JUDGING the Pilipinas Debate 2016 last Sunday among five presidential candidates was necessarily a subjective exercise for the voter/viewer – which means the winner was whoever the viewer said it was.

From our corner, however, we judged the debaters on the basis of content (70 percent) and delivery (30 percent). Their ranking in our scorecard was: (1) Mar Roxas/ Grace Poe, (2) Rody Duterte/ Miriam Santiago, and (3) Jojo Binay.

Through text, we also sampled the opinion of some 40 media colleagues and 10 non-media friends whose views we value. Their assessment and occasional explanations came out as varied as their professions and prejudices.

We rated Roxas and Poe as winners, mainly because we found them best prepared. It was obvious that they had bothered to do their homework. This was more evident with Poe, who was citing facts and figures to support her statements.

In contrast, the others were mostly reciting tired slogans. Binay, for instance, may have realized too late that he was not out in Cagayan de Oro to glad-hand rural voters but to be subjected to the scrutiny of a national audience via television and social media.

We sympathized with Santiago who we knew had the most substance, and fire when provoked, but she appeared bothered by a speech difficulty. Her having to sit now and then when it was not her turn did not help dispel the impression that she had a medical problem.

We were somewhat taken aback when Roxas attacked Poe’s lack of preparation as a possible OJT (on-the-job trainee), Binay’s alleged corruption, and Duterte’s intemperate language and bloody solutions to problems. He did not name them, but the reference was too obvious.

To deliver the point of his being, to his mind, the best prepared for the job, Roxas likened the choosing of a president to recruiting a family driver:

“Kung ihahambing natin ang pagpili ng pangulo sa sino ang magmamaneho sa ating mga anak sa araw-araw, kanino natin ipagkakatiwala? Sa taong may kaso, sa taong mainitin ang ulo, sa taong ngayon pa lang natututo magmaneho, o sa taong ni minsan hindi kayo ipinahamak?”

Roxas may be forgiven for the personal attacks, considering that this is Philippine politics and he has to claw his way up from his dismal (fourth?) survey ranking. Also, Filipinos attending political rallies normally expect some blood and thunder, at least in the speeches.

Besides there is the tested tactic of offense being the best defense. As a cellar-dweller in the surveys, Roxas’ handlers probably guess he does not have much to lose and much to gain by going on the offensive.

While Poe had a good enough an excuse for not being a grizzled player like her Liberal Party rival, Binay was at a loss for words deflecting the corruption mud flung at him. He could not have put up a convincing 30-second retort to charges that require a lifetime in a trial court.

Binay came across as a slow talker. He also has a medical problem? Or has the lawyer in him gotten used on the campaign trail to simply shaking hands and mumbling greetings? Good he managed an explanation for his coming to post-Yolanda Tacloban on a helicopter.

Talking of Tacloban, one wonders if the calamity victims accept Roxas’ claim that he was with them before, during, and after the killer typhoon ravaged the area. Note that he had more elaborate details, including the Binay helicopter and photo-op, in his debate script.

The opening debate held at the Capitol University in Cagayan de Oro was organized by the Commission on Elections in cooperation with GMA Network and the Philippine Daily Inquirer. There will be followup debates co-sponsored by other media outfits.

■ Debaters didn’t say anything new

LAST Sunday’s two-hour debate touched on corruption and ill-gotten wealth, experience in government, health, morality, Mindanao development, agriculture and the economy. It did not break new ground nor introduce new issues.

Its main accomplishment was that it gave the electorate a hint of how the five presidential candidates think and talk on their feet under pressure.

Santiago pointed out, correctly, that what were bandied about in the debate as planks of political platforms were nothing but motherhood statements. She shot down some of them by simply asking how they would be funded.

There were no answers, because either the proponents had not thought of the funding part or there was no more time for a detailed answer.

In their closing remarks, Binay hit the administration’s underspending, saying it would not happen in his presidency. Underspending delays performance, he said, adding that without infrastructure requirements project costs go up and improvement of livelihood is dampened.

Citing her background, Santiago said: “We are here looking for a real leader who will implement all the valuable suggestions that were made here this evening. But this is not a personality contest. This is not a show for entertainment.”

Duterte reiterated his resolve to stop crime and corruption in the first six months of his term. He said: “There’s so much corruption, there’s so much crime, so much drugs flooding the country. And it seems nobody is minding these problems. We just talk about them.”

Poe repeated her promise to approve as president the Freedom of Information bill. She said: “Kailangan magkaroon ng pakikipaglaban sa korupsyon. Kapag ako po ay naging pangulo, unang executive order, magkakaroon ng freedom of information na matagal na nating ginugusto.”

For his part, Roxas, said his being rich and privileged was no hindrance to his helping the poor: “Hindi ko pinoproblema ang kakainin ko sa bukas. Bakit ko gustong maging pangulo? Dahil gusto kong maging ganito din ang buhay ninyo.”