Since Vice President Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) announced that she will step aside to make way for a stronger vice presidential candidate in next year's presidential election, people from all sides have begun discussion who President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) might choose as his future running mate.
Due to pressure both inside and outside the DPP, Chen was forced to respond on the matter the next day, saying that it is not yet an issue as the ruling party has not yet started its nomination process.
Since the Taiwanese electorate is considered relatively stable, and there is no other internal or external variable that could affect the election situation, the media have viewed the running-mate issue as a key factor in the likely outcome of the election results. Opinion polls have included questions about a number of possible candidates.
But, is a running mate so important that he or she could completely change a party's prospects? Looking at past presidential elections both at home and abroad, I doubt it.
In order to complement his own roots in China, as well as to narrow the gap between northern and southern Taiwan, PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) deliberately chose PFP Vice Chairman Chang Chao-hsiung (張昭雄), who was born in Kaohsiung, as his running mate in the 2000 presidential election. Unfortunately for Soong, he did not get the support of pro-localization voters, and his vote tally in Kaohsiung in fact lagged far behind that of Chen.
Similarly, Chen picked Lu -- then Taoyuan County commissioner -- as his running mate, to attract votes in northern Taiwan. But he received the fewest votes in Taoyuan County of all three presidential candidates. The contribution of running mates is therefore self-evident.
In the 1988 US presidential election, many believed that Dan Quayle -- Republican candidate George Bush's running mate -- was too young and unsophisticated, and therefore should not be considered. They believed that Lloyd Bentsen -- Democratic candidate Michael Dukakis' running mate -- was experienced and enjoyed great popularity. But Bush was elected president, and Quayle, initially dismissed as a joke, accordingly became vice president.
Some believe in what has become known as the "earthworm theory" about the influence of running mates on election results. They believe that running mates are just like anglers' earthworms. Their sizes and weights may vary from one to another, but they are bait, pure and simple.
An angler may of course take the greatest care to choose the most attractive bait. But whether he can catch his fish eventually depends on his or her ability. In other words, the influence of running mates on the election outcome is insignificant.
I believe that voters' choices depend on the qualities, abilities and policies of presidential candidates. The "running mate effect" has now been exaggerated and politicized. No matter who Chen's running mate will be, please note that Chen and Lien are the leading actors in the upcoming presidential election. They are the helmsmen who will decide the nation's future direction. Let's put the spotlight on the two presidential candidates themselves.
Chiu Li-li is a Tainan City councilor.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS