Presidential Debate: Lack of Proposals and Focus on Attack

The recent presidential debate in the Panama left much to be desired, as the lack of concrete proposals and focus on attacks among the candidates overshadowed the opportunity to inform the public about their plans for the future of the country. Instead of presenting tangible solutions, she witnessed a dynamic characterized by conflicts and disagreements.

Absence Martinelli and Mulino ironically became a point in their favor in the debate. By not participating, they avoided falling into the trap of attack, which allowed them to maintain a more positive image and distance from the direct conflict that characterized the event.

The personal conflict between the candidates has led to the perception that the political dispute is a higher priority than the presentation of concrete plans and policies to solve the country’s challenges. This approach left citizens with more uncertainty than the clarity of the actual proposals of the presidential candidates.

READ ALSO: Infrastructure and service challenges in Panama

In this context, it can be argued that the real winner of the debate was the formula Martinelli-Mulino who did not participate. Their absence has allowed them to avoid the negative dynamics of the event, strengthening their position among voters who are looking for leaders with a focus on solutions rather than partisan bickering.

In conclusion, the presidential debate in Panama was a missed opportunity, where the lack of concrete proposals and the focus on personal attacks left the audience with more questions than answers. Absence Mulino-Martinelli it proved useful amid a dynamic marked by political confrontation rather than presenting substantive plans for the country.