Is the PFP Blowing Smoke or Clearing the Air?

Is the PFP Blowing Smoke or Clearing the Air?
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 11, 2011

Summary: The first wave of PFP nominations includes candidates who may be able to unseat KMT candidates in their own electoral districts. But most observers do not believe the PFP candidates themselves can get elected. The KMT and PFP candidates can only ensure mutual defeat and a DPP victory. Voters will conclude that a vote for the PFP is a vote for the DPP. The PFP may attempt to cloud the issue. But voters will resist any split. The opposite may happen. As the smoke clears, the PFP may be marginalized. The PFP can cloud the issue, or it can allow the smoke to clear. But the fact remains, the PFP is in a no-win situation.

Full Text below:

Yesterday James Soong officially announced the first wave of People First Party (PFP) legislative candidates. Is the power struggle between the KMT and the PFP generating a Fog of War? Or is this a sign that the smoke is finally clearing?

James Soong and the PFP may find themselves in a dilemma. The PFP after all, seeks primarily Blue Camp votes, If the PFP escalates its confrontation with the KMT, it may anger Pan Blue voters, making it difficult for PFP candidates to win support. On the other hand, if it keeps a low profile, it will have no issues to run on, This too will make it difficult for PFP candidates to attract votes. In other words, the People First Party may have entered the fray. But it is caught on the horns of a dilemma. Neither raising a ruckus nor laying low will enable it to win votes.

Soong's recent reentry into the political arena, was initially driven by emotion. The immediate reaction of voters was also predominantly emotional. But once the election begins in earnest, Soong will find it difficult to stir up voter sentiment. The more he stirs the pot, the more he will provoke resentment. The more he will inspire voter doubts and fears. The public may become indifferent. Emotions are fleeting, In the long run, candidates must rely on rational discussion and persuasion. The PFP is no exception.

PFP candidates raised the possibility of running for office. They precipitated a tempest in a teapot. But less than a week later, the smoke was already beginning to clear. At first, the People First Party openly denounced the "Ma/King establishment," saying it had "wreaked havoc upon the nation." Two days later however, they assured voters that they firmly "supported Ma's cross-Strait policy and foreign policy," and that they firmly "supported President Ma's reelection bid." This of course raises a question. Why would the PFP firmly "support" the reelection bid of a president who had "wreaked havoc upon the nation?" The PFP wanted to stir up voter sentiment. But voter sentiment invariably settles back down. As we can see, the PFP is caught in a dilemma.

In fact, when the PFP officially announced its candidates, it may have calmed voter sentiment. The PFP "supports Ma's cross-strait policy." The DPP promises voters that "if we return to power, we will continue the previous administration's cross-Strait policy." The PFP and the DPP are unable to find fault with President Ma's cross-Strait policy. Therefore in response to election season, they are attempting to cloud the issues. But given the Big Picture, the more they attempt to cloud the issues, the faster the smoke will dissipate, and the clearer the situation will become.

The PFP touts James Soong as a man of ability. The implication is that President Ma is "incompetent." It argues that President Ma's cross-Strait policy deserves support. But Ma is "incompetent." Therefore the PFP is reluctant to support President Ma's reelection bid. Therefore the KMT must be deprived of its absolute majority in the legislature, and the PFP must be allowed to play the role of a "deciding minority." But this contradictory and feeble argument does not hold water. If President Ma is that "incompetent," how can we possibly support his re-election? If the KMT loses its absolute majority in the legislature, how will that address the problem of President Ma's alleged "incompetence?" Suppose the People First Party is elected to the legislature? Consider the negative precedent set by the "Chen/Soong Meeting." Can they really gain peoples' trust? Besides, Ma's record may be unsatisfactory in many ways. His restrained style may come across as stiff and irresolute. But to characterize it as "incompetent" is uncalled for. The fact is: when President Ma assumed office, the situation on Taiwan was the worst it has been in two decades. Since he assumed office, the situation, in many ways, is the best it has been in two decades. Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian loved making political waves. They wreaked havoc upon the nation. Yet their conduct is characterized as "capable." On the other hand, Ma Ying-jeou's introverted, restrained, and reserved style is characterized as "incompetent."

President Ma does deserve to be reprimanded in certain areas. But the Ma administration led the nation out of the financial tsunami. It enabled the two sides to proceed down a win/win road toward "peaceful development." It helped people escape the nightmare of endless battles over reunification vs. independence, The Ma administration has been free of corruption scandals, It has restored judicial independence, One hundred and seventeen nations now grant the ROC visa-free treatment. The diplomatic truce has saved hundreds of billions of hard earned ROC taxpayer dollars. Consider the recent stock market crash and U.S. debt, Cabinet members such as Sean Chen may lack charisma. But when push comes to shove, they are far from "incompetent." The public must not equate fast-talking snake oil salesmen such as Chen Shui-bian and Frank Hsieh with "men of ability." It must not naively characterize mild-mannered Ma administration officials such as Sean Chen as "incompetent." The People First Party must not parrot everything the DPP says. This is an issue that can be easily obscured. In the end, the smoke will clear and the truth will emerge.

The first wave of PFP nominations includes candidates who may be able to unseat KMT candidates in their own electoral districts. But most observers do not believe the PFP candidates themselves can get elected. The KMT and PFP candidates can only ensure mutual defeat and a DPP victory. Voters will conclude that a vote for the PFP is a vote for the DPP. The PFP may attempt to cloud the issue. But voters will resist any split. The opposite may happen. As the smoke clears, the PFP may be marginalized. The PFP can cloud the issue, or it can allow the smoke to clear. But the fact remains, the PFP is in a no-win situation.

親民黨下水：攪渾或沉澱？
【聯合報╱社論】
2011.08.11 02:31 am

宋楚瑜昨天正式公布親民黨第一波區域立委提名名單。這究竟是宣告國親兩黨的爭鬥自此愈攪愈渾，或反而從此進入了沉澱期？

今後，宋楚瑜及親民黨的操作可能陷於兩難處境。畢竟親民黨追求的主要仍是泛藍票源，若欲升高與國民黨的衝突，可能引發泛藍選民反感，不易吸引選票；反之，倘如放低姿態，不能造成話題，亦難吸引選票。也就是說，親民黨下了水，但攪渾不易，沉澱不利，極可能進入清濁兩難的困境。

宋楚瑜進場，當初主要是憑著一股情緒；而選民當下的反應也主要是出自一股情緒。但真正進入選舉流程後，宋想攪動情緒不易，愈攪選民的疑懼及反感愈大，社會的情緒即可能轉而趨向沉澱。因為，情緒是一時的，續航力仍須仰賴理智的論述與說服力；在這一方面，卻似乎看不出親民黨有另樹一幟，自成一家之言的條件。

其實，親民黨在掀起參選話題後，不到一個星期就從「攪渾期」進入了「沉澱期」。一開始，親民黨有人公開斥罵「馬金體制，禍國殃民」；但是，兩天後就統一口徑為「支持馬總統的兩岸政策及外交政策」，並「支持馬總統連任」。試問：親民黨如何主張「支持」一名「禍國殃民」的總統連任？由此即可見它想要攪動的選民情緒，若與勢必漸趨沉澱的選民情緒相對照，其間確實存有操作上的矛盾。

其實，親民黨正式提名後，或許有使渾濁的情勢趨於沉澱的可能性。如今，在兩岸政策方面，親民黨「支持馬總統的兩岸政策」，民進黨則稱「若再執政將延續前朝兩岸政策」；而馬總統的兩岸政策，倘若親民黨及民進黨皆難以搖撼，經由選季的激盪，整個大局即應當不是愈攪愈渾，而可能是漸趨沉澱。

另一個話題是親民黨標榜宋楚瑜是有能力的人，用以對照馬總統之「無能」。親民黨的邏輯似乎是：馬總統的兩岸政策是應當支持的，但因馬總統「無能」，所以雖支持馬總統連任，卻應當讓國民黨在國會不過半，由親民黨來扮演「關鍵的少數」。然而，這樣矛盾又脆弱的論述似乎不易立足：倘若馬總統已「無能」至此地步，豈能支持其連任？而若使國民黨失去國會多數，難道就是治療馬總統「無能」的藥方？而親民黨若進入國會，以「扁宋會」的歷史紀錄言，又如何能獲得國人之信任？何況，馬英九的治理績效固有諸多未能盡如人意之處，但他的那種相對內斂的風格，縱似稍欠霸氣及略顯生硬，但若指其「無能」，恐亦有失公允。事實則是：馬總統接任時，台灣可謂處於二十年來最惡劣的情勢，但他接任迄今，在諸多領域卻堪謂是二十年來最佳狀態。為何如李登輝、陳水扁那般興風作浪的領袖是「有能力」，但馬英九這種內斂自制含蓄者就是「無能」？

馬總統確有諸多可以求全責備之處，但馬政府帶領國人通過金融海嘯的衝擊、使兩岸走上「和平發展」互惠雙贏之路、引導國人跳脫日日統獨惡鬥的噩夢、馬團隊中未見貪腐醜聞、司法獨立已告體現，且除了完成一一七國免簽證外，因外交休兵而節省的人民血汗錢恐以千億元計；即以近日美債股災言，像陳?這樣的閣員，平日雖不惹眼，但要緊時刻以具體表現證明絕非「無能」；國人不能將陳水扁、謝長廷那種將整個國家置於舌尖翻滾者稱為「有能力」，卻將馬團隊中如陳?這種素樸的典型謂為「無能」，因而親民黨也就不必如此人云亦云了。因為，這也是一個不易攪渾的題目，最後必趨沉澱。

再者，從親民黨首波提名名單看，其中或有足以拉下同選區國民黨參選者，但一般認為尚無自己當選的實力，其結果即是鷸蚌相爭，民進黨得利，此一情勢將使選民認為投親民黨就是投民進黨。面對這種氛圍，親民黨的手法若趨向攪渾，選民會抗拒撕裂；反之，若聽其沉澱，親民黨又可能被邊緣化。在攪渾與沉澱之間，親民黨的操作大不易。