The split between the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) over the Taipei mayoral election would seem to benefit the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate, Frank Hsieh (謝長廷).
History tells us there is a "dumping effect" with Taiwan's first-past-the-post electoral system if there is more than one competitor from the same camp.
However, history also shows that once there is a split within a camp, the third party is likely to become the sole beneficiary.
When he was the DPP mayoral candidate in 1994, Chen Shui-bian (
Ethnicity and the unification-independence debate used to determine elections for Taipei. Now, however, it comes down to the candidate's character, because Taipei residents are more politically informed and independent-minded.
It is too early to predict the impact PFP candidate James Soong (
In this regard, Hsieh should not take the pan-blue camp's split for granted.
Rather, he must apply his experience as Kaohsiung mayor and present a platform on how he would crack down on the re-emerging sex industry, address deteriorating traffic conditions, stir up the bureaucratic machine and make Taipei a better and safer place in which to live.
Hsieh's campaign strategy of accusing Hau's father Hau Pei-tsun (
Hsieh must demonstrate to the voters why he can do a better job than Hau and even Ma in terms of forging discipline, decisiveness and effectiveness in policy implementation.
Hau's strategy also lacks vision. With strong endorsement from Ma, Hau's campaign has been relatively defensive so far.
But his biggest problem lies in the extent to which he can distinguish himself from Ma.
This is especially important given that Ma has suffered from both a public backlash over the anti-Chen movement initiated by former DPP chairman Shih Ming-teh (施明德) and from Soong's consolidation of the deep-blue vote. To shake off this association, Hau needs to adjust his style and react to public criticism candidly and aggressively.
A campaign is like riding a bike. The more momentum you have, the harder it is to knock you over. But if you're just barely moving or standing still, even the slightest push will make you tumble.
Being aggressive helps to force the agenda onto terrain most favorable to you, and that's usually an advantage for opposition candidates. Whoever can frame the debate and control the setting of the agenda will win the campaign.
After establishing the goals of the campaign and adopting a more aggressive strategy, opposition candidates must set up an agenda to capture voter interest and respect.
They must determine what went wrong with the city government over the last seven years and then punch the message home with force and determination.
This is what Taipei voters want from the year-end contest.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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
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,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS