Campaigns are about sending the right messages to the voters. Campaigns are about who can deliver their message well. A campaign cannot be successful if it is based solely on a negative message. All candidates should keep these rules in mind.
Regretfully, what we have witnessed in the last couple of weeks of the Democratic Progressive Party's primary battle is finger-pointing, exchanges of rhetoric and a lack of vision.
Since President Chen Shui-bian's (
Recent episodes include Lu's accusations about Su's attempts to force Chen out of office last year.
Lu implied in a TV interview that Su attempted to use his resignation as a threat to force Chen to step down when Chen was the target of a street campaign demanding his resignation. Yu later echoed Lu's statement. Hsieh also complained about Su's monopolizing of executive resources for his personal campaign.
Though he has confirmed Su's offer to resign on four separate occasions, Chen has protested Su's innocence.
As Su is by far and away the most popular of the "big four," it's only natural for the other three to target him as their common enemy before the DPP's primary process begins.
The media love the smell of blood and each competitor will take advantage of the other's mistakes to try and improve their chances. Negative campaigns have their place, but they do not form the essential structure of a winning campaign. They are sometimes used as tactical tools to gain an advantage, but most of the time negatives will only work once you've laid out an alternative vision for your candidacy through positive ads and reform-minded determination.
Therefore, we urge Chen, Hsieh and Su and all the DPP's candidates to focus primarily on offering positive and concrete public policy proposals and visions that will tackle Taiwan's pressing economic, social, environmental and cultural problems. Those are the messages that the voters want to hear.
Campaigns start with competing messages. The key to winning any race is to come up with an affirmative message that betters your opponents' message. It is the inability to understand this simple, straightforward point that causes more losses in politics than any other single factor.
In articulating the affirmative message of a campaign, comparisons between each candidates' positions may be needed. If the comparisons are just a thin disguise for negatives, voters will catch on quickly. If the comparisons of the positions are accurate and reflect the real opinions of the candidates, they may work.
Each contender has his or her own unique personality. The key is to translate this into leadership and turn the country back on the right track.
All four candidates should also seize the opportunity given by the public debates to convince the voters that the pursuit of social justice, independent national sovereignty, the enhancement of national security and clean politics constitute the keys to Taiwan's sustainable development.
Bold initiatives that leave the voters behind are not acts of leadership but of self-indulgent arrogance. The art of leadership is to maintain sufficient momentum to control events and steer public policy without losing support.
An idealist leader will not hesitate to do something that is unpopular. But a smart idealist will carefully measure public opinion before he does so.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS