These elections go from Pedro Sánchez or Alberto Núñez Feijóo. Or to be politically correct, they go left or right. The political struggle is between the two blocks, represented by PSOE and Sumar, on the one hand, and by PP and Vox, on the other. But, in addition, in Catalonia there is a battle to see who prevails in the world of sovereignty, represented by four different parties, as was verified in the first campaign debate, organized by La Vanguardia and RAC1.
The four formations that represent this world, rationally disappointed but emotionally alive, are ERC, Junts, CUP and PDECat. Republican candidate Gabriel Rufián was pragmatic, but forceful as usual. And he was especially implacable with Míriam Nogueras (Junts), even though she told him that he was not his adversary this season (are you sure?) And, on the rebound, with Albert Botran (CUP). Especially when he told them that Congress is not going to eat pipes, or lie down on the sofa. Of course, nobody took it for granted. His message about what had happened in this legislature was clear: “Almost everything good that has happened has been thanks to ERC and Bildu.”
Nogueras replied that the legislature had been negative for Catalan interests and that 23-J is about “Catalonia or Spain”. In those appeared Roger Montañola, who leads the PDECat brand -to which he has added the surname Espai CiU-, who defended the peix al cove, whether the PP or the PSOE governs, before jumping on Nogueras’ neck to recriminate him for he had dedicated himself only to waving flags and doing activism in Parliament, “in short, to do the paripé.”
Meritxell Batet (PSC) and Aina Vidal (comuns) tried to take the debate to the right and left axis, showing complicity. Nacho Martín Blanco (PP) and Juan José Aizcorbe (Vox) seemed to be one from Venus and the other from Mars. There was not the slightest harmony at any time. Batet stressed that in these elections a change of culture was at stake and the risk of returning to the past. Rufíán ended unanimously: “I am not asking for the vote for myself, but for the country.” A term ambiguous enough that no one could reply to it.
