Race to the Bottom Election Campaign: Alarm Bells for Taiwan's Democracy

Race to the Bottom Election Campaign: Alarm Bells for Taiwan's Democracy
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 2, 2014

Executive Summary: The Taipei mayorship has long been regarded as a stepping stone to the presidency. Recently however, the Taipei mayoral race has turned into a "race to the bottom." Television and newspaper reports hardly ever report anything good about Sean Lien and Wen-Je Ko. This leaves Taipei citizens more anxious than ever. For Sean Lien and Wen-Je Ko, whoever can look into the voters' hearts, will immediately remove himself from the current "race to the bottom." He should speak plainly about how he intends to govern Taipei. He should lead the public towards a happy and prosperous life. He should win the hearts of the voters.


Full Text Below:

The Taipei mayorship has long been regarded as a stepping stone to the presidency. Recently however, the Taipei mayoral race has turned into a "race to the bottom." Television and newspaper reports hardly ever report anything good about Sean Lien and Wen-Je Ko. This leaves Taipei citizens more anxious than ever. Who will win on November 29? No one can be certain. What is certain is that Ko voters will probably feel little peace of mind, and Lien voters are unlikely to feel much confidence in their candidate.

Many people are voting for Lien, not because they like Sean Lien, but because they cannot accept a blustering, pompous, and sexist Wen-Je Ko. They are afraid that someone like him would be a disaster for Taipei. Those who are voting for Wen-Je Ko do not necessarily believe Wen-Je Ko will be a competent mayor of Taipei. They may simply hate Sean Lien because he represents wealth and privilege.

This election should have been about choosing the best mayor for Taipei. Instead it has become about preventing the worst candidate from becoming mayor for Taipei. Ko has unwittingly become the head of Sean Lien's campaign committee. Lien has unwittingly helped Ko gain votes. Voters are shaking their heads and sighing, wondering how the capital city mayoral election ever came to this?

Past Taipei mayoral elections were not like this. Take former Taipei Mayor Chen Shui-bian, who later became president. Compare him to Ma Ying-jeou, his rival for the mayorship of Taipei. Some voters hated Chen and voted for Ma. Some voters hated Ma and voted for Chen. But most people voted for Chen or Ma because they wanted to, because they believed one or the other would be the best mayor for Taipei. Some were even proud of their vote.

Chen Shui-bian was a star legislator. His interpellations were incisive. He came from a category three impoverished household. Ma Ying-jeou was a Minister of Justice with the courage of his convictions. He never spoke ill of others. His style was more palatable to middle class Taipei voters. These two were political superstars. Even Hau Lung-bin and Frank Hsieh, the loser, or Su Tseng-chang, all held high office. Voters who supported them believed for the most part that they would do a good job if they won. Those perceived as spoilers, Wang Chien-hsuan and James Soong, received few votes. This was not because their ability to govern was in doubt, but because the balance of power among the political parties convinced voters that Ma Ying-jeou was likely to win. Therefore they voted for Ma Ying-jeou.

The election for mayor of the capital has now become an appalling "race to the bottom." What other places are like this? The answer is, give other cities, including New Taipei, Taoyuan, Taichung, Tainan, and Kaohsiung, where all the candidates seem to have been "spirited away." All the news about the Taipei mayoral election has been bad news, but at least there is news, The other five cities are not even being covered. Never mind counties and municipalities outside the six major metropolises.

This shows that democratic elections on Taiwan now face a structural crisis that requires soul-searching by both the ruling and opposition parties, as well as the media and the public.

First of all, the guiding principle of every candidate's campaign committee, in every county and municipality across the island, appears to be "avoid all press coverage." This guiding principle has led to a second guiding principle, "make sure your opponent gets plenty of press coverage." The reason is simple. Any media coverage is bad. Good news is bad news, at least for viewer ratings. Bad news is good news, at least for viewer ratings. Good news does not get reported. Only bad news attracts the spotlight. No wonder campaign committees hope that their own candidate remains hidden in the shadows, and their opponent gets caught in the glare of the klieg lights.

Secondly, this sort of "bad news is good news" norm calls for media soul-searching. Even more importantly, people have lost faith in politicians. All they feel for politics is revulsion or indifference. This is something that all politicians and political parties should reflect upon. More than a few political superstars in the past have been lionized by the voters then swept into office. Have their political records affirmed voter faith? Or have they left voters bitterly disillusioned? Voters have repeatedly lionized candidates and held out high hopes for them, only to be repeatedly disappointed in the end. It is not difficult to understand why they would become deeply skeptical. Any good news about the candidates and their first thought is likely to be, "Here it comes again, more lionization. Spare me."

Say an electric fan is broken. You take it to the appliance repair shop a hundred times for repair. But it never gets restored to working order. One day, you take it to a local snack bar for repair. This seems nonsensical in the extreme. But after a hundred disappointments it may seem like a rational choice. Wen-Je Ko and Sean Lien are political novices. They have generated a political wind, one akin to sending one's fan to the snack bar for repair. But if the appliance repair shop cannot fix the fan, one should not expect much from the snack bar.

Third, on top of voter skepticism, the political parties have failed to cultivate new talent. The mayorship of the capital city is an important position. Yet the candidates fielded by the blue and green camps are novices with almost no municipal level political experience. People cannot help wondering what the ruling and opposition parties have been doing for the past few years? 

This may be worrisome, but it is what the year end Taipei mayoral election has come to. No matter how disgusted one might feel, one must face the facts. From a pessimistic perspective, one may not be able to vote for the best candidate. One can only refuse to vote for the worst candidate. Consider this election a costly lesson. The price paid must not be in vain. The ruling and opposition parties, as well as people across the country, must engage in soul searching. Political talent must be cultivated. The political culture must be reformed to inspire public confidence. Taiwan's democratic politics must be rehabilitated. We must restore the core value of democratic elections.  We must elect the wise and the able.

For Sean Lien and Wen-Je Ko, whoever can look into the voters' hearts, will immediately remove himself from the current "race to the bottom." He should speak plainly about how he intends to govern Taipei. He should lead the public towards a happy and prosperous life. He should win the hearts of the voters.

社論－扣分選戰是台灣民主警訊
2014年10月02日 04:09
本報訊

向來被視為「總統養成所」的台北市長選舉，變成一場比賽失分的「扣分大戰」，電視新聞裡、報紙版面上，幾乎看不到連勝文和柯文哲的正面新聞，台北市民空前焦慮，因為11月29日那天，誰當選也許還沒有人說得準，但可以確定的是，選柯的人恐怕不覺得心安理得，投連的人也不會理直氣壯。

許多人之所以投連，不是因為喜歡連勝文，而是沒有辦法接受一個口出狂言、目中無人、歧視女性的柯文哲，他們擔心，這樣的人當選，是台北市的大災難；投柯文哲的人，也未必相信柯文哲會是稱職的台北市長，可能只是單純討厭連勝文的權貴標籤。

於是，一場本應是選最優的台北市長選舉，變成防最爛當選的爛戲，柯變成了連的頭號助選員；連變成了柯的王牌加分機。選民們看得搖頭嘆氣，首都市長選舉，怎會演變至如此田地？

過去的台北市長選舉，並非如此。以後來分別當上總統的前台北市長陳水扁和馬英九為例。其角逐台北市長寶座時，雖然也有一些因討厭扁而投馬，或因為討厭馬而投扁的人在，但大多數的人在投扁或投馬時，是打從心底認為，他們會是稱職的台北市長，甚至為自己投下的一票感到驕傲。

陳水扁是明星立委，問政犀利、三級貧戶苦讀出身；馬英九是堅持理念的法務部長，口不出惡言的風格更符合台北市中產階級的胃口。不說這兩位超級政治明星，即便是郝龍斌，乃至於落選者謝長廷、蘇貞昌，也都歷任政治上要職，投他們的選民，多半也都相信他們當選台北市長後會有好的表現。就算是被視為陪榜或攪局的王建煊與宋楚瑜，得票不高，並不是因為治理能力被否定，而是政黨政治的結構以及選民認為比較起來還是喜歡馬英九多一些，所以票投馬英九。

首都市長進入了慘不忍睹的「比爛模式」，其他的地方又如何呢？包括新北、桃園、台中、台南、高雄的其他五都，似乎都進入了「神隱模式」，台北市長選舉雖然都是爛新聞，但至少還有新聞，其他五都則幾乎連版面都沒有，更不要說六都以外的其他縣市了。

這透露了台灣的民主選舉，出現了結構性的警訊，需要朝野政黨、媒體與民眾一起省思。

首先，這場選戰，全國各縣市各陣營候選人的最高指導原則似乎都變成了「努力不讓自己上新聞」，而這個最高指導原則，則演化出第二原則，就是「努力讓對手上新聞」。道理很簡單，現在的媒體氛圍傾向負面，好新聞是爛（收視率）新聞，爛新聞是好（收視率）新聞。正面新聞上不了版面，只有負面新聞才能吸引鎂光燈，無怪乎各陣營的選戰主軸就愈來愈清楚：我神隱、你上報。

其次，這種負面新聞當道的文化，除了媒體要自我檢討外，更重要的原因是民眾對政治人物失去了信心，對政治只剩下惡感或冷感，這一點是所有參與政治的政治人物及其所屬的政黨都要共同反省的。過去多少明星級的政治人物，在受到選民英雄式的擁戴當選後，其治理表現是讓選民認為深慶得人還是所託非人呢？如果一次又一次對英雄的翹首企盼，換來的是一次又一次的無奈失望，就不難理解會出現一種心情制約：只要看到對候選人的正面新聞，就會想：「又在造神，少來！」

就像家裡的電風扇壞了，你送到電器行修了一百次都修不好，有一天，你改送到小吃店修電扇，這看起來無厘頭至極的行為，卻是經歷一百次失望後，再理性不過的選擇，柯文哲與連勝文颳起的素人政治風，就是另一種把電風扇送小吃店修理的無奈反應。只是電器行修不好的電扇，送小吃店也不必有太多的期待。

第三，除了不被選民信任，這也反映了各政黨人才培養的嚴重斷層，首都市長是何其重要的職務，到最後，藍綠推出的代表，卻都是幾無政治歷練的市政小白兔。讓人不禁要問，過去幾年朝野政黨在幹什麼？

不管再憂心，年底的選舉尤其是台北市長選舉，已經是長成現在這個樣子了，再無奈也得面對，從消極的角度來說，投不出最好的，也只能退一萬步不要選出最爛的，就當這次選舉我們得繳一筆昂貴的學費。但學費不能白繳，朝野政黨、全國民眾，都得好好深思，從政治人才養成、政治文化重塑到人民信心重建，要如何進行台灣民主政治的復建工作，找回民主選舉「選賢與能」的核心價值。

對連勝文與柯文哲兩位候選人而言，誰能看清楚選民的心，立刻擺脫「扣分賽」的迷思，說清楚要如何治理台北市、帶領市民邁向更幸福繁榮的生活，一定會贏得選民的心。