During the debate, each of them tried to prove their earlier allegations by displaying documents -- using relatively moderate language compared to their earlier rhetoric. However, there was debate the next day over who had won and who had lost. While circles close to Kılıçdaroğlu said he was the winner, others close to Fırat said Fırat was the victor, proving earlier expectations that the debate would not change anyone's mind.According to Star's Şamil Tayyar, the loser of Thursday's debate was Kılıçdaroğlu, because he failed to prove his earlier allegations that Fırat was engaged in drug trafficking. "In conclusion, Kılıçdaroğlu, in whose reason, experience and mind I have great confidence, should take a break from engaging in politics after failing to prove his allegations. If he can manage it, he should not return, because credibility is a very important asset in politics. His credibility has been dealt a severe blow with this debate," Tayyar says.
"A duel took place in Parliament on Thursday. What is the result? Nothing, but most likely political circles were happy with this result," writes Sabah's Mahmut Övür, who thinks politicians dallying with such debates fail to address Turkey's real problems. "While this country has to get rid of a Constitution that was written after the 1980 coup, politicians do not gather to write a new Constitution. They are also not willing to settle accounts with coup perpetrators. They do nothing to change the Political Parties Law or Election Law. Think about the Alevi issue, on which the AK Party and the CHP could easily reach consensus. Is it not significant that no step has been taken to address this problem for years? Finally, while thousands of the Kurdish citizens of this country demand education in their mother tongue, what do two the largest parties of this country think?" asks Övür. In consideration of these problems, he says although the meeting drew praise from some circles, it was not a meaningful step for politics.
Hürriyet's Oktay Ekşi thinks that although Kılıçdaroğlu and Fırat denied that they came together for a duel, what happened on Thursday was nothing more than a "verbal duel." In his view, Kılıçdaroğlu was the winner of this debate because of his credible attitude and his presentation of documents to support his allegations. He thinks Fırat spoke in a disorganized way and confused people by showing irrelevant documents, so he was the loser.
Radikal's İsmet Berkan says if one forgets the ugly remarks Fırat and Kılıçdaroğlu directed at each other over the past days, then it is possible to say "political moderation" was the winner of Thursday's debate. Berkan complains that nobody cared about the content of Fırat and Kılıçdaroğlu's arguments, as everyone was "supporting their own team." "Nobody cares about who is playing well, why he played well or what the loser's excuse is," Berkan complains.
