Who won and why? Political experts share their impressions

Más Información

Khemvirg Puente

, political expert at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)

Winner: Ricardo Anaya

Remark: He had the best performance but I wouldn't say it was a sound victory. Nevertheless, he had a clear and straightforward speech.

Alberto Aziz

, researcher at the Center for Research and Higher Studies in Social Anthropology (CIESAS)

Winner: Andrés Manuel López Obrador & Ricardo Anaya

Remark: [López Obrador] was the front-runner and they attacked him, and Anaya because he gave powerful arguments, although he wasn't very convincing.

Arturo Sánchez

, former councilor of the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE)

Winner: Ricardo Anaya

Remark: He had the most direct and clear positions and he got his rivals into predicaments, particularly Andrés Manuel.

Vidal Romero

, political expert of the Autonomous and Technological Institute of Mexico (ITAM)

Winner: Ricardo Anaya

Remark: He gave the clearest proposals and was seen as steadfast, in addition to being the one who attacked López Obrador with the most credible arguments.

Víctor Alarcón

, political expert of the UAM

Winner: No clear winner but Andrés Manuel López Obrador lost it.

Remark: All candidates knew how to corner and question[Obrador], while [Obrador] lacked the adequate capacity to reply.

Ulises Corona

, political expert at the UNAM

Winner: Ricardo Anaya

Remark: He was the most prepared, displaying the greatest knowledge in all subjects and gave the greatest number of detailed proposals, all quite accurate and concrete.

Sara Sefchovich

, sociologist and researcher

Winner: No clear winner

Remark: They all invested too much time and effort attacking AMLO. The lacklustre: Meade. The most articulate and better prepared to fend off criticism: Anaya. The only one with a project albeit an outdated one: Zavala. El Bronco: Non-existant. And Andrés Manuel said the same thing as always, which the others proved its changes every time. The winner? We all lost! No one dared to mention the problem of drug trafficking, as if they could rule this country without considering it.

Ricardo Raphael

, political analyst

Winner: Ricardo Anaya

Remark: Anaya left unscratched because no one jumped down his throat and, when Meade failed to pick up, I think [Anaya] will take home part of those votes. Anaya has benefited more from the debate compared to the other candidates. AMLO didn't lose because he managed to withstand the onslaught. However, the answers he failed to give did him harm.

Raúl Rodríguez

, journalist

Winner: No one won.

Remark: Margarita did poorly, nervous and inarticulate. El Bronco, the true populist and the vanguard of the blows. Anaya, a false and a demagogue. Meade was clear on his proposals but was seen preoccupied. AMLO, the same as always. Not even the attacks of the other four riled him up. Meade will win some points, AMLO will maintain his preference percentage. Citizens will decide who has won the debate.

Salvador García Soto

, journalist

Winner: Ricardo Anaya

Remark: Regarding preparation and communication performance, the best was Ricardo Anaya, who was accurate in his criticism to López Obrador and at the same time he postured ideas and proposals. Andrés Manuel López Obrador didn't win or lose, he was neither riled up nor did he lost his bearings although he was scratched. Meade's preparation couldn't beat his wooden performance, too obsessed with López Obrador he failed to take advantage to distance himself from the fatigue of Peña. EL Bronco seized the opportunity, with witticisms and nonsense, but he positioned himself. Margarita Zavala scored some points but lost time defending Calderon's strategies and failed to take advantage of being the only woman in the contest.

Héctor de Mauleón

, journalist

Winner: Ricardo Anaya

Remark: Articulate, effective, and convincing.