The eyes were on USA with the first debate for the presidency between the current president and a democratic candidate, Joe Biden, and his predecessor and Republican candidate, Donald Trump. All the media came to the same conclusion, which was the triumph of the tycoon over the current president, who seemed doubtful and indecisive at times, also unable to cope with the speech of his rival.
Foreign policy, economy and immigration were some of the topics discussed in a debate not without tense moments between the candidates, with reproaches, disqualifications and mutual accusations of all kindsFrancisco Torreblanca, a specialist in professional personal branding and professor at ESIC, answered AS’s call to offer his point of view on everything that arose from the debate in the race to reach the White House, both at a communicative and image level, as well as politically.
Question: From the point of view of communication and non-verbal language, what assessment can be made of the debate?
Answer: In the overall balance, if we add the content and staging and non-verbal part, it was a predictable debate. All expectations led us to the current president being rather static and hesitant, as we had been seeing in images during this time, and with a candidate to return to the presidency representing what he is, an emotional God. He perfectly dominates the timing, the abrupt change from one contrary emotion to another, that aggressiveness gives rise to everything being very predictable.
Q: Are these situations where Biden was left blank and hesitant due to a lack of preparation? Or are there other factors at play?
R: It is a sum of factors. I honestly think that age, although this shouldn’t be a factor, I think it is. We are seeing certain behaviors, both physical and expressive, that lead you to think that there is some problem derived from one’s age. That little fluidity, the dispersion, the lapses When it freezes, it leads us to weigh all of that.
The issue here is that it confirms the previous expectation we have. If before the debate we think about the candidates, one so dynamic and aggressive, and the other who has that distortion, then we think he has nothing to do. Although Biden sought a certain calm and tried to say what he had to say, and avoid lapses, these were inevitable. If we add to that the aggressiveness of the opponent, well I understand that that affects in some way. In face to face there is no color.
Q: In view of what we were able to see from Biden in the debate, and looking ahead to the November elections, do you think that a certain feeling of detachment could be generated in the electorate or that there could be abstention?
R: Apparently, yes, but a kind of Stockholm Syndrome can occur. That is, the party’s voter feels a certain compassion for Biden and that reinforces his commitment to the party, and not so much to the candidate. Knowing that he is the candidate, that that is not going to change, and seeing the aggressiveness of the other party, it is likely that this will generate a compassion effect that will later cause the difference to not be so notable.
All expectations led us to the current president being rather static and hesitant, compared to a candidate to return to the presidency representing what he is, an emotional God. He perfectly masters the times.
Q: The North American Vice President, Kamala Harris, even said that there was a weak beginning but a strong end. Biden is extraordinarily strong. Given what happened yesterday, do you share that diagnosis?
R: Well, that’s what I had to say, because we can also think that it’s external support. That is to say, if we say this phrase, and also from a person so closely linked to Biden, a phrase as forceful as this, it’s because surely the party needed a headline and a media impact that would reinforce this feeling of Biden’s weakness. I think it’s going more along those lines.
The US media concluded that Biden was outmatched, and many questioned his candidacy for the presidency. What other member of the Democratic Party could have come forward to give a forceful response to Trump?
R: The vice president herself (Kamala Harris), who has a lot of charisma and could play a decisive role. But of course, we are in a moment of truth where a change of that type cannot proceed because it would be a catastrophe. By simply giving justifications, all potential campaign time would be wasted and it would probably be a disaster.
Although it is not known. We live in such an emotional society, where we are all so connected and with so much information at every moment, that a movement of this kind can provoke a feeling of belonging to Kamala’s personal brand. Being a woman, it could have a big impact, but it would be a box of totally authentic surprises.
Q: What message should Joe Biden give to the electorate to turn this situation around?
Above all, we must reinforce the counterpart proposed by Trump, who proposes a return to previous achievements in the economy, that hard line on immigration that he promised and always carried with him, that message of America First, in terms of foreign policy… I believe that these key points should be the basis for the alternative and consolidation of Biden’s current policy.
Biden must reinforce the counterpart that Trump proposes. The only way out is to enhance his anti-Trump message, but focus his message on economic, immigration, foreign policy and climate change policies.
Entering other terrain that goes beyond political arguments, at this moment, I believe that Biden does not have the potential to surpass Trump. The only way out is to enhance his anti-Trump message, but focus his message on economic, immigration, foreign policy and climate change policies, where there is a lot of skepticism. To call up younger voters, there is climate change, health policies can be another interesting battlehorse, and also the immigration aspects. Out there (Biden) has many flanks to defend what he is doing.
Q: Do you think that all is lost for Biden, or is there still a game?
R: I think there is a split. If there are more debates or confrontations, it is likely that we will see more of the same, each one in their place, there is a split because of that compassion effect that I was telling you about. If we see that someone is getting very weaker with this age, etc., probably, emotionally we will feel indebted to the support and that can reduce differences.
Q: A return of Donald Trump to the White House, how would it have repercussions on a communicative and political level?
R: It would be another tsunami, like his previous term. With the previous policy he followed, the farewell he had and the accusations he has had, a second chance would serve Trump to reaffirm himself and to say, here I am, I am back to reign, and I think he would be very drastic in certain decisions. There are people who are waiting for that, and who are waiting for the opposite. That second chance for Trump would put a lot of dots on the S’s.
Follow the AS Newspaper channel on WhatsAppwhere you will find all things sport in one place: the latest news, the agenda with the latest news on the most important sporting events, the most notable images, the opinions of the best AS journalists, reports, videos, and a bit of humour from time to time.
