One obvious conclusion can be drawn from the distribution of votes between the different parties in the legislative elections: there is basically no difference from the results of the elections three years ago.
Whether we look at the number of votes won by the different parties, their proportions of the total vote or the number of seats won by the blue and green camps, the situation remains almost static.
Keeping in mind the upsetting presidential election and the political situation and social unrest that followed, how could this be?
The people most disappointed by the outcome of the the elections are probably two presidents.
Despite former president Lee Teng-hui's (
The trend was more or less the same in every city and county, nor were there any obvious differences between the north and south.
The blow to President Chen Shui-bian (
Unexpectedly, the strategy failed completely, and the number of votes won was the same as three years ago. Because voter turn-out was low, the final proportion of votes won was 37.5 percent, a small increase of only two percentage points.
Deducting the TSU's 800,000 votes, the total number of votes won by the DPP in the legislative elections was approximately 2.2 million lower than the number of votes won by Chen in the presidential election nine months ago. So what are voters thinking?
Looking at the number and proportion of votes won by each party in different areas, the DPP did not win a majority in any city or county except for Ilan County. In Taiwan south of the Chuoshui River, they saw an increase in Chiayi County, but in other cities and counties, results were about the same as in 2001. Looking at actual votes won, the changes were even smaller.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) won 240,000 votes more than in 2001, or about four percentage points, and increased its number of legislative seats by eight. The main differences occurred in Taipei County and City because of a more cautious approach in the nomination process -- to avoid repeating past mistakes -- finally brought results.
The People First Party's (PFP) losses "complemented" the KMT's gains. The party lost 560,000 votes, or almost 5 percentage points, and eight seats. As a result, the blue camp maintained the same number of seats, making the whole election exercise look like a storm in a teacup.
But why didn't the large number of opinion polls published prior to the elections detect this phenomenon?
At least half of the answer to that question is to be found among respondents that could not be included in the telephone queries or that did not respond to the polls.
Although Taiwan is inundated by opinion polls, very few pollsters are willing to spend time on these two categories of respondents, which means that there is still much to learn. Do voters want to slow things down, or do they want to turn the political clock back?
Hung Yung-tai is a professor in the department of political science at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS