To Win Back Hearts and Minds, Confront the Cause of Defeat

To Win Back Hearts and Minds, Confront the Cause of Defeat
China Times News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
December 8, 2009

By now just about everyone has held forth on the results of the just concluded County and Municipal Elections. Regardless of what their conclusions might be, there is one fact no one can deny. The election results show the KMT being put to a severe test. By contrast, the DPP is gradually turning the corner. Voters have used their ballots to issue the KMT a little warning, and to offer the DPP a little encouragement. This means the KMT's situation has not deteriorated to where it should be utterly despondent, and the DPP's situation has not improved to where it should break out the champagne. This was merely a mid-term exam. The finals are yet to come!

As President Ma himself concedes, the KMT, including himself, need to engage in "self-examination." But what is it they need to examine? Forget such weasel words as "an unfavorable political climate." Forget such technical quibbles as "an inappropriate nomination strategy." Those who lose elections should never offer excuses for why they lost. If you lost, you lost. If you are willing to admit, "We didn't do a very good job," then you must find out exactly what you did wrong. If all one does following an election is demand that the campaign committee hold a post-mortem and issue a report based on 20/20 hindsight, followed by "business as usual," then all we can say is the voters have given you fair warning, but apparently their warning wasn't painful enough.

Those attuned to public opinion know one must never underestimate the significance of local elections. Consider elections on Taiwan over the past several decades. The quadrennial county and municipal elections are often subtle leading indicators. During the 1997 county and municipal elections the DPP was in the opposition. Yet it swept the major county and municipality races throughout Taiwan. The ruling Kuomintang was humiliated. It was left holding Hualien, Taitung and the outer islands. The results of those elections foretold the first change in ruling parties in 2000. Similarly, during the 2005 county and municipal elections, the Kuomintang was in the opposition. Northern and central Taiwan went from Green to Blue. The ruling Democratic Progressive Party was left holding seven counties and cities in southern Taiwan. The results of those elections foretold the second change in ruling parties in 2008. In other words, we may not believe in historical inevitability. But history nevertheless provides us with clear lessons. Voters on Taiwan will not make endless allowances for any political party, Blue or Green!

President Ma and his team have worked hard over the past year. They made a real effort to do well. But in politics one never gets an A for effort. Politics is all about public perception and public sentiment. It's true that the past year has been unkind to the ruling administration. The price of raw materials has skyrocketed due to global inflation. Global financial turmoil has left us with a weak global economy. Global climate change has led to hurricanes and flooding. Taiwan has been subjected to unprecedented traumas. These, perhaps, are what President Ma meant by "an unfavorable political climate." But he must not underestimate the wisdom of the voters. Leaders the world over have all been coping with "an unfavorable political environment" for the past year. Many countries have yet to emerge from their crises. But many leaders have met with public approval. Put bluntly, blaming "an unfavorable political environment" is merely shirking one's responsibility. President Ma must be vigilant, especially since his halo has dimmed so rapidly from little more than a year ago. Even party members who have violated party discipline consider him a pushover -- someone they can pick on.

President Ma's reputation took a serious hit following the 8/8 Floods earlier this year. They revealed major problems with his administration's decision-making process. Many policies that should have been aggressively promoted long ago, were repeatedly withdrawn due to fear of the public reaction. Many controversial policies were repeatedly rejected or never presented to the public for discussion. The decisions were all made behind closed doors. As a result the opposition has monopolized the debate over policy. The Ma administration has lost even the rudimentary ability to defend its policies. Take the recent election for example. The opposition repeatedly demagogued the issue of U.S. beef imports. The ruling party knew it could not resist pressure from the U.S. It also knew there would be a backlash from the grass-roots. South Korea was the clearest example. So why did it allow the worst possible scenario to play out? This was a major policy decision. Yet it was made behind closed doors, by a handful of people in the national security council. The administration failed to coordinate with the KMT. Even relevant departments within the Executive Yuan were left out of the loop. Forget about communicating with the public. Is it any surprise that a closed decision-making and governance method such as this would provoke widespread criticism? Many commentators have blasted the Ma administration for being "arrogant" and "full of themselves." This is a perfect example.

Perhaps the Ma administration should be grateful. This election was merely a flesh wound. No bones were broken. No tendons were severed. The damage inflicted is manageable. Voters used their ballots to send the administration a warning. They left the administration a chance to do better. The administration has one chance to make things right. It had better realize there will not be a second.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2009.12.08
社論－坦然面對挫敗 才能贏回民心
本報訊

不論各界選擇多少角度去評論剛結束的縣市長投票結果，有一項基本的事實或許是任誰都不會否認的：這次選舉結果顯示，國民黨執政氣勢正面臨更嚴酷的考驗，而相對的民進黨則正逐漸走出谷底。簡單的說，選民用選票，向國民黨傳遞了若干警告，也給了民進黨若干鼓勵，這意味國民黨還不至於慘到要懷憂喪志的地步，民進黨也還稱不上可以從此歡欣鼓舞，畢竟，這只是期中測驗，真正的大考，還在後頭呢！

正如同馬總統自己都坦承，包括他本人及國民黨都需要「再檢討」。重點是，檢討什麼？不要再提什麼「大環境不佳」的空泛語言，也別再陷入「提名策略不當」的技術細節，選輸的人永遠不該找理由替自己辯護，輸了就是輸了，如果願意承認「我們的確做不好」，那就還必須找出「究竟那裡做不好」，對不對？如果選後的檢討，只是責求輔選單位開個會，寫篇「後見之明」的檢討報告，接下來還是一切照舊，那麼也只能說，選民所給的警告，還不夠有讓人痛的效果。

對民意走向敏感的人都清楚，永遠不能低估地方選舉所透露的訊息。打開近十數年的台灣選舉史，每四年一度的縣市長選舉，很微妙經常扮演著領先指標的角色。一九九七年的縣市長選舉，民進黨以在野之身，幾乎席捲了全臺主要縣市長席次，讓執政的國民黨難堪地退守到後山的花東與外島，那次選舉結果也預告了二○○○ 年首度的政黨輪替；二○○五年的縣市長選舉，國民黨同樣以在野之身，讓北台灣與中台灣全面綠地變藍天，中央執政的民進黨則退守到南台七縣市，那次選舉結果也同樣預告了二○○八年的二度政黨輪替。換言之，我們縱然不必迷信歷史會有什麼規律，但最起碼歷史提供了清楚的教訓：台灣的選民永遠不會刻意善待藍綠任何一個政黨！

我們當然知道，馬總統乃至執政團隊過去一年確實做得很辛苦，也確實很想把事情做好，但政治治理這檔事，從來不是「只問耕耘」的事業，它永遠都要在乎人民感受。沒錯，過去一年多的執政運勢確實不佳，全球原料飆漲所帶起的通貨膨漲、全球金融風暴所釀成的景氣衰退、乃至全球氣候變遷所造成的風災與水患等，都讓台灣接續受到空前的重創，這些因素或許就是馬總統所謂的「大環境」，但請千萬別低估選民的智慧，全球的領袖過去一年多誰沒遭逢「大環境」的挑戰？不少國家還不是挺了過來，許多領袖也照樣贏得民意的肯定，講白一點，歸咎「大環境」只是卸責的藉口。馬總統最該深自警惕的應該是：何以才一年多一點，昔日超高的人氣光環，竟然褪色得這麼快？連黨內違紀的同志都認為他「好欺負」！

其實，早從今年八八水災後馬總統聲望全面崩跌以來，已經透露了馬政府的決策模式出現了很大問題，若干早該積極推動的政策，一再因為懼怕民意反彈而處處綁手綁腳；而若干預期爭議頗高的政策，卻又一再閉門決策，拒絕甚至根本忽略與民意對話，結果不僅政策論述舞台被在野黨全面篡奪，連最起碼的政策辯護能力都逐步喪失。以這次選戰中被在野黨一再炒作的美國牛肉進口為例，執政黨明明知道根本擋不住美國的壓力，也明明知道基層民意肯定會反彈，韓國先前鮮活的例證已擺在那裡，怎麼還是一切任其朝最壞的劇本上演？這麼重大的決策，就讓國安單位幾個人閉門操盤，不僅事前未做任何黨政協調，行政團隊相關部門也全在狀況外，更不必提什麼與民意做好先期溝通了，這種封閉的決策與治理模式，會陷入全面挨打的境地，豈不是全在預料中？許多論者過去批評馬政府「傲慢」、「自我感覺良好」云云，這不就是個現成的例證？

或許馬政府還真該慶幸，這次的選舉結果，只是傷到皮肉，尚未深及筋骨，基本上還算是可控制範圍內的挫敗，選民只是用選票傳達了警告，但還預留了不少調整與再修正的空間，但機會也只有這一次了，下一回請真的記住：不可能再有任何閃躲與僥倖的空間了。