The late US president Richard Nixon had to swallow two bitter pills in his life: the Watergate scandal that drove him out of the presidency and the 1960 presidential election that was stolen from him.
In the hotly contested 1960 election, John Kennedy claimed 22 states while Nixon won 26, with the rest gained by the third candidate Harry Byrd. However, in terms of the popular vote, Kennedy's 34.2 million ballots beat Nixon's 34.1 million by a narrow margin of around 115,000 votes. Despite losing the election by a tiny 0.17 percent margin -- a margin even less than the 0.22 percent between President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and Chinese Nationalist Party Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) -- Nixon still phoned Kennedy to congratulate him, conceding defeat. Nixon also refused appeals to challenge the result, adding that "a recount will trigger a constitutional crisis."
In fact, the 1960 election was plagued with fraud and foul play. Before the day of the election, rumors that Kennedy's father Joseph had been buying votes for his son clouded the proceedings. Especially in Mafia-plagued Chicago, vote-rigging was widely speculated about and reported on. Nixon later jeered, "even a tombstone in Cook County can go to vote."
Although Nixon is usually ridiculed as "Tricky Dick," his refusal to call for a recount and his prioritization of national interests over personal gain earned him another nickname, "Noble Dick." How-ever, watching Kennedy snip off the fruit of victory right in front of their eyes, Nixon's outraged supporters launched bids for recounts and investigations in 11 states. Despite the fact that Nixon distanced himself from all these suits, everyone knew "Tricky Dick" was pulling the strings behind the curtains.
Yet it is a story rich in irony. The recount showed the original figures to be overgenerous in favor of Nixon, even in the hotly disputed Cook County. For lack of any hard evidence, neither the state nor federal courts saw a reason to overturn the results, despite the trivial, occasional negligence in the counting of votes. Despite the rumors of vote-rigging, Nixon's supporters had no choice but to swallow their bitter defeat.
Forty years on, speculation on whether Kennedy stole the 1960 election keeps coming. In his book The Dark Side of Camelot,published last year, the prominent investigative journalist Seymour Hersh pinpoints several suspicions. Using FBI wiretaps, Hersh claimed that the votes for Nixon in Chicago were rigged. Hersh also wrote that the director of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, believed Nixon actually won the presidency. But in deciding to follow administrative procedures and referring the FBI findings to the Attorney General, Robert Kennedy, Kennedy's younger brother, Hoover had actually buried the case. The truth is still shrouded in fog.
Until the day he died, Nixon firmly believed that Kennedy had stolen the election. Nevertheless, when his secretary Monica Crowley asked him in his later years if he still believed a recount would have torn the country apart and sunk America into chaos, Nixon still gave an emphatic "Yes."
There are four "stolen elections" in American history, including the one in 1960. The disputes over the 1824 election, when John Quincy Adams challenged Andrew Jackson, and the 1876 one, when Samuel Tilton confronted Rutherford Hayes, were taken to the House of Representatives. In another case, the 2000 election contested by then-vice president Al Gore and George W. Bush was finally heard by the US Supreme Court.
Despite various means of settlement, the four losers share one thing in common -- they all called on their supporters to remain calm and wait for the results, in line with the Constitution. No one ever incited supporters. Although Tilton's supporters once threatened to recapture "the stolen power" by violence, Tilton sternly rejected such attempts. If these four losers had not relied upon constitutional procedures, the history of American democracy could have been rewritten four times.
Given his doctorate in political science, Lien should know the history of the four "stolen elections" in the US. No matter whom Lien chooses as his role model among these four, he can easily find a rule to guide him. But if he looks for models in the Philippines or in other underdeveloped countries, then he is wrong for degrading himself and underestimating Taiwan.
Wang Chien-chuang is the president of The Journalist magazine.
Translated by Wang Hsiao-wen
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,