Persuading voters: Lee concise, detail-oriented; Yoon emphatic

From left, presidential candidates Lee Jae-myung, Yoon Suk-yeol, Sim Sang-jung and Ahn Cheol-soo / Joint Press Corps, Hankook Ilbo

By Ko Dong-hwan

• Published Feb 7, 2022 4:59 PM KST
• Updated Feb 8, 2022 9:17 AM KST

Political strategists analyze presidential candidates' debate styles

By Ko Dong-hwan

Debates reveal a lot about politicians. It's a rare opportunity for people to see them talking unscripted for hours, except for a few pages of notes. It provides viewers with plenty of insights and clues as to who the people on the platforms really are, while hundreds of news reports produced daily share rumors that are often inaccurate.

The preparations for the first TV debate between four leading candidates for the March 9 presidential election weren't always smooth, as opposition between the candidates' election camps continued to delay plans for debates, much to the disappointment of an uneasy public. In addition, the two minor parties insisted that it was illegal and undemocratic for the two giant parties to hold their own one-on-one debate. The minor parties ended up filing an injunction against the latter's efforts, and a court accepted it leaving no option but to hold a four-way debate.

The recently televised debate on Feb. 3, with the second-highest TV rating for a presidential debate in the country's history (39 percent combining the three broadcasters ― MBC, KBS and SBS), gave each of the candidates a chance to leave their quintessential impression on the viewers. And, according to Dr. Louis Perron, a political strategist and an internationally renowned expert on how elections are won, those impressions varied between what a successful candidate should and shouldn't do in a debate.

“It's a rare occasion to directly compare the candidates next to each other,” Perron, based in Zurich, Switzerland, told The Korea Times. “We say that debates are the equivalent of the swimsuit round in beauty pageants, meaning that strengths and weaknesses are easily exposed.”

The debate, which according to many expert evaluations was missing ferocity and critical blows that would have added some fire to the debate's rather mediocre atmosphere, did have some memorable moments.

Yoon Suk-yeol of the main opposition People Power Party (PPP) constantly zeroed in on Lee Jae-myung of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) pummeling him with a series of questions on his alleged involvement in a controversial land development project scandal in the Daejang-dong area of Seongnam, Gyeonggi Province. Sim Sang-jung of the minor Justice Party mauled Yoon as he claimed the need for deploying an additional U.S. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) system in South Korea against North Korean missiles, questioning the tactic's effectiveness in the country's current geopolitical situation. Lee, aware that Yoon wants to resume use and construction of nuclear power plants, quizzed him on the meaning of terms like “RE100” and “EU Taxonomy.”

Perron said those instances reflect some of the strategic goals of an effective debater who is clear on what they seek to accomplish. “Strategic goals (of an effective debater) might be to address a certain weakness to show another side of your candidacy, pivot away from a certain issue or allegation, stop the bleeding related to a certain scandal, create a certain controversy or to get a certain message across,” he said.

Bad debaters, on the other hand, let their emotions take over and thus fail to deliver their message, according to Perron.

Shin Ji-young, a linguistic scientist and a Korean literature professor at Korea University in Seoul, said Yoon, as a public speaker, is very provocative and often arouses his listeners emotionally through frequent use of words considered inappropriate for a public event or a politician. “He isn't trained to speak in public,” she said, adding he is almost the complete opposite of Lee, a fast, specific and concise speaker. “Yoon isn't often specific about what he is trying to say, making his speeches sound tedious and not gripping.”

“If a candidate is less gifted, then one needs a strategy on how to deal with it,” Perron said. “George W. Bush was not a particularly gifted or even appealing speaker. He dealt with it by, first, always speaking in short bursts, and second, by being an extremely focused speaker. He would speak in a brief way and stay on message. Even when Al Gore physically walked up to him at a debate, he wouldn't divert from his point. As we say in the industry: Get to the point, make the point and repeat the point.”

Perron also said candidates shouldn't put on a face or try to overplay it in a debate, highlighting “authenticity is more important than ever.”

Out of the four candidates, Ahn Cheol-soo of the minor People's Party is known for having put on the most drastic changes to his appearance and voice throughout his nine-year political career. Originally a soft-spoken computer programmer with a stark high-pitch voice, he lowered his tone and added more authority to his voice to reshape his image as graver and stronger. However, these attributes proved to be his critical shortcoming in his previous presidential election campaign in 2017 as they only made him look unnatural and awkward. That impression, although with a lessened intensity than before, was still there for the Feb. 3 debate.

“The radical changes Ahn went through didn't really improve, like wearing clothes that don't fit,” Shin said. “He looked much more comfortable and even happier in 2011 when he co-hosted a talk show before being elected as a lawmaker in 2013. Presently, he doesn't really look content.”

Perron said authenticity played a critical part in the 2016 presidential election in the Philippines from the perspective of a social experiment. National television broadcast live an hour before the debate started, allowing viewers to see the candidates standing in preparation.

“Imagine. By looking at a person simply standing there for an hour, you actually learn a great deal about how that person is in reality,” Perron said. “I think that this one hour of pre-debate decided the 2016 Philippine election (which Rodrigo Duterte won).”

Good candidates, according to Perron, invest lots of time in preparing for a TV debate, such as conducting dry runs.

“You might remember the debates during the last U.S. presidential election when Donald Trump constantly interrupted and insulted Joe Biden. I am sure that the person who played Trump in Biden's mock debate acted the exact same way,” Perron said.

He also referred to the 2010 U.S. presidential debates when Mitt Romney, who Perron describes as “not a particularly gifted speaker,” took a surprise win against incumbent President Barack Obama, known for being a great public speaker. “Romney had conducted 10 mock debates prior to the real one,” he added.

Perron cited Obama and Bill Clinton as the best speakers in his opinion. He also mentioned Germany's Helmut Kohl and Angela Merkel as mediocre speakers who proved to be successful politicians and came to govern their country for 16 years each.

“Merkel knows that she cannot give a speech like Obama, and she doesn't pretend,” Perron said. “She deals with it and tries to emphasize her strengths ― that she is serious, reliable, trustworthy and not emotional.”