The results of the by-election in Taichung’s second electoral district and the recall vote against independent Legislator Freddy Lim (林昶佐) were announced on Jan. 9 — two home runs for the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and nothing for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT).
Meanwhile, the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) has called for an end to ideological labeling to mitigate the antagonism between the pan-green and pan-blue camps.
The two camps should refrain from proclaiming themselves winners or their rivals losers in upcoming elections.
The “pendulum effect” often describes voting behavior. A party that claims a landslide victory might suffer an electoral defeat next time around as voter sympathy favors an underdog or they seek to prevent one side from gaining too much power. The bigger the margin of victory, the more likely the pendulum effect.
Since Taiwan Statebuilding Party legislator Chen Po-wei (陳柏惟) was recalled, prompting the Taichung by-election, the DPP has been on a winning streak, emerging on top with the results of four referendums, the Taichung vote and the failure of Lim’s recall in Taipei’s fifth electoral district.
Whether the pendulum effect comes into play depends on how the DPP responds to its victories. If it keeps associating the victories with localist ideologies such as Taiwanese values — safeguarding Taiwan, prevailing justice or the “friend or foe” principle — it runs the risk of the pendulum swinging in the buildup to the local elections in November.
The effect takes place when there are opposing forces — the greater the polarity, the bigger the swing.
A classic example is the 2008 US presidential election. Americans elected their first black president, but eight years later replaced him with the most conservative president in recent history.
There are always people who are at odds with mainstream narratives and independent voters use their ballots to prevent the country from turning into a state dominated by one party.
Therefore, the more the DPP says that its victories were the result of a superior ideology, the more voter antipathy and aversion it might generate.
It should also refrain from using “us and them” rhetoric. Adopting narratives that reduce political polarization might limit the pendulum effect.
For the past few years, Taiwanese have seen fewer KMT politicians graciously accepting defeat. After this month’s by-election and recall attempt, the KMT blamed its defeats on the “state apparatus,” saying it robbed Taiwanese of their freedom and wills.
The KMT attempted to evade responsibility by disparaging opponents and inciting hatred for the DPP, tactics that do not maintain morale for long.
After a defeat, conceding and congratulating the opponent is more than a gracious act, it shows respect to voters. To blame defeat on an opponent pushes swing voters away.
The KMT should try to rebuild its image using policies and qualified candidates instead of fighting the DPP on ideological issues.
As for the TPP, its call to cease political labeling might seem reasonable, but it needs to be coupled with action.
TPP Chairman Ko Wen-je’s (柯文哲) habit of calling opponents “1450,” or cyberarmy members, shows that the party’s actions do not match its words.
The TPP might be seeking to woo people who are tired of politics after a packed agenda of recalls, referendums and the by-election, but it should work on substantial political narratives, and not rely on excoriating the DPP and the KMT to draw attention to itself.
“Humble in victory, gracious in defeat” might be a cliche, but following that adage might prevent defeat. The TPP should propose initiatives and agendas so that it benefits if the DPP and KMT mobilize hatred and outrage.
Chang Yueh-han is an assistant professor of journalism at Shih Hsin University.
Translated by Rita Wang
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
US president-elect Donald Trump earlier this year accused Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) of “stealing” the US chip business. He did so to have a favorable bargaining chip in negotiations with Taiwan. During his first term from 2017 to 2021, Trump demanded that European allies increase their military budgets — especially Germany, where US troops are stationed — and that Japan and South Korea share more of the costs for stationing US troops in their countries. He demanded that rich countries not simply enjoy the “protection” the US has provided since the end of World War II, while being stingy with
Historically, in Taiwan, and in present-day China, many people advocate the idea of a “great Chinese nation.” It is not worth arguing with extremists to say that the so-called “great Chinese nation” is a fabricated political myth rather than an academic term. Rather, they should read the following excerpt from Chinese writer Lin Yutang’s (林語堂) book My Country and My People: “It is also inevitable that I should offend many writers about China, especially my own countrymen and great patriots. These great patriots — I have nothing to do with them, for their god is not my god, and their patriotism is
RSS