Analysis of the Vice Presidential Debate: Environmental Sustainability is an Important Issue
The debate between the four vice presidential candidates was quite fierce, with criticism appearing in a number of questions and objections.
The following article was translated using both Microsoft Azure Open AI and Google Translation AI. The original article can be found in Analisis Debat Cawapres: Kelestarian Lingkungan Jadi Isu Penting
The fourth debate between the vice presidential candidates was quite intense. Each candidate presented their vision and mission by emphasizing the sustainability of nature as the important foundation in their work program plans. Nevertheless, the candidates still provided criticism of each other in a number of questions and counterarguments.
At the debate in the Jakarta Convention Center, Jakarta, on Sunday (21/1/2024), the theme of sustainable development and the environment, natural resources and energy, food, agrarian issues, indigenous people, and villages were raised.
Each question posed by the panel team can be answered by each vice-presidential candidate effectively. Each question or objection by the candidate can be answered by the other candidate, sometimes accompanied by real-life examples.
There are a number of topics that make the atmosphere quite noisy. Vice presidential candidate number 2, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, for example, asked questions about greenflation and lithium ferrophosphate (LFP). However, other candidates answered diplomatically and received lively attention from the live audience.
The fourth debate broadcast received quite a high response from the public. This can be seen from the results of the Kompas R&D poll during the debate. A total of 64.8 respondents said they watched the debate.
Compared to the previous three presidential and vice-presidential debates, the enthusiasm this time remains intact. In the third debate, the respondents' interest in watching the debate reached 63.3 percent, although it decreased from the second debate, which attracted the interest of 66.5 percent of respondents.
In the debate, the number of words and diction used by each candidate varied, but the numbers were not too different. For vice presidential candidate number 1, Muhaimin Iskandar, 2,686 words were spoken with a duration of 24 minutes 27 seconds. The most dominant words spoken were "farmer", "village" and "development".
Next, vice presidential candidate number 2, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, spoke 2,539 words with a duration of 24 minutes and 12 seconds. The most frequently spoken words were "land", "energy", and "society".
Vice presidential candidate number 3, Mahfud MD, uttered a sentence of up to 2,568 words with a time of 25 minutes 36 seconds. The most frequently used words were "economy", "law", "custom", and "society".
The varied diction pattern actually complements each other due to the wide range of material covered, and generally emphasizes sustainable development. Environmental preservation, preventing environmental damage, and improving the welfare of all citizens are key factors in driving progress in the future.
Several debates among the candidates apparently have little impact in persuading the public to switch their choices. The respondents who claim to shift their preference are only 7.5 percent, while around 86 percent remain loyal to their choices.
Three aspects that are assessed by respondents are the ability to answer questions fluently and clearly, mastery of the subject matter, and the candidate's appearance on stage. This appearance is measured by clothing, posture, and expressions displayed.
The results of the respondent's assessment show that each candidate received a good assessment with an average score of 7. This score refers to the respondents' answers (64.8 percent) which are based on the research margin of error.
The ability to answer received a score of 7.4, the assessment of problem mastery received a score of 7.4, and the appearance of the third vice presidential candidate was rated with a score of 7.7.
As for Gibran, he received a public rating of 7.1 for the criteria of answering questions, 7.0 for the mastery of the discussed issues, and 7.3 for his appearance, which includes manner of dress, attitude, and expressiveness.
Furthermore, Muhaimin scored a rating of 6.9 for his ability to answer questions, 6.9 for his mastery of the topics at issue, and 7.6 for his performance score. (KOMPAS RESEARCH)
Also read: Competition Sharpens Discourse on Defense