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.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS