There are many aspects in which López Obrador has shown himself to be improvised, incompetent or both. In his communication style, however, it has not been any. The simplicity of his story and the intransigence with which he sticks to it are probably his greatest strengths as a politician.
That does not mean that his speech is truthful nor does it mean that it lacks contradictions. It means, as you have explained Luis Antonio Espino that his speech makes many of those who listen to him feel represented by him and thus grant him credibility.
In other words, the truths he states are not so much factual as affective: they build an emotional bond with his audiences –based on closeness and repetition– that allows him to exempt himself from having to account for his words and, consequently, It endows a formidable force that today no other leadership in Mexico has.
The López Obrador script, in this sense, constitutes a very powerful weapon for doing politics, but it is a terrible tool for governing. Because simplicity and consistency do not serve to deal with the complexity of the problems facing public administration, to adapt to surprises that demand flexibility, or to imagine innovative solutions. Unlike.
That recalcitrant attachment to the established script implies not only what Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie called “the danger of the single story” that is, clinging to a partial but totalizing point of view that prevents conceiving the world from a plurality of experiences, denying oneself the possibility of discovering other perspectives and enriching oneself from them.
