For a multitude of reasons, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has, by nominating Deputy Legislative Speaker Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), put forward its weakest-ever presidential candidate.
According to a KMT- commissioned poll released on Wednesday last week, Hung has an 18 percent support rating, trailing People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) on 19 percent and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) 37 percent. For investors in the fortunes of the pan-blue camp: With only five months to go until the election, what action could be taken to counter such an unfavorable turn of events?
The political views of voters match a normal distribution curve, so during any single election, candidates must do all in their power to command the support of median voters.
Adopting the middle ground between left and right — between the opposing values of progressive and conservative schools of thought — is certainly not based upon the philosophical principal of the Confucian “golden mean.” On the contrary, it is based upon statistical theory. It is precisely because centrist voters represent majority public opinion that candidates — irrespective of their individual beliefs — often pretend to be all things to all people: This is the most commonly used method to perform well in an election.
The reality of politics is far too complex to be explained by simple academic theory: There are other factors at play that must also be taken into consideration. Not every candidate necessarily has winning as their goal. Some candidates use their candidacy as a political tool. Others join for the ride, interested only in competing rather than actually winning. Furthermore, normal behavior dictates that many people often select political commentary and analysis that fits with their preconceived ideas and beliefs, since this provides a feeling of comfort and they can avoid confronting uncomfortable truths.
Lastly, one should not view median voters through the prism of random statistical averages that places them precisely between the twin poles of left and right. It would be a mistake to believe that by occupying the middle ground, adopting an impartial stance and making reasonable accommodations, candidates will be able to gain the approval of more voters. In reality, political attitudes change as time goes by. A normal distribution curve can quickly become skewed.
Consider the issue of national recognition. According to a study conducted by the Election Study Center at National Chengchi University in 1992, 26 percent of respondents identified themselves as Chinese, 18 percent as Taiwanese and the remainder as possessing a dual identity. However, this year the numbers have changed to 3 percent of the population identifying themselves as Chinese and 59 percent as Taiwanese. Put another way, a little over 20 years ago, adopting a two-faced attitude to curry favor with the electorate was a winning strategy, but in today’s era of increased local consciousness, such a strategy would likely provoke a backlash from the electorate.
US attitudes toward homosexuality have undergone a similar transformation. During the 2004 presidential election, while searching for a policy to “fire up the base” and win a second term in office, then-US president George W. Bush planned statewide referendums to amend the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The aim was to motivate the Christian right to vote for him. This 11-year-old electoral trick has now been rendered totally ineffective, since states across the US were already passing laws that said homosexuals can marry before the US Supreme Court earlier this year said gay couples in the US have full marriage rights.
Following defeat to the Democratic Progressive Party in the 2000 presidential election — and faced with a rapidly growing local consciousness — the KMT attempted to adjust its image. At the following presidential election in 2004, Soong and former vice president Lien Chan (連戰), in displays of intense passion, knelt down and kissed the ground.
Four years later, in the 2008 election, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) declared: “Even if I were struck down and burned to ashes, I would still be Taiwanese.”
In comparison, following her nomination, Hung has loudly opposed independence as a sop to deep-blue voters, while even declaring that the Ministry of Education’s changes to the high-school curriculum do not go far enough. Hung has joined forces with Ma to criticize former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝). Driven by an nationalist vision of “greater China,” Hung and Ma refuse to admit that Taiwan was previously assimilated into the Japanese empire or the historical fact that Taiwanese previously identified themselves as Japanese subjects.
Hung’s policy of rapid unification might fire up the deep-blue KMT core, but it will fail to attract voters who sit in the middle of the unification-independence divide.
Why then would the KMT employ an electoral policy that flies in the face of common sense? Perhaps a sinister plot has been hatched. This would explain why Hung appears not to care about winning the election. Or perhaps this is her unique style as she struggles to balance reason with emotion. Developments of the election campaign need to be closely monitored and some time will reveal the answer.
Ivan Ho is a professor in the Department of Sociology at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Edward Jones
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