UP prof: VP faceoff better than presidential debate

MANILA, Philippines — The vice presidential faceoff was more engaging to watch than the presidential debate, a University of the Philippines professor said Sunday.

“This is the best debate so far,” political science professor Jan Robert Go told Philstar.com in an online interview. “The messages were clear.”

All six vice presidential candidates—Senators Alan Peter Cayetano, Francis Escudero, Bongbong Marcos and Antonio Trillanes IV, who are all running as independent; Sen. Gringo Honasan of the United Nationalist Alliance (UNA) and Camarines Sur Rep. Leni Robredo of the Liberal Party (LP)—attended the debate.

While the analyst said that there was a right dosage of mudslinging which was inevitable, the candidates still managed to present their ideas on important issues.

According to him, several vice presidential candidates stood out during the debate.

“Senator Honasan was very composed and interestingly made a lot of sense. Representative Robredo did not engage in mudslinging and gave very clear responses. Senator Trillanes was good in demanding clearer answers from Senator Cayetano who was doing much of the mudslinging. Senator Marcos was obviously trying to work his way out on controversial issues like corruption and human rights violations,” he said.

Of the six, Robredo and Honasan stood out more than the rest in the debate, the analyst said.

The two candidates gave clear and impressive answers when asked about cabinet position and issues like decongestion, public transportation, political dynasties, human rights and corruption, which others did not directly answer.

“Robredo gave the very good answers. Those were concise, clear and sincere,” Go said.

Honasan, as the experienced one, managed to give his ideas on long-term plans and the land use program, among others.

Go, however, did not find the “Yes or No” portion interesting since questions were “leading.”

“They (organizers) beg for obvious answers like accountability of telecommunication companies and climate change efforts. Some questions could be actual questions like same-sex marriages and death penalty,” Go said.

The analyst finds the question on whether the candidates plan to run for president rather interesting.

“They (candidates) are obviously on the safe side here, but it was clear who has no plans,” he said.

The analyst hoped that there had been a discussion on climate change and same-sex marriage, which left people in social media disappointed when the issues were not raised.

Except for lacking issues, Go said the debate was still successful since the format helped to flesh out the necessary answers.

The debate, which was held at the Quadricentennial Pavilion of the University of Santo Tomas in Manila, followed a dual moderator and town hall format.

It was the first and only debate under the Commission on Elections held for the vice presidential candidates.

The third and last presidential debate will be held in Dagupan City, Pangasinan on April 24.