When Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Secretary-General King Pu-tsung (金溥聰) met with the press after returning from a visit to Singapore, he said that if the KMT loses three of the five special municipality elections on Nov. 27, he would consider himself to have failed and take full responsibility. The KMT thinks it will be difficult to win in Tainan and Kaohsiung, but that it holds the upper hand in Taichung. Since it also expects a narrow win in Sinbei City, Taipei City is crucial.
The party is now concentrating its campaign efforts there, thus proving that Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) Taipei mayoral candidate, Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌), was right when he predicted that if he ran for mayor in Taipei, he would lock down most of the KMT’s election resources there, which would benefit the DPP’s candidates in other cities.
Following the scandal surrounding the Taipei International Flora Expo, an opinion poll conducted by a media outlet showed incumbent Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) trailing Su by 2 percentage points. King, however, says internal KMT opinion polls show no difference in support between the two.
Representatives of both parties say that if the DPP trails the KMT by only a small margin in pre-election polls, it could well end up winning the election. Some pan-blue supporters and most pan-green supporters think Su will be the next mayor of Taipei.
This reasoning is borne out by earlier election results, the latest county commissioner and mayoral elections in Yilan county and city being one example. There are two reasons why this is so.
First, most farmers and factory workers support the pan-green camp, while military personnel, civil servants, teachers, the middle class and business circles support the pan-blue camp.
Among pan-green supporters, there are several users per telephone, and some may not even have a chance to pick up when pollsters call. Among pan-blue supporters, however, there are fewer users per telephone, and sometimes, one person has access to several telephones, which means that when pollsters call, the pan-blue camp’s numbers are slightly inflated.
Second, many people have moved from the areas surrounding big cities into the actual cities. The proximity means that they return home frequently, so they keep their household registered in their hometown. An odd phenomenon is that many migrants tend to support the pan-green camp.
When conducting opinion polls in areas surrounding Yilan or other big cities, those who have moved out are not be able to answer the telephone, but on election day, they return home to vote. That is why the final DPP vote is higher than the KMT vote when compared to pre-election opinion polls.
These two factors do not apply in the same way in Taipei City. Although there still are more pan-green users than pan-blue users per telephone, this situation is not as pronounced as in the areas surrounding big cities. In addition, the migrant situation is the opposite of the situation in the surrounding areas.
When conducting an opinion poll, those who have moved into the big city from the surrounding areas might be included in a poll, but they cannot vote because they have their household registration in their old hometown. Clearly, although the difference between the DPP and the KMT might still be smaller in the final vote than in the pre-election polls, the effect will be smaller than in the surrounding areas.
Taipei City has always been a KMT stronghold leaving the DPP far behind. The reason Hau cannot build momentum for the Nov. 27 election is that both the KMT-led national government and Hau’s city administration have disappointed voters.
While many KMT supporters have given a negative assessment of Hau in opinion polls, some will still vote for him on election day. In other words, the view that the DPP will have a chance to win any election where they trail by only a small margin of votes in pre-election polls does not necessarily hold true in Taipei City.
The KMT’s greatest worry is not Hau’s current standing in the opinion polls, but rather whether or not his support will continue to dwindle. The party may have come up with a plan to defeat Su, but while negative campaigning is effective when aimed at an incumbent, it does not have a great effect on challengers from the opposition.
In other words, the KMT’s attempt to go on the attack to defend its position in Taipei will not necessarily be successful. Hau should try to concentrate on his own weak spots instead of directing all his efforts at finding his opponent’s shortcomings.
Taipei residents expect more of the city government than residents in other cities. Hau is unable to present positive political achievements, dares not distance himself from the mistakes committed by his predecessor and cannot disassociate himself from the irregularities that have occurred during his own term in office.
As the DPP reveals irregularities related to the flora expo, the KMT accuses it of attacking the expo itself — in other words, not only do they not appear to understand the need to disassociate the expo from the irregularities, their strategy actively links the two together. The KMT has chosen the wrong path.
Chen Mao-hsiung is a retired National Sun Yat-sen University professor.
Translated by Perry Svensson
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
To recalibrate its Cold War alliances, the US adopted its “one China policy,” a diplomatic compromise meant to engage with China and end the Vietnam War, but which left Taiwan in a state of permanent limbo. Half a century later, the costs of that policy are mounting. Taiwan remains a democratic, technologically advanced nation of 23 million people, yet it is denied membership in international organizations and stripped of diplomatic recognition. Meanwhile, the PRC has weaponized the “one China” narrative to claim sovereignty over Taiwan, label the Taiwan Strait as its “internal waters” and threaten international shipping routes that carry more
RSS