Nonverbal language revealed the contrasts between Noboa and González

The presidential debate on March 23 between Daniel Noboa and Luisa González highlighted deep differences, not only in proposals but also in body language. Both candidates resorted to non-verbal communication strategies to influence the electorate's perception heading into the second round on April 13. The space became a stage where image, tone, and gestures spoke as much as words.

The candidate from the Citizen Revolution adopted a rigid and firm posture, marked by an energetic tone and body movements like touching her chest or gesturing forcefully. These signals projected determination, although they were also interpreted as signs of excessive confrontation. In contrast, Daniel Noboa opted for a visually relaxed strategy, smiling even in the most tense moments of the debate, aiming to convey control and confidence.

Expert Pablo Velasco pointed out that Noboa's language could sometimes seem condescending, such as when he offered González a "scholarship to study economics". However, this attitude also reflected a tactic aimed at going viral and connecting with a younger and more irreverent audience. This type of approach moves away from traditional politics and focuses on achieving a direct impact on social media.

Another relevant aspect was the attire. González opted for a more formal outfit, in line with her strategy of presenting herself as a structured and serious figure. Noboa, meanwhile, dispensed with the tie, consolidating his image of closeness and informality, with a nod to undecided and young voters seeking less conventional alternatives.

A Symbolic Battle for the Presidency

During the two-hour debate, which covered five thematic axes—education, health, security, economy, and governance—both contenders used non-verbal language to reaffirm their styles. Luisa González maintained a firm gaze and dominant postures, reaffirming her intention to project authority. Daniel Noboa appeared more serene, using gestures like pursing his lips or slightly tilting his head, suggesting analysis and self-control.

For Velasco, the debate became a "spectacle of symbolic confrontation," where the media effect mattered more than the depth of the proposals. From a semiotic perspective, every gesture, every pause, every expression was calculated to leave a mark on the audience, revealing how modern political communication is played out as much in form as in substance.

The presidential debate showed that, beyond content, the way candidates communicate decisively influences the electorate. While Luisa González bet on an image of structured authority, Daniel Noboa sought to connect through closeness, humor, and restraint. This struggle for symbols reflects a new way of doing politics, where gestures can weigh as much as words.