Ricardo Pascoe Pierce
The first debate between the three presidential candidates concluded. The first aspect that stood out was the excellent conduct of the two moderators, even though Morena had tried to disqualify Manuel López San Martín from ADN 40.
On the other hand, the questions selected were punctual, painful, and indicative of the concerns of Mexican society, regardless of partisan obsessions and prejudices. On this point, Morena also challenged the academic institution in charge of gathering and ordering the information received by the citizens. When Morena questioned her role in the process, the director chose to resign from her position.
Up to that moment, Morena was on the offensive against the debate’s forms and substance, implying that if it did not respond to its purposes and expectations, it might not attend the debate.
Massive Caller published a survey reflecting the feelings of a broad population that watched the debate. The results were, to the question “who won the debate”: Xóchitl with 51.1.%, Claudia with 46.6%, and Álvarez 2.3%.
The participants’ performance was irregular. As happened in the debate between the candidates for Mexico City, Movimiento Ciudadano’s role was testimonial and peripheral. Its insistence on its participation only raises doubts about its true intentionality in the electoral process. Some will confirm their suspicion that Movimiento Ciudadano’s presence is to subtract votes from the real opposition to Morena.
On the other hand, Claudia was cold, not very empathetic, and followed her script to the letter. She answered absolutely nothing on transparency and corruption, effectively dodging Xochitl’s questions. Not even the questions about Metro Line 12 or the Rebsamen School disturbed her. She did not answer, repeating the refrain of the “neoliberal era” or the “PRIAN”. She was effective in the worst sense of the word: she consistently lied about data and achievements of her government in Mexico City and the federal government and escaped unscathed from her misdeeds.
Xóchitl missed a golden opportunity. Those were terrible issues that have seriously affected Mexican society: health, education, transparency, and corruption. The 4T has failed as a ruling party on all these issues. It has been six years of setbacks. And yet, Xóchitl questioned and attacked an opponent who has, to her credit, an enormous capacity to lie, dodge, and get away with it. She could not seriously hurt her by discussing those issues. The experience remains for the subsequent two debates.
Security was the only issue missing to round out the menu of national tragedies, which will be addressed in another debate. We must learn the lessons this exercise offered and the mistakes and errors that will improve the next debate.
The poll’s result encourages Xóchitl Gálvez’s candidacy, although the lessons from this debate must be analyzed, acknowledged, and assimilated as part of the difficult road ahead in the campaign.
Claudia will limit herself to her script until the end, while Alvarez will try to be minimally relevant.
In conclusion, the campaign goes on; there is nothing for nobody, and we will meet in the next two debates on that decisive date: June 2.
[email protected]
@rpascoep
Further Reading: