In the campaigns running up to tomorrow’s special municipality elections, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has tried to transform its electioneering tactics, veering away from the traditional ideological campaigns that were prevalent under former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁). The best example of this new tactic is the DPP’s use of the Internet to direct its campaign rhetoric at the Web-savvy younger generation, which typically refrains from voting.
Taipei mayoral candidate Su Tseng-chang’s (蘇貞昌) campaign headquarters in downtown Taipei is a prime example of the DPP’s new direction. His technology-heavy office is more reminiscent of the Taipei International Flora Exposition’s Pavilion of the Future than a center of politics. DPP candidates elsewhere have also turned to rock concerts and popular culture to woo younger voters. However, despite this shift, the party hasn’t quite gone far enough.
In local elections, the key factor for voters, especially swing voters who are undecided until election day, is what a candidate says he or she will do to improve their daily lives. Campaign platforms in municipal elections should focus on such mundane topics as cleaning street gutters, improving traffic lights, building more bicycle paths, fixing broken street signs or improving and building parks. Those are the issues that touch the lives of swing voters, not ideological divides between the pan-green and pan-blue camps, scandals involving municipal projects, presidential politics, international affairs and whether or not an opponent was born locally.
The DPP’s candidates have spent too much time and effort attacking their Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) opponents and too little on how they would improve the municipalities they wish to govern. Su focused many a comment on Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin’s (郝龍斌) possible involvement in the Xinsheng Overpass scandal. DPP Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) attacked her KMT Sinbei mayoral opponent Eric Chu (朱立倫) for allowing pollution to flow into Taoyuan County rivers when he was county commissioner. In Taichung, DPP mayoral candidate Su Jia-chyuan (蘇嘉全) criticized Taichung Mayor Jason Hu’s (胡志強) nine years in office, saying he hadn’t improved the crime situation, as demonstrated by a recent scandal involving police and gangsters.
In all of these examples, there was too little focus on what the candidates plan to do if they win and too much focus on the negative attributes of their opponents.
Another issue DPP candidates should have de--emphasized is their belief that this election would serve as a referendum on President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) policies. The majority of swing voters in these elections are thinking about issues that are closer to home, not about whether Ma is selling out their future. They will be voting for somebody who will build a better place for them to live and work, not somebody who will concentrate on repealing the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement.
Most importantly, they are voting for officials to lead their own governments, not for somebody who makes their stance against or for China clear. This is not a referendum on the president, it is a referendum on how well people think the DPP or the KMT can govern.
Of course, it’s now too late for the DPP to change its tactics. All it can do is hope its final mix of events directed at younger voters, coupled with traditional electioneering activities, will sway residents in those municipalities where the party might have a chance of turning the tide against the KMT.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS