Politicians exchange passionate arguments during the heated debate

The much-anticipated debate between Tübingen's Mayor Boris Palmer and AfD state chairman Markus Frohnmaier took place recently, with mixed reviews from commentators and communication experts.

Despite the chaotic atmosphere and interruptions by protesters, the debate provided a stage for AfD's controversial statements, as experts suggest that engaging in debate is necessary to counter their influence rather than ignoring them. However, the debate was less a conversation and more a situation where they talked past each other, according to communication expert Frank Brettschneider.

Palmer aimed to highlight the substantive weaknesses of the AfD during the debate, particularly their stance on renewable energies and climate protection. He accused the AfD of rejecting renewable energies, which he claimed threatened Tübingen's climate protection plan and multi-million investments. In response, Frohnmaier presented himself as a moderate and reasonable figure in the topic of freedom of opinion, despite being booed for minutes.

Frohnmaier's goal during the debate was not to convince Palmer or the audience, but to mobilize his own voters and present himself as a normal part of the conversation. He often evaded local issues in Tübingen and instead referred to the general situation in Germany.

Brettschneider deemed Palmer's strategy of highlighting substantive weaknesses only partially successful. He also believed that the troublemakers who disrupted the debate backfired, as they did not weaken the AfD as intended. Holding the debate in front of an audience and allowing questions was not deemed a smart move, as many audience questions were more like prepared statements than genuine questions.

The debate did not result in any major mistakes from Frohnmaier, as per the provided information. Brettschneider couldn't declare a winner of the debate, as it mainly reinforced existing opinions and didn't seem to change anyone's mind. He also stated that those already aware of the issues were already aware before the debate.

In a surprising turn, Palmer presented statistics from the criminal register to counter Frohnmaier's statements about Germany's internal security issues. In 2000, the number of crimes in Germany was 6.3 million, compared to 5.5 million in the previous year, according to Palmer.

The event was considered to have gone well for the AfD state chairman, with Frohnmaier making no major mistakes during the debate. However, Brettschneider thought the format of the debate was unsuitable or flawed, suggesting a studio setting with a professional moderator would have been better.

Despite the debate's shortcomings, experts advocate discussion to address and counteract AfD's positions. Engaging in debate is seen as a crucial step in countering their influence, rather than ignoring them, as exclusion tends to strengthen the party. Thus, the debate, chaotic as it was, served as a platform for open discourse, albeit with room for improvement.