DPP mayoral candidate Lee Ying-yuan (
All three polls, held by two of Taiwan's largest newspapers and a major cable TV station, show that Lee did not register any significant improvements in his support ratings after the debate, even though he performed quite well. The ratings Lee received range from 14 to 21 percent, almost unchanged from those he had scored in all the previous surveys carried out by the same three private news organizations.
The incumbent also did not register any significant rise in his support rating following the debate. But Ma has remained far ahead of Lee with ratings hovering around 60 percent.
In a sense, the failure of Lee's performance to arouse greater voter backing might suggest that his charges against Ma of leadership shortcomings, lack of achievements and inefficiency were not convincing enough. It would also suggest that Lee's own major alternative construction programs -- including a plan to relocate the Sungshan airport, a proposed new site for the "Giant Egg" domed stadium project as well as a streetcar system for the city -- were not viewed as good policy choices.
Such inferences, however, do not hold water if one considers how the poll was taken. Three questions were asked -- which candidate are you going to vote for; which candidate did better in the debate and which candidate's policies do you support the most. The candidates' individual approval ratings for the second and third questions are almost identical to the ratings they enjoy for voter intentions for the first.
This seems to indicate that before watching the debate, many people had already made up their minds about which of the two candidates they are going to vote for.
If that is the case, the consistently huge gulf between Lee and Ma may not result from any public doubts about his policies. Nor do they seem to have had much to do with Lee's credentials as a candidate. Lee, 49, is highly educated and has extensive experience in government service, including stints as a legislator and senior administrative positions.
So what accounts for Lee's incredibly poor opinion poll ratings? A logical explanation is that Lee's strategists and supporters may have used the wrong campaign tactics. The Lee camp has, for example, continued to use tactics that are widely perceived as negative campaigning against Ma. This despite Lee's avowed intention to fight a gentlemanly contest.
During the debate Ma twice demanded an explanation as to why the Lee camp had consistently taken his Hong Kong origins as a line of attack and painted his re-election bid as an attempt to compete for the office of chief of a Taipei special administrative region of China.
Using such negative campaigns against a popular incumbent mayor is likely to do Lee more harm than good. Similarly, in a metropolis like Taipei with a particularly high concentration of highly educated people and centrist voters, campaigning on ethnic and national identity issues can't be expected to win wide support.
Lee and his campaign managers may need to take a new look at the heavy involvement in his campaign by President Chen Shui-bian (
After repeatedly questioning Ma's loyalty to the ROC, the president recently even charged that Ma, if re-elected, would perform the mayoral job for only a few months before announcing his candidacy in the coming presidential race. He challenged Ma to swear to God he would not do that.
By treating Ma in such a way, Chen has given the impression that he is trying to do all he can to discredit a likely challenger to his presidency. Such speculation tends to undermine the legitimacy of the president's claim to be campaigning against Ma just for the purpose of helping his party's candidate.
Furthermore, although Chen's intensified campaigning for Lee since late October has generated considerable enthusiasm for Lee's campaign, this has obviously not yet translated into popularity in opinion polls.
So it might be necessary for the Lee camp to undertake a thorough review of its campaign strategies and make appropriate changes before it is too late. It will also be crucial to move quickly to prepare for a tentatively agreed second and last TV debate in this final stage of the campaign.
Tseng Kuo-ping is a freelance journalist based in Taipei.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath