THE VIEW FROM RIZAL
“Who do you think emerged the winner in the interviews of presidential aspirants last week?”
That was the question we got from a number of readers and friends last week. The interviews done by two of the country’s best-known television hosts were “talk of the town.” Hashtags sizzled and social media was flooded with banters and bashes. This is what is meant by the phrase “the political pot has begun to boil.” We were pressed by readers and friends to reveal our choice. Our response was “why are you asking who ‘won’; was there a contest?” The fact is many see the “interviews” and the “debates” that happen during campaign season for general elections as “contests.” They are like the preliminaries of a beauty pageant where early bets are placed and odds determined as to who may emerge likely winners.
We prefer not to look at the presidential interviews and debates that way. We like to view them instead as an opportunity to take a closer look at the pack from which one will become the country’s top government official. They are like a “gallery” where one gets to scrutinize the candidates and aim to find out who fits his description of the “ideal.” These public appearances by presidential aspirants could be crucial.
In the history of US politics, it is believed that the US presidential debates had a lot of influence on the voters who elected the late John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.
For Kennedy, his visual image onstage and on the television screen proved to be his major edge over his rival Richard M. Nixon. For Ronald Reagan, it was his unforgettable, brilliant handling of the question about his age. He was at that time the oldest person to aspire for the highest elective office in the United States.
Observers believe that these US presidential debates helped voters see the “stark contrast” between the rivals.
Kennedy’s visual image showed the “calm, collected and confident” side of him. In the face of tough questions from the debate panel, Kennedy’s image showed a person who was unruffled and unintimidated. In contrast, his rival Nixon, fidgeted and was drenched with sweat which he kept wiping away from his forehead.
The public was quick and cruel on their judgment. They concluded that Kennedy had the guts and strength of character.
The same happened in the Reagan-Mondale debate. Reagan handled a tough question with calm, and his trademark wit and humor. The nationwide TV audience shared the laughter while his rival – the somber-looking Mondale - stood by attempting a smile.
It looks like these forums showcase the character of the candidate. When people watch them in these public appearances, audiences scrutinize character rather than the answers to the interviewer’s questions. The questions are merely tools that help reveal how a presidential aspirant would handle the toughest moments and decisions that come with the toughest political office in the country.
In these televised debates, the real winners are the voters. They get to see what they are looking for. They witness the demeanor of the candidates at the latter’s most vulnerable moments.
So, at the national level, these interviews and debates count. They help a lot in the voters’ decision-making process.
At the local level, that may not be true.
Campaigns at the local level lack the kind of atmosphere and environment that televised programs provide. Debates at the local level are usually done in gymnasiums, churches or town plazas. Here, candidates bring their most rabid followers who have one single task: to heckle the opponent of their candidate.
In televised events, the national candidates are isolated from the hecklers. At the local level, the candidates directly face the pack of hecklers. The noise they create prevents the participants from a meaningful engagement that could help reveal their plans and their character.
At the local level, the primary basis becomes “performance” – the track record that a candidate has established in the performance of his or her public service mandate.
At the local level, voters choose the candidate who has these two elements: “magaling” and “maraming nagawa”.
At this level, the truism that “actions speak louder than words” is most important. The real “debate” does not take place in a studio or onstage. It happens in the arena of public service where people size up the candidates based not on answers to trick questions, but rather, based on how the candidate answer their needs.
*For feedback, please email it to [email protected] or send it to Block 6 Lot 10 Sta. Barbara 1 cor. Bradley St., Mission Hills Subd., Brgy. San Roque, Antipolo City, Rizal.