In recent years politicians and the media have often referred to the term "median voters" to describe a particular group within the electorate. However, they often confuse its meaning with that of "independent voters," which refer to voters with no party affiliation, and "undecided voters," which refers to voters who do not divulge their preferences during opinion poll interviews.
The median voter theorem is a well-known concept in game theory. It posits that in an electoral competition between two candidates, if voter policy preferences can be represented along one dimension, the candidate whose views coincide with the median preferences of the electorate as a whole will win the ballot.
This means that in a single-member district plurality electoral system with two candidates, a candidate who really wants to win must lean toward the median because whoever secures that position will win greater voter support .
That theory might not apply, however, if there is more than one issue or more than two candidates in an election. Neither would it apply in a situation where the preferences of the electorate as a whole describe an "M" or normal distribution on the ideological spectrum of a single issue.
In other words, even if the electorate as a whole trace an M-peak, or double-peak distribution in single-member districts, the candidate closer to the median in a standoff between two contenders is still more likely to win unless some of his erstwhile supporters decide not to vote.
Legislative elections used to be based on a multi-member district system. Under the system, candidates might spread across the whole ideological spectrum rather than lean towards the middle, because they can be elected by attracting the votes of minority groups. Hence, in addition to party affiliation and personal image, other factors such as the total number of candidates nominated by the party, successful vote allocation and differentiation of nominees from the same party may all affect election results.
In such elections, candidates in the median position may not be elected if voter preferences show a double-peak distribution. But under the new single-member district systems -- be it elections for local government chiefs, legislators or president -- victory will almost be guaranteed for the candidate choosing the middle path as long as the campaign focuses on one major issue and there are only two candidates.
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) politicians running for legislative seats in this year's elections may face a two-level game dilemma. The DPP's legislative primaries are 70 percent decided by opinion polls that include only green camp supporters and 30 percent by a poll open only to party members.
Based on past experience both inside and outside Taiwan, those who actively participate and wield a greater influence in the primaries are usually the party's hardline supporters. Thus, DPP politicians will have a better chance to be nominated if they are backed by die-hard supporters.
In the year-end elections, however, they will have to strive for majority support in one-on-one races. This is a whole new experience. How candidates adjust to their different roles and strategies in the primaries and the official election will be a tough challenge. Naturally, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) may face the same problem if it also excludes the rival camp's supporters from their opinion polls for the primaries.
Lastly, it is important to note that this discussion is based on a single-issue campaign. Voter structure and preferences may be different in each electoral district. For certain candidates, if they want to win in a single-member district, local service and grassroots management may still prove crucial to being elected.
Wang Yeh-lih is a professor in the Department of Political Science at Tunghai University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
As technological change sweeps across the world, the focus of education has undergone an inevitable shift toward artificial intelligence (AI) and digital learning. However, the HundrED Global Collection 2026 report has a message that Taiwanese society and education policymakers would do well to reflect on. In the age of AI, the scarcest resource in education is not advanced computing power, but people; and the most urgent global educational crisis is not technological backwardness, but teacher well-being and retention. Covering 52 countries, the report from HundrED, a Finnish nonprofit that reviews and compiles innovative solutions in education from around the world, highlights a
RSS