Who can offer Hope for the Future

Who can offer Hope for the Future
China Times editorial
translated by Bevin Chu
June 9, 2007

Frank Hsieh's announcement of his running mate must await the result of opinion polls. But this is probably only a way to allow everyone to save face. Su Tseng-chang has officially announced that he will not accept the vice presidential slot. Barring the unexpected, the Democratic Progressive Party will be endorsing a Hsieh/Yeh ticket. In other words, the ruling and opposition party tickets for the 2008 presidential race are pretty much set. Preliminary opinion polls suggest that a large part of the public is adopting a wait and see attitude.

The choice of running mates has long been a problem. The key is whether the candidate can affect the outcome of the election. The choice of presidential and vice presidential candidates offers all sorts of promises. It can create political momentum that leads to certain victory. In 2000, the Chen/Lu ticket offered the promise of gender equality. In 2004, the Lien/Soong ticket offered the promise of Pan Blue solidarity. Looking forward to 2008, the Blue vs. Green struggle is a whole new ball game. Lee, Chen, Lien, and Soong have determined Taiwan's political situation for the past six or seven years. In 2008 the will no longer be able to do so. What promises do a Hsieh/Yeh ticket or a Ma/Siew ticket offer? That is the question.

The Ma/Siew ticket was formed first. This ticket has provoked debate over the adoption of "ben tu" nativism and a potential Deep Blue backlash. But expert observers perceive these as secondary issues, as efforts at preemption. Pandering to nativism and ethnic identity has never been the Blue camp's strong suit. The Blue camp is not about to linger on a battlefield that is the Green camp's natural stomping ground. The promise that the Ma/Siew ticket hopes to offer is "good governance." This ticket came as a surprise, not entirely because of Siew's ideological path and political stance. Ma and Siew have different provincial backgrounds, but they duplicate each other's strengths more than they complement them. Both are technocrats and political appointees. Siew briefly held the post of party official and lawmaker. But his image as a financial and economic expert overshadows all else. This may well be the image this ticket aims to achieve.

If we look only at election considerations, this ticket is unpromising. Neither Ma nor Siew are charismatic speakers. Neither has the ability to inspire crowds during political rallies. On the other hand, such bland personalities also make it difficult for the opposition to create polarization. The promise of a Ma/Siew ticket is the return of the KMT responsible for Taiwan's economic miracle during the 70s and 80s, rather than the KMT burdened by allegations about illicit party assets and black gold or internecine power struggles. The voters most susceptible to such appeals are of course, older voters.

In contrast to the Ma/Siew ticket, the promise of a Hsieh/Yeh ticket is completely different. Hsieh and Yeh share the same ideology. Disagreements are unlikely to arise between them as they carry the Green banner into battle. Their differing backgrounds, meanwhile, complement each other. They promise the same gender equality as the Chen/Lu ticket. They also promise Hoklo/Hakka ethnic harmony. These are two promises that Su Tseng-chang could not offer as a running mate. Most importantly, a Hsieh/Yeh ticket offers the promise of a DPP that everyone is familiar with, the one that rebelled against KMT authority during the 80s and 90s, the one that promised democracy and reform, the one that continually met with political persecution, instead of a DPP burdened by an embarrassing record of incompetence and that descended swiftly into corruption after assuming power. Hsieh and Yeh each administered the southern Taiwan city of Kaohsiung, one after the other, defending this essential base for the DPP. Frank Hsieh has maintained relations that are neither too friendly nor too hostile toward Chen Shui-bian. He chose to cooperate with Yeh Chu-lan. He removed Chen Shui-bian's finger from the scales of power. He effectively drew a line between himself and Chen. The same is true of the promise for the Ma/Siew ticket for older generation voters.

Now we can look back and see why neither Ma nor Hsieh were eager to pick the most obvious running mates. The reason is simple. A Ma/Wang ticket or a Hsieh/Su ticket may have been a dream team in the eyes of some supporters. But those four would have fought over the presidential slot. Whoever settled for the vice presidential slot would have felt that he had knuckled under. Such a shotgun wedding between factions rather than candidates would not engender harmony. It would provoke fighting over spoils and struggles over power. The result would not be "one plus one equals more than two.' It would be "one minus one equals zero." Teaming Vincent Siew with Ma Ying-jeou, or Yeh Chu-lan Yu with Frank Hsieh, on the other hand, would not yield such negative results.

The DPP vice presidential running mate controversy may continue for quite some time, but the final result is unlikely to be a surprise. The problem has dragged on too long. What truly matters is whether the final choice of running mate can offer real hope for the future.

中時電子報
中國時報 　2007.07.09
誰能締造有願景的未來最重要
中時社論

儘管謝長廷表態還要等民調出爐才決定副手人選，但這應只是讓各方都有台階下的動作，在蘇貞昌日前正式宣布退出副手角逐之後，如果不出其他意外，民進黨應該就是「謝葉配」了。換言之，二○○八朝野陣營的對戰組合可以說大致已底定了，從民調初步的反映即可看出目前有不少比例的民眾仍選擇觀望，對這個兩組對戰組合是可展開初步的觀察了。

對朝野陣營而言，副手問題之所以會困擾那麼許久，關鍵即在於人選誰屬確實能牽動選局，特別是正副人選所塑造出的想像空間，可以營造一定的勝選氣勢，例如二 ○○○年的陳呂配即成功塑造了兩性共治的想像空間，而二○○四的連宋配即是塑造了泛藍大團結的想像空間。前瞻二○○八，對藍綠陣營而言某種程度上都是暫時歸零的一年，主導台灣政局六、七年之久的李扁連宋四人，某種程度上都不能再左右選局，因而謝葉配與馬蕭配究竟能營造怎樣的想像空間？是個饒富趣味的課題。

先看較早成局的馬蕭配，儘管這組人選最近一直繞著什麼本土論述、深藍反彈等話題繞，但明眼人都看得出，這些動作最多只是補強，甚至是在打預防針。本土亦或認同議題本來就不是藍營的強項，他們也不可能真的滯留在這個綠營擅長的戰場上等著挨打。馬蕭配真正所想要塑造的想像空間，應該就是「治理能力」！這組配對會在第一時間讓人感到意外，並不全是蕭的路線與立場，而是馬蕭兩人除了族群背景外，彼此的重疊性其實遠大於互補性，特別是他們兩人都是技術官僚與行政首長出身，蕭雖短暫擔任過黨職與立委，但財經首長的形象卻蓋過其他，而這或許就是這個組合最想要達成的效果。

純就選戰的考量而言，這個組合可以讓人期待地方其實並不多，馬蕭兩人口才其實都不佳，也都不是在造勢台上善於煽起群眾熱情的人物，但這種特質也同樣很難讓對手煽起對立的情緒。換言之，馬蕭所可能喚起的想像空間，或許是在一九七○﹣八○年代締造過經濟奇蹟的國民黨，而不是這幾年被黨產、黑金、內鬥所纏身的國民黨。當然對這種召喚能產生感覺的選民，很大一部分還是比較老世代的選民。

相較於馬蕭配，謝葉配所能召喚起的想像空間則完全不同。謝葉兩人在路線上沒有分歧，代表正綠旗出征也不會有爭議，而他們在背景上也確實能夠達到互補的效果，包括能夠延續陳呂配的「兩性共治」理念，還加上了閩客合作的「族群共榮」訴求，這兩點或許都是蘇貞昌所不及的。當然最重要的是，謝葉配所召喚起的想像空間，還是那個大家所最熟悉的民進黨，那個在一九八○﹣九○年代反抗國民黨權威、有民主與改革的論述能力、卻又不斷橫遭打壓與磨難的民進黨，而不是在執政後陷入政績難堪、沉淪貪腐的民進黨。謝葉兩人先後經營南台灣的高雄市，為民進黨守住了這個最關鍵的基地，謝長廷又一直與陳水揙維持著若即若離的關係，他選擇與葉菊蘭組合，不僅破了陳水扁操縱平衡槓桿的棋局，也有效的與扁達成若干區隔。當然，與馬蕭配一樣，能夠燃起這種想像空間的，也還是比較老世代的選民吧！

當然，現在也可以重新回頭看看，為何馬謝兩人都不樂意他們早先最被矚目的組合。理由其實也不複雜，馬王配或者謝蘇配，或許在部分支持者眼中是勝選的夢幻組合，但問題是他們四人都是爭取「一哥」的人選，擔任副手可能都自認是「屈就」。這種心理動機將使得這種強行送做堆的組合，在「派系結盟」的意義上遠大於「人選搭配」，它所產生的化學變化很可能不會是肝膽相照，而是權力分贓甚至是權力衝突，屆時沒有產生一加一大於二的效果事小，若是產生相互抵消的效應可能更糟。而蕭萬長之於馬英九，或是葉菊蘭之於謝長廷，都是不可能產生這種疑慮的。

民進黨的副手爭議可能還會吵一陣子，但最後結論應不致再讓人意外，而這個問題也確實沒必要拖太久。畢竟接下來怎麼讓已確定的人選搭配，創造出富前瞻性的想像空間，恐怕才該是重點。