EDITORIAL: Whither the DPP?

Even by the day it appears that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is getting deeper into trouble in its campaign to retain the presidency. This is not helped by do-nothing senior members of the party such as Vice President Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) who, true to form, has launched attacks against members of the government instead of rallying around the party flag to salvage something for the March poll.

Lu and a number of other embarrassing party members command an inordinate degree of respect despite their political stupidity and/or laziness.

In this regard the party is all too similar to the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which also seems unable to unload "old guard" freeloaders in its party framework and the legislature.

There was always going to have be a reckoning for the DPP's terrible performance in the legislative elections -- "performance" here referring to the manner in which the campaign was conducted, regardless of any structural disadvantages the party was facing.

The problem is that the DPP lacks a coherent strategy and merit-based hierarchy to do this.

Indeed, the party does not have the remotest idea how to begin to reinvigorate itself for the next legislative poll in 2012, let alone for a presidential election in two months.

Former premier Yu Shyi-kun was DPP chairman for most of President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) second term, a time when the party was in the most desperate need of launching a campaign to engage new voters. But the time he had was utterly wasted. By the time Chen took over, it was clear that the party never appreciated the need to look beyond the green-blue divide and appeal to common interests at the local level.

Instead, it seems to have concentrated on spoils for established figures, such as Legislator Chai Trong-rong (蔡同榮), the former boss of Formosa TV, whose flight from his Chiayi City electorate in the face of a split vote and election as a legislator-at-large typify the mess that the DPP now finds itself in.

Some will argue that the KMT's domination of resources makes any DPP incursion into local politics a futile affair. This is only true if the DPP thinks that local sentiment is not worth fighting for.

If KMT presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is elected in March, there will be ample opportunity to critique the policies and competence of a KMT government.

DPP supporters will be disappointed by the public's willingness to reward the boycott of the legislature with an increased majority.

They will wonder why it is that the public could support a party that would threaten to cut off Taiwan Post's budget because it refused to print a stamp designed by a KMT legislator, that would cripple arms spending in the face of a deadly threat from China, and that would shut down the arm of the government that monitors the performance of public servants simply because it could.

The answer is in the party's name: Taiwan is a "democratic" state, and people do not always vote for what candidates consider virtuous.

Party strategists must realize that it cannot mobilize moderate supporters using ideological battles and reliance on White Terror nostalgia at election time -- a fault that was most apparent in its advertising campaign.

In the end the message is clear: The KMT has what it takes to win legislative elections and the DPP does not -- and it may not for many elections to come, assuming, of course, that under a KMT government Taiwan can survive as a sovereign state.