Election campaigns are all about setting the agenda, framing the debate, damage control and positive or negative campaigning. There is more to winning a poll than merely attacking the opposition. The only way to come out of a campaign alive is to tell the truth, take the hits and move on.
The Dec. 3 local elections are a manifestation of all the aforementioned campaign elements.
Ever since the scandal involving the former deputy secretary-general of the Presidential Office, Chen Che-nan (陳哲男), made the headlines, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government have been conducting crisis management to minimize the impact of the scandal on the government's image and in the polls.
In addition to exerting more internal party discipline and taking full responsibility for Chen's misconduct, the president and DPP leaders have attempted to reorient the focus of campaign back to policy by reframing the debate. The reform of the 18 percent interest rate for retired teachers, public servants and military officials demonstrated the government's strong will to implement one of the Six Great Reforms the president outlined during his Double Ten National Day Address.
From a strategic point of view, distracting public attention from the scandal by focusing on other, larger items of the reform agenda is the best way for the DPP to survive the scandal. A campaign cannot win if it is based solely on negative messages.
It is only natural that some media groups and the pan-blue opposition will take advantage of the DPP's mistakes to sabotage the government's image. Negative campaigns have their place, but they do not form the essential element of a winning campaign. They can sometimes be tactical tools to gain an advantage. But most of the time, negatives will only work once you've laid out an alternative vision for your campaign through positive ads and reform-minded determination.
In addition to spreading more unverified rumors against the government, the pan-blue camp has so far failed to prove they can do better than the DPP. Campaigns start with competing messages. The key to winning any race is to come up with an positive message that outlasts your opponents' message. It is the inability to understand this simple, straightforward point that will cause the public to lose more trust in the pan-blue alliance.
The reform of the pension system is the best example of turning a negative campaign into a positive competition. Since last week, the president and the DPP have put the reform of public-service pensions on top of their campaign priorities in the name of promoting "social justice and eliminating class division."
The KMT's abuse of the pension system has become a DPP target. For example, they accused Taichung Mayor Jason Hu (胡志強), KMT Deputy Chairman Kuan Chung (關中) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) of including their service in the KMT as part of their calculations for their civil-service pensions. The DPP's rebuttal is effective because it touches upon the general welfare of voters.
Rebuttal is crucial. Rebuttals usually defeat attacks. A rebuttal not only wipes out the impact of the original negative attack, but it damages the credibility of the candidate who launched the attack and makes it harder for him to try again. The president and his government need rebuttals and counterpunches to rejuvenate their campaign.
The crossfire on pension reform is helping to lead the campaign back onto the right track. The government should take the initiative to push for reform and to convince voters that the pursuit of social justice, healthy development and the enhancement of national security constitutes the key to Taiwan's future development.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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