While Taipei mayoral hopefuls independent Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) and Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate Sean Lien (連勝文) have voiced consent on holding a debate, it seems that Lien is somehow insincere about his willingness to engage in a debate and reluctant to face voters directly, making it questionable that he would be a good, responsive mayor if elected.
Since earlier this month, Ko has been challenging Lien to a debate on their respective policy platforms, and while Lien quickly agreed to it, his campaign executive director Alex Tsai (蔡正元) has stipulated many conditions for the debate, which seems to be a de facto rejection of Ko’s invitation.
When Ko first asked his KMT rival to debate policy with him, Tsai said the debate should focus on women’s issues and that the host of the debate had to be a woman, since, at the time, Ko was at the center of some controversies for remarks he made that were criticized as sexist.
It is true that gender issues are important, but it does not make sense at all that Lien would accept Ko’s challenge to debate policy ideas, then stipulate that “by the way, the debate topic should be about women,” not to mention that whether the host is a man or a woman is totally irrelevant.
So, although Lien said “yes” to Ko’s proposal, the prospect has since faded in light of the conditions that Lien’s camp put forth.
Nevertheless, Ko continued to repeatedly propose the idea, and a second opportunity arose when representatives from the two camps met to negotiate details of the debate. However, the negotiation did not go smoothly, because Lien’s camp insisted that the debate involve multiple cross-examinations and rebuttals between the candidates, but rejected the idea of taking questions from civic groups or voters, while Ko’s camp said it believed that responding to questions from voters would be essential.
Although the dispute may seem irrelevant, it is significantly symbolic.
A mayor is elected — at least theoretically — because voters believe that the person can solve their problems and improve the lives of the city’s residents.
Hence, it is very important for a candidate to face voters directly, take their questions, respond to them and show voters what solutions there are to the problems troubling them, as well as presenting a vision for the city’s future.
A mayoral candidate’s ideas and policy proposals for a city can be well demonstrated while answering questions from civic groups or voters. When a question-and-answer session takes place during a debate, voters get the opportunity to hear clear responses to their queries from all competing candidates and make comparisons, which is very helpful when casting a ballot at a polling station.
Although it is equally important for the two candidates to challenge and question each other in a debate, this happens almost every day. Whenever Ko makes a comment, whether it is a policy proposal or criticism of Lien, the media take the comment to Lien and ask for his response. Such “crossfire” has been going on since the day both candidates decided to run in the election, and therefore it is not as important for them to have multiple exchanges during the debate as it is for them to answer questions from the public.
If Lien is reluctant to take questions from voters now, when he is in the midst of soliciting their support, it is hard to imagine that he will be willing to listen to and respond to Taipei residents if he is elected.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS