Missing the debates

I remembered my professor telling our class about debates being an “ideal form of public discourse”. He said debates have been a place where people voice out their opinions on certain issues, that is why debates are important in the presidential race. It not only gauges the presidentiable’s intellectual capacity to answer the questions, it also helps them lay out their stand on certain issues.

But recently, only a few presidentiables were attending these debates, claiming that their stands have already been presented during their attendance to the previous forums. They said their campaigns are much more important than doing the same thing all over again. If what they said were true, then why do many people still ask about their stand on certain issues?

To tell you the truth, I was disappointed by their refusal to attend such debates, because I believe debates are the best way to know a candidate inside and out. It gauges their intelligence instead of face value.

It was wrong for them to belittle the debates and claim they had said all they needed to say. Not all Filipinos are able to watch the debates, and not all questions are answered because of the little time.

I salute those presidentiables who keep attending the debates like Sen. Richard Gordon. He, and the other lesser known presidentiables like JC Delos Reyes, was present when debates were held.

Like in the ABS-CBN tandem debate, those in the lead like Villar, Aquino and Teodoro revoked their attendance, disappointing the masses since the company had to stop the debate, but Gordon was there. In the CBCP presidential debate, the same thing happened, those in the lead were not present and those not in the leading surveys are the ones attending.

“Those who refuse to join debates show that they cannot stand the pressure of facing the people,” Gordon said in an interview with the Philippine daily Inquirer when he was asked about the other candidates’ refusal to attend the debates.

“Candidates should demonstrate not only their ability to spend money
or their ability to use their family (to campaign) but also their capability (to lead),” he added.

I don’t know if it was because these people are afraid of public discourse, or they just don’t care about their platforms. I mean, they only relied their campaigns based on popularity than on intellect.

I agree to Gordon’s statement because debates are there to test candidates when they are pressed with issues surrounding the country. They shouldn’t be relaxed just because they have the money for campaign advertisements or they were in the lead of the surveys. If they really were sincere in their campaign, then they should be wiling to go out of their way and attend the debates.