The public wants to know whether Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) plans to withdraw from next year’s presidential election.
On Aug. 11, Ko declared that he would remain the TPP presidential candidate until the end of the race. A few days earlier, reports said Ko maintained that he would not be anyone’s deputy.
His attitude and stance have been settled. This strategy has confined the influence of Hon Hai Technology Group founder Terry Gou (郭台銘), overpowered Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Hou You-yi (侯友宜) and lifted TPP morale.
It is common knowledge that Gou wants to collaborate with Ko, as he had once suggested that Ko should be his deputy.
Knowing that he could not take advantage of the KMT, Gou turned to Ko. The two met in Kinmen and seemed to have made some kind of commitment. Gou also delivered flowers to Ko’s concert, “harassing” him from time to time, and painted a picture of two politicians bonding together. That way, Gou could pressure Ko, and Ko would be confined.
Now, Ko has made it clear: Not only would he refuse to be somebody’s deputy, he even said that he would stay the course. These comments were clearly directed at Gou, as their potential voters overlap. At a time when Gou is still trying to encroach on Ko’s voter base, Ko fought back and shattered his plans.
Gou can no longer exploit Ko’s popularity, nor can he return to the KMT for negotiations because Hou has become the KMT’s one and only candidate. In short, Gou is running out of options.
Ko’s second objective is to overpower Hou. Recent public opinion polls show that he remains in second place in opinion polls, after Vice President William Lai (賴清德) and ahead of Hou.
Obviously, Ko wants to have as many bargaining chips as possible in negotiations with the KMT. He also wants to intimidate Hou by demonstrating his resolve. Ko wants Hou to consider joining his ticket as vice presidential candidate once the KMT realizes it cannot turn the tide.
The structure of the presidential election is clear. Lai’s support has never surpassed 40 percent, while about 60 percent of Taiwanese want to get rid of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). The key is to bring together the non-green camps.
If Ko’s strategy works, Gou would lose his status and become marginalized. He might as well just leave the election. As for Hou, it looks like he cannot catch up with Ko or be on a par with Lai.
Before long, the public might encourage Ko and Hou to pair up. At this point, the KMT and Hou would have to make their decision. If the blue camps keep thinking of the TPP as unimportant, non-green supporters might even stop backing the KMT’s legislative candidates.
Ko’s declaration has also cheered the TPP. After all, one of his goals is to win party votes and increase the TPP’s seats in the Legislative Yuan. As long as Ko remains in the race, the TPP could win up to 10 seats.
Although the TPP’s performance in single constituencies has not been good, a TPP legislative candidate nominated by Ko could defeat KMT. In other words, the blue camps have been restricted by Ko’s strategic moves.
It is only natural that Ko keeps boosting TPP morale and consolidating his leadership. This can only do him good.
Niu Tse-hsun is a professor in Chinese Culture University’s advertising department.
Translated by Emma Liu
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