Xavier Domínguez (Reus, 1974) is the political strategist and consultant behind the campaign of Xavier García Albiol (PP) in Badalona, but he does not marry anyone and combines it with advising other ERC and PSC candidates. Recently returned to Catalonia after more than 15 years working in 12 Latin American countries and in the US, he laments the lack of investment in communication by institutions and public companies in Spain and maintains that a good campaign must be based on communicating emotions, on values and in moving away from ideological corsets.
Working for the PSC, the PP and ERC is a rarity. Does it create conflicts for you?
On the contrary, it would create a conflict for me to work for only one. I don't have any intellectual challenges working with anyone who identifies me politically.
The strategy is different...
Clear. What does not change is my firm belief that communication should be based on values, not ideological. There is no ideology that gives absolute majorities, which are absolutely necessary.
Is this what Albiol is trying to do by hiding the initials of the PP?
Everyone knows that he is from the PP, but he has to go further. Investing in what is already known is absurd. The “Badalonisme” campaign is an expression of the shared values in a city, which he can represent, using the colors of all the parties. Values cross borders, they question the other electorate.
Does the strategy work the same for someone who is already mayor?
Even more so, because a mayor belongs to everyone, to those who have voted for him and to those who have not.
How do you see the new political cycle in Catalonia?
I see three agendas: one social, patrimony of the PSC; an independentist in charge of Junts, which has more to do with a legal struggle than an ideological one, and ERC, which wants to become the heir to Pujolism.
In Junts there are families. Is that why Trias also hides the initials?
Yes. There are those who got into trouble and those who look askance at it, led by Trias. In the case of Barcelona, the problem lies with the candidates.
How do you see them?
Colau is better than what the surveys say; Collboni suffers; Maragall has not been able to contribute anything new to ERC and Trias is better than Junts is, but stagnant in the polls. Collboni, Trias and Maragall will have a very long campaign.
What do you advise?
The problem is of origin. The PSC left doubts that with another candidate it would obtain a better result. In the case of Maragall, there is a deficiency with a candidate who starts run over. Trias is immersed in the Junts corruption debate; Either he distances himself or he will suffer. Colau does what he does, polarize, but he should be more of a martyr. Politicians tend to show that they do not suffer. Colau and Sánchez are examples of this.
Ayuso's campaign around freedom hit the nail on the head.
Yes, and that is the future of political communication, like it or not. That is why the alternative in Madrid is Más Madrid, which has started the campaign very well, and not the PSOE. “Let Rita do it” is one of the best things that has been done in years. Instead, Reyes Maroto is the imposition of a candidate to throw off the image of the Government, and this is no longer useful.
How should Pedro Sánchez act if he wants to win?
First of all, be more honest. Sánchez has a chance to govern, but winning is difficult. His problem is excessive security. The electorate would like more empathy, because there is a big difference between Pedro de la mochila and Pedro de la Moncloa. Empathy was left in the backpack.
And Feijoo?
You should talk less, it's clear. Let the party speak, let them campaign. The leader does not have to always speak and answer everything. It is impossible to know everything.
And Yolanda Diaz?
The problem is that I couldn't say if she is the candidate of Podemos or of Sánchez in Podemos, and far from appearing to be a leadership, she could end up being a puppet of the tactical power of the electoral process.
What political differences condition consultancy in America with respect to Spain?
Politics is the same because it is based on the concept of betrayal and betrayal both here and there.
Treason in what sense?
Politics only evolves through betrayals. It should be understood as an evolution of values and ideas. All the parties maintain almost immovable values, but the betrayal of one's own ideas is what allows them to evolve. If there is no betrayal, you do not grow.
Is disaffection towards politics the same as here?
Here there are less than in America. Here, 50% voter turnout is considered low, but I have seen 1.2% turnout in Miami, and the US is the epitome of democracy. Here we participate more than we think.
What is the problem then?
Detachment, lack of trust. The people here vote knowing that it is very likely that nothing will be solved and that the participation processes there generate change. If we ask anyone if they believe that Sánchez or Feijóo will solve a problem, they will say no. This is how a vote against is generated, with little faith in the future, which is how people vote here: in favor of one so that the other leaves.
Does bipartisanship feed the problem?
Bipartisanship is the solution. The problem has come with diversity, generating watertight compartments that, in order to make a difference, are willing to not reach agreements.
Can you live from political consulting in Spain taking into account the electoral cadence?
Yes, but public institutions and companies should communicate permanently. A large part of the crisis at Aena or Renfe is because they do not explain what is happening. Public companies do not understand this, which is why 90% of advertising and communication investment comes from the Ibex 35.
