Macri sidestepped as many inconvenient questions as Scioli did. Nobody knows how he is going to actually govern, same as Scioli. Nobody bothered asking either if the candidates where will the money come from to pay for all their promises. Nobody took advantage of a question thrown their way to stake out or even defend a position that may in any way be controversial, relying on the courage of their convictions.
Even a normal conversation wasn't possible, because the impossibility of normal rules being respected forced the imposition of iron 'no interruption' rules which totally stifled the possibility of a good back-and-forth but at least made the debate workable to some baby extent.
Only in Argentina are baby steps such as these called a good debate, and only next to a blowhard, blustering, poorly prepared, incoherent, poor caricature of a Mafioso figure such as Scioli can Macri be called a good candidate.
Who knows? Maybe he'll make a great president. But nothing in this debate leads to the conviction that that will be the case.
The debate did make clear that Macri is the better candidate, but only because it conclusively showed Scioli to be mind-bogglingly bad. Where Macri could attempt to appear presidential and composed, Scioli repeatedly showed that he couldn't even pretend. Only a bunch of obviously hollow, patronizing, "estoy luchando para vos acá!" appropriate for a local gremio. Truly pathetic, truly Argentine.
But will Macri, in fact, be any good as president when not standing side-by-side with this buffoon? Only time will tell.
