The Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tumultuous presidential primary has come to an end, with Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) emerging as the winner.
Runner-up Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) gracefully congratulated Tsai and called for the whole party to unite in her support, paving the way for a potential change in power for the third time in Taiwan. Su’s attitude is an admirable model for other politicians.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), for his part, made sure he got in first, announcing ahead of the release of the DPP primary results that he would run for a second term on behalf of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Ma’s wording of the announcement was very similar to that used by the DPP, saying he would defend the nation’s sovereignty and dignity. So Ma made his move even before the DPP’s wounds, resulting from contention during the presidential primary, had a chance to heal.
What Tsai needs to do now is settle into her new role as the DPP’s presidential candidate. This is the first round of the election game and for the moment Ma has the advantage, but there are many more rounds yet to be played out. It is too early to tell who will take the prize in the end, but the media are already cheering and shouting from the sidelines, eager to have their say. As usual, some of the candidates’ supporters are more worried about the campaign than the candidates themselves.
The DPP primary, which was based on opinion polls, showed Tsai’s popularity at 42.5 percent against 35.04 percent for Ma, while Su got 41.15 percent against 33.79 percent for Ma. One would think from those results that Ma is lagging behind Tsai, but that is not necessarily the case. There can be a big difference between the ratings candidates get in opinion polls and the votes they garner on polling day.
Public opinion survey experts appearing on political talk shows point out that these figures can’t really predict the election’s outcome. For example, a recent opinion poll conducted by the Broadcasting Corp of China had public support for Ma at 36.35 percent, a little ahead of Tsai’s 34.48 percent, which is within the poll’s margin of error. Let us not forget that when former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was Taipei mayor, his approval rating was above 70 percent, but he still lost to Ma when he stood for re-election. That shows how undependable opinion polls can be, so the DPP should not get too excited about the recent poll results.
Whatever ground rules a political party lays down for its presidential primary, the contest is bound to strain relations between party members and the supporters of the different candidates. The important thing is to make sure that the wounds heal quickly once the poll is over, so that the party can present a united front against its rivals. In this respect, Ma has a big advantage because he is unchallenged as the KMT’s candidate and doesn’t have to deal with much finger-pointing from within his own party.
However, there is no need to be overly concerned about a grassroots party like the DPP. The party has had plenty of fierce internal disputes, but the wounds have always healed quite quickly. Politicians who are obsessed with power struggles eventually come to be treated with disdain.
Following her win in the DPP primary, I believe that Tsai, with her political wisdom and stature, will be able to humbly accept the various comments and words of advice, both positive and negative, that she received during her primary campaign. For example, some people think her campaign team was weaker than Su’s and that she is less efficient, so they say she should show vision and magnanimity by making Su her top adviser and bringing the party’s most capable people into her team. Some also advise her to try a “shadow Cabinet” approach to overcome difficulties and achieve success through collective thought and action.
The public is looking for someone with vision. People want to see a team in which tasks are assigned carefully and meticulously to lay out plans and put them into action. The problem with Ma and Tsai is they have too much in common. While their work styles may differ to some extent, they are both controversial. If Ma and Tsai go on as they are without making any changes, the gap between them will be pretty small as the election approaches. It will be a hard choice for voters, who would like to see some real change.
Many people think that holding presidential and legislative elections at the same time will be bad for the DPP, especially because bringing forward the date of the presidential election will deprive some young people of the chance to cast their first ballot.
However, there are still plenty of people who will reach the voting age of 20 before the twin elections, which will be held on Jan. 14.
Voters these days are more capable than ever of making their own minds up. Even firm adherents of the pan-blue and pan-green camps may shift their positions. The recent spat between Legislator Lo Shu-lei (羅淑蕾) and Legislator John Chiang (蔣孝嚴), who were both running for nomination as the KMT’s legislative candidate in Taipei’s Zhongshan-Songshan (中山-松山) electoral district, is a case in point.
The only real difference in next year’s election is that the presidential vote will be the main attraction, taking attention away from the legislative poll. Still, it won’t be hard for the pan-blue camp to win more than half the legislative seats. When you take away the party’s 16 safe seats and the 34 legislator-at-large seats, that leaves just 63 constituencies up for grabs, with more in the north than in the south.
Moreover, the tension surrounding the presidential election could spur more voters to take part in the legislative election, which should be good for the KMT’s prospects in that vote. Although the two main parties will plan their campaigns carefully and do anything they can to win, no one can predict the outcome with confidence. Besides, victory is not decided by wisdom alone and the unexpected can always happen.
The pan-blue and pan-green camps are both duty-bound to respect the democratic system. As moderate parties, they must do their best to win, but they must also accept the outcome, whatever it may be. As in any game of chance, those who place their bets must accept the risk of loss. Both parties have to present their policies to convince the public and the final outcome will be decided by the voters.
Lu I-ming is the former publisher and president of Taiwan Shin Sheng Daily News.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US