A debate presupposes that the opponents put forward arguments, but this face-to-face between Catarina Martins and André Ventura was more of a continuous throwing of blows between the two, with difficulty in explaining arguments. Expresso commentators, João Silvestre, Liliana Valente and Cristina Figueiredo, saw positive arguments in Catarina Martins, but they also saw them in Ventura, in the form of self-criticism.
João Silvestre
(Executive Editor of Expresso)
Better: “If we are talking about illegal things, we cannot say that the laws allow it”, Catarina Martins
Immigration dominated much of the debate. André Ventura insisted several times that it was the laws of the contraption years that fueled illegal immigration and human trafficking. Catarina Martins, even if she went too far with expressions such as “don’t be stupid” or “don’t say nonsense”, pointed out the obvious: it is not the laws that cause illegalities. It couldn’t be more logical.
Worse: “All illegal immigrants should go home”, Andre Ventura
The phrase like “all immigrants should go home” doesn’t have enough meaning. status to be qualified as an argument. It is a ‘mouth’ that is suitable for tavern conversation and football discussions but is completely unqualified for political debate. Ventura could even organize an entire debate replicating the model with several of his favorite targets: “Take all the gypsies to your home”, “take all the people of Bangladesh to your home”, “take all the corrupt people to your home”, “take all the pedophiles to your home”,… It’s a catchphrase, but it will never be an argument.
Liliana Valente
(Expresso policy coordinator)
Better: Anísio Cabral’s goal that gave Portugal the U17 World CupCatarina Martins
Catarina Martins had a rehearsed phrase: “I like Portugal”. And he repeated it as an argument several times, but I don’t think it stuck. At a time when Ventura ran away as best he could to criticize the exploitation and slavery of immigrants in Alentejo by employers and GNR soldiers, Catarina Martins drew on the immigrant argument that Chega voters like. In this case, Anísio Cabral, the Under 17 player who scored the winning goal and thus gave Portugal the title of World Football Champion. According to the rules that Ventura approved in Parliament, Anísio, the son of Guineans, could not be Portuguese, Catarina Martins told him. Clear language and concrete examples can help deconstruct anti-immigration discourse and the dangers hidden in the dehumanization of these people.
Worse: “Don’t be silly”, it’s “mummer”. “You are stupid”, “laugh at the victims, laugh”Catarina Martins and André Ventura
It cannot even be said that they were arguments. In this debate, many terrible throwing weapons were used against the opponent. Catarina Martins was determined to enter the debate with Ventura and face him on the Chega leader’s battlefield and it didn’t always go well. When he called him “dizzy” it unnerved Ventura, “you’re stupid.” But when he called him a “mummer” it was an even quicker slip of the debate that went into imperceptible mode with tones that were too high. The blocker was also determined to laugh whenever Ventura said “that’s nonsense”, as she came to say, and Ventura replied “Laugh, laugh at the victims”. It doesn’t matter to anyone that someone laughs at victims, but laughing wasn’t always a good argument for the blocker.
Cristina Figueiredo
(SIC Politics Editor)
Better: Ventura’s self-criticism, when he seemed to be criticizing Catarina
It’s difficult to find one, in a debate that seemed more like a verbal boxing match – where, in truth, neither managed to throw their opponent to the ground. But Ventura is Ventura: when we hear him say to Catarina Martins “it bothers me that he has such basic ideas” or “I noticed that he avoided all the questions to adopt the usual rhetoric” it is impossible not to give him the award. Suddenly, it was as if it wasn’t the BE MEP standing in front of her, but a mirror. Ventura debating with Ventura. As an argument for the tragicomedy that this face-to-face was, let’s face it, brilliant.
Worse: Ventura’s tape
In fact, I don’t really know where to start. Or where to end up. It was all bad. Yes, Catarina Martins is absolutely right when she says that this debate had nothing to do with presidential elections. But it has everything to do with the “persona” André Ventura who, from debate to debate, refines his performance capacity as a great bully in national politics. The speech clichés (always the same), the themes (always the same), the disqualification of the opponent (always in the same way). It leaves viewers tired, if not nauseated. And yet, the SIC/Expresso survey that we published this Thursday puts him ahead of all the candidates as the one who “cares most about people”. There is a parallax error here that perhaps the next poll (after the debates) will be able to explain. Or not…