The debates are not for the candidates, but for the citizens.
Now we see a series of conditions set by the representatives of the presidential candidates, especially that of Morena, as if the debates were a propaganda forum.
They have propaganda in abundance: 52 million spots in which they show their best angles with the help of technology. They say what they want even if it is lies, they make unfulfillable promises without anyone questioning them.
They saturate the population and distance them from politics because the idea that everyone lies, bores and abuses television and radio becomes widespread.
They want the debates to be, more or less, the same.
Interviewers who are comfortable for them, ask questions that are gentle or do not bother them, and that please highlight how good the President has been.
One of the candidates even asked to know the questions in advance.
Moment. What it is about is that the population knows them as closely as possible to what they really are.
Let’s see if they have the nerve to react with serenity and good judgment in difficult situations, like many of the ones they will have to face if they win.
We need them to question them thoroughly, to know if what they propose is viable or not, if they are telling the truth or just repeating phrases empty of content.
What is the fear that the drivers are, for example, Carmen Aristegui and Ciro Gómez Leyva? Or others of that caliber.
And that they encourage debate between the candidates.
There are so many buts that Mario Delgado – leader of Morena – has put into the debates, that he reveals a great distrust towards his presidential candidate.
Delgado distrusts the questions, the drivers, the citizens who send their concerns, the INE commission that organizes the debates, the chairs, the tables, the clock, the microphone.
And a fear that he shares with his candidate: that criticism of the government is implicit in the questions.
The president of Morena makes us see that he protects a crystal candidate.
He wrongly minimizes it. Sheinbaum is made into the controversy of university assemblies. She already had debates as a candidate for the head of Government, and also on Sunday, April 7, at the presidential level.
Whether he is right or not in his arguments is another story, but he does know how to debate.
If she can’t do more, it’s Morena’s problem: they chose her.
And if the candidate is made of glass and her arguments are weak, voters have a right to know it.
The same in the case of Xóchitl. Voters have the right to know if there is more than folklore in their candidacy.
The doubt, in the case of the Morena candidate, is whether it is only Mario Delgado who does not trust her in the debate of ideas and proposals. Or if they also missed it as a presidential candidate.
Mario Delgado said: “We want to warn that we are very concerned about the issue of video questions, because the possibility of manipulation of these video questions is very high, and we no longer trust the production company that is doing these debates.”
He is worried about video questions and talks about manipulation.
What manipulation can it refer to? Delgado has to explain what, in these cases, manipulation of a question is.
Let’s see what the scope of the distrust that Mario Delgado expresses has. If he does it on his behalf or is the transmitter of a concern from his boss.
The electoral calendar and the rules of the game dictate debates and that is what they should be: debates.
For the third debate, three moderators were chosen, one close to each candidate and another from Central Korea. From Monterrey, Mexico City and Mérida, with the argument of “regionalizing.”
If that is the idea, a debate could have been held in Yucatán, another in CDMX and another in Nuevo León, with journalists from those states, of which there are and very good ones.
That, however, is not the idea, but to leave the candidates happy. Decaffeinate to meet the requirement.
The objective of nationally televised debates is for citizens to form an opinion.
This requires respectful drivers, but direct and informed, with the personality to refute and focus the candidate. Let them ask uncomfortable questions about the topics already agreed upon.
We won’t see that. Mario Delgado was – or conveyed – fear.
