepen his proposals. Perhaps there is some truth in this. But the main thing is HOW. We citizens no longer want to listen to the string of lies they promise to tell, but rather want to hear HOW they will make it possible, and this depends on the format set by the political parties and the National Electoral Institute.

Yesterday’s topics were: education and health, transparency and anti-corruption, non-discrimination, vulnerable groups and violence against women. Does anyone remember a specific proposal for these 7 topics? Me neither.

Why talk about how to overcome the colossal failure in education after a pandemic or about a health care “strategy” that should put more than one person in prison when we can talk about how they greeted each other, how they looked at each other, how did they feel? dressed or someone else is stuck.

Today it seems that the digital world and bot farms will determine who gets the end result.

In at least the last 25 years of journalistic observation of electoral processes, I do not remember a single study that would know the percentage of people who decided to vote after watching one, two or three debates. The closest the Mexican electorate has come to “trusting” are highly discredited election companies.

It will be difficult for NINs and party representatives to change the formats of the next debates, which will take place at the end of the month and in May, but the onus is on the candidates and the candidate to make their move. and talk directly to citizens about HOW they will make this or that proposal.

Unfortunately, we saw a show yesterday where apparently everyone declared themselves the winner and minimized their attacks on each other. Some call this democratic normality, but in reality it is the cynicism and conformism of Mexican politicians.

It’s true that politicians are terrible (all of them), it’s true that the “new INE” is so green that its role on June 2 creates a lot of uncertainty, but it’s also true that among the most painful things about it all is that we , citizens, we remain as disappointed as we are motionless and apathetic.

The National Palace says that today’s society is becoming increasingly politicized. This is a lie (like almost everything they say), society is not politicized, it is polarized, and this polarization leads to social and even family conflicts, even greater disappointment and apathy.

This little formula works well for Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. Divide and rule.

There is a need for organizations such as INE, the media, opinion leaders and other de facto forces to rethink current patterns of election communication.

Meanwhile, yesterday and today the citizens lost.

NOTE. Special mention goes to INE and its very poor production. With noticeable errors and discontinuities. Hopefully they will improve in the next two games.