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.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS