The Bogus Presidential Candidate Debates
Translator
Editor
13 December 2023 17:00 WIB
TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - In Indonesia, presidential candidate debates are planned as bogus performances. There is no in-depth discussion of the issues.
Ferdinand Marcos Junior in the Philippines and Gibran Rakabuming Raka in Indonesia have much in common: both are the sons of presidents running for office, and both are avoiding public debates. In last year’s election in the Philippines, Ferdinand, alias Bongbong Marcos Jr. repeatedly refused to debate his opponent, even in official events organized by the election committee.
Many suspected that Bongbong was worried he would be asked about the corrupt regime of his father, which oppressed the people and was eventually overthrown by ‘People Power’ in 1986. According to another analysis, he did not see debates as an important way to improve his electability. According to several studies of elections in developing countries, presidential candidate debates do not influence people’s voting decisions. Without taking part in debates, Bongbong won the presidential election. Young voters were hypnotized by a massive and highly misleading social media campaign.
Like Bongbong, the Prabowo Subianto-Gibran Rakabuming Raka candidate pairing has most frequently avoided debates organized by organizations, campuses, or television stations. Rather than answering questions about substantive, yet alone negative, issues, the pairing released a video of Prabowo dancing and trying to charm potential voters.
In the debate organized by the General Election Commission (KPU) this week, it seems that the Prabowo-Gibran team will once again ‘play safe’. They have proposed that the session where the candidates respond to and rebut arguments is not included. For Prabowo-Gibran, riding high thanks to the support from President Joko Widodo, a debate will probably not attract any new voters.
The candidates’ debate might bring benefits for the Anies Baswedan-Muhaimin Iskandar and Ganjar Pranowo-Mahfud Md. pairings, who might attract swing voters. They might also garner support from undecided voters. From the response and rebuttal session, Anies-Muhaimin dan Ganjar-Mahfud would also have an opportunity to highlight the weaknesses of Prabowo-Gibran.
But even if the KPU includes a response and rebuttal session, the debate will not become a contest of proposals and competence in drawing up ideas and strategies. From the beginning, presidential candidate debates are planned as a way of explaining detailed visions and missions. Broadcast on television with most of the supporters on location shouting, these events are more like performances than dialogues between presidential candidates.
Therefore, any hopes that presidential or vice-presidential candidates will debate and rebut ideas seem forlorn. And forget any wish to see any lively verbal sparring in the responses to particular issues. Without fundamental changes to the format, these debates could be even worse than those from the 2019 presidential election.
Four years ago, Joko Widodo and Prabowo Subianto and their running mates were like robots: Speaking of general matters with replies that they had committed to memory. As the questions were leaked a few days previously, the responses of the presidential candidates were not authentic.
The discussion moderator did not even allow any elaboration of or commentary on candidate statements. The job of the moderator was simply to read the questions drawn up by the panelists. Meanwhile, these panelists were not allowed to ask questions directly to the candidates. All of these restrictions were included in the General Election Law.
Therefore, the people did not see the characters of the presidential candidates and were not able to assess their abilities in drawing up ideas and strategies to tackle major problems. In the United States presidential debates, strategic issues such as tax, increases in the standard of living, and defense strategy were discussed openly. Voters could see the character of their leaders: Donald Trump, dominated but did not listen, while Joe Biden sometimes gave fragmentary answers.
In the Indonesian election, debates are planned as bogus performances. Voters are looked down on as ballot paper hole punchers—only capable of remembering TikTok dances and chubby cheeks.
