Last Sunday, the presidential candidates attended the mandatory televised debate organized by the CNE. In this column, I intend to make a short analysis of the most relevant ones.

I must begin by emphasizing the importance of making the debate mandatory, because apart from the chaotic format – which I hope will be reviewed by the CNE in the future – it is important that the citizens were able to see live, without teleprompter or help, those who aspire to the highest dignity of the nation.

These are the observations on the debate of the seven presidential candidates: our columnists speak

Going into the matter, it is evident that in the case of the two candidates who are leading by a large margin, the goal was, as far as possible, to get out of the debate unscathed, to ensure their passage to the second round, considering that the short time left for D-day”. However, , did not have the same luck.

In Ms. Luisa’s case, not only was she unable to emulate her main leader, but it became clear that she was light years away from him. And as if that wasn’t enough, he scored two own goals to revive Refinería del Pacífico and the Odebrecht case. And while it doesn’t affect the hard vote, which would vote for the lamppost if the Supreme Leader so chooses, it clearly limits the recruitment of undecided voters who are already on the decline after last week’s unfortunate event.

presidential debate

In fact, Jan Topić not only showed his mastery in the problem of insecurity in the country, which is by far the main concern of the voters, but he skillfully connected all the axes of the debate to the problem of insecurity. Calm, with figures, times and goals, he supported his pre-election speech.

As for the other candidates, Daniel Noboa, who should rather be betting on 2025, justified Topić, they even had a very interesting exchange that raises hope for a different political future. For many a surprise event. Above all, for those who did not know their academic qualifications.

We’ll see if the post-debate moves the numbers up to Sunday, which is unlikely, but not impossible.

Otto was under a lot of pressure from the debate. It all adds up at this point. In my opinion, it was good. There is no doubt about his personal and intellectual qualities. However, to my taste, the exigencies of his campaign have forced him into a role that is not natural to him. Suddenly, a politician with clarity of concepts, consensus and good dialogue, shouts, points out and threatens, and does it well, because he is an excellent communicator. We’ll see if, in the end, they reach him. Personally, I like Otto better for being Otto.

“Yesterday cannot be called a debate: the format did not fulfill the purpose of informing the public”

Yaku died in his law. Consistent with his historical discourse and his ideals of the left, social justice and ecological defense. Unfortunately for him, that scenario seems out of place in such turbulent times when people, for the most part, want immediate solutions to the violence that has engulfed the country.

Hervas looked disheartened, as did his campaign. And finally, don Bolívar tried very hard, but he was not up to the task.

We’ll see if the post-debate moves the numbers up to Sunday, which is unlikely, but not impossible.

We will continue to comment. (OR)