SUMMARY
This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.
MANILA, Philippines – Like the first presidential debate, the second one held in Cebu did not show policy depth and details, but revealed the character of the candidates, according to millennial advocates and experts who observed the exchange.
“This debate is a litmus test on how our commander-in-chief would look like,” said Nicole Curato, a Filipino sociologist based at the Center for Deliberative Democracy and Global Governance in Canberra, Australia.
The debate, which lasted for almost 3 hours, was character-revealing, according to climate ambassador and TV personality Bianca Gonzalez.
Not sure if I learned anything new from our candidates with this debate, but it did reveal A LOT about their character under pressure.
— Bianca Gonzalez (@iamsuperbianca) March 20, 2016
@VoltaireTupaz Entertaining, no doubt. But I would have wanted more info on plans of candidates on education, health. Character-revealing.
— Bianca Gonzalez (@iamsuperbianca) March 20, 2016
Even at the beginning, advocates and experts were already dismayed at the candidates’ “catfight” over coal and climate change. Other observers said the debate got intense as it proceeded, but lacked substance.
@rjkarunungan @VoltaireTupaz 1/2 INTENSE. But if allowed a 2nd word, PETTY. Candidates spent more time and energy defending themselves…
— Micheline Mich Rama (@MichAllTogether) March 20, 2016
@rjkarunungan @VoltaireTupaz 2/2 than articulating plans for PH progress. Wish they fought as hard 4 Pinoys as they did 4 their reputations.
— Micheline Mich Rama (@MichAllTogether) March 20, 2016
Leloy Claudio, assistant professor at the Center for Southeast Asian Studies in Kyoto University, summarized how the presidential bets conducted themselves under these circumstances.
@VoltaireTupaz @NicoleCurato 3. Roxas – cerebral, but also lost his cool. I can trust him with policy, but he doesn’t handle stress well
— Leloy Claudio (@leloyclaudio) March 20, 2016
@VoltaireTupaz @NicoleCurato Poe: Eloquent, uses one liners well. But she really took a hit on the coco levy issue.
— Leloy Claudio (@leloyclaudio) March 20, 2016
@VoltaireTupaz @NicoleCurato Duterte: Bully tactics re. Roxas worked. But how does he get away with admitting to being a killer?!
— Leloy Claudio (@leloyclaudio) March 20, 2016
@VoltaireTupaz @NicoleCurato Binay: Disagree with the panel. Weak all around, and couldn’t answer Mar Roxas’s questions towards the end.
— Leloy Claudio (@leloyclaudio) March 20, 2016
Even the new format, which allowed longer interaction among the candidates, did not facilitate clearer articulation of stances on issues. It did reveal, however, how the presidential bets perform under pressure.
Improved format but debaters failed to deepen political stances. Theatrics & ad hominen dominated the debate. #PiliPinasDebates2016 #PHVote
— mikelabayandoy (@mikelabayandoy) March 20, 2016
In the previous debate, Mike Labayandoy also criticized the format because “it did not encourage continuity, deepening of positions.” (READ: No sparks: ‘Not a debate, but speed dating’)
But for Evan Tan, a member of the executive committee of the Philippine LGBT Chamber of Commerce, lines were drawn on specific issues close to women and human rights advocates.
@VoltaireTupaz Sobering. Excited to see the next debate. So far, candidates are consistently showing where they stand on key issues.
@VoltaireTupaz we have #DaangMatuwid for this. https://t.co/m1pzcELva1
@VoltaireTupaz and that delay bec of going against rules. Digong’s war vs criminality without clear action plans. All soundbites.
(READ: #PHVote: Millennial advocates hit Duterte’s ‘killing spree’)
Meanwhile, though her mistake ended up causing the 90-minute delay in the debate, TV5 news chief and anchor Luchi Cruz Valdes was praised for her efforts to keep the candidates’ exchanges on track.
AGREE. Props kay Mam Luchi. Nakakatakot siguro mamagitan, kahit si Poe umiinit ulo eh hehe. #PiliPinasDebates2016 https://t.co/VJOf5Kf263
The Cebu presidential debate is the second in a series organized by the Commission on Elections (Comelec) and its media partners. It was supposed to start at 5 pm but began at 6:30 pm. (READ: #PiliPinasDeLate? Delayed Cebu debate stirs confusion on social media)
– Rappler.comIn the meantime… @JADeVenecia @glenntuazon @patevangelista @maria_ressa @rapplerdotcom pic.twitter.com/DcxKklQA9D
— Nicole Curato (@NicoleCurato) March 20, 2016
Add a comment
How does this make you feel?
There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.