Underestimate Undeclared Voters at Your Own Peril

Underestimate Undeclared Voters at Your Own Peril
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
October 22, 2014

Executive Summary: The nine in one elections are less than 40 days away. The most widely anticipated political debate of the elections should already have taKon place. But the word is Taipei City mayoral candidates Sean Lien and Wen-Je Ko could not reach an agreement on the debate format, therefore it has been cancelled. Taipei citizens will probably not be able to evaluate the two political camps' campaign platforms until November. Taipei citizens may have to wait to see the two candidates engage in open political dialogue. If so, it would be a first in Taipei's mayoral election history.

Full Text below:

The nine in one elections are less than 40 days away. The most widely anticipated political debate of the elections should already have taKon place. But the word is Taipei City mayoral candidates Sean Lien and Wen-Je Ko could not reach an agreement on the debate format, therefore it has been cancelled. Taipei citizens will probably not be able to evaluate the two political camps' campaign platforms until November. Taipei citizens may have to wait to see the two candidates engage in open political dialogue. If so, it would be a first in Taipei's mayoral election history.

We are deeply disappointed with this development. After all, the capital city election is the highlight of the nine in one elections. It has the highest priority. Most significantly of all, both the ruling and opposition camp candidates are "virgins." Neither has any political record that voters can refer to. What's worse, both candidates have waged negative campaigns since the campaign began. Spittle wars to the other candidate have overshadowed positive agendas. Just what kind of government can these two candidates offer citizens of Taipei? That has never been clearly explained, A political debate is just such an opportunity. Unfortunately the two candidates have made such a debate impossible.

One thing is particularly unacceptable. According to news reports, the main reason the debate is not going ahead is technical. Apparently the two sides' schedules conflict. The Ko camp demands a town hall forum style debate. Sean Lien demands a one on one policy debate, an interactive policy debate with cross-examinations. As a result, the two sides have failed to reach an agreement. Both camps have dug in their heels. Onlookers are confused. What possible advantages or disadvantages can there be for the two candidates? They cannot tell.

For example, Wen-Je Ko has a modicum of eloquence. Why is he so afraid of a cross-examination? If the two cross-examine each other, Sean Lien would not necessarily get the better of him. By the same token, why should Sean Lien be afraid to field questions from the public during a comprehensive town hall forum style debate over municipal planning? Would Wen-Je Ko necessarily hold sway? That is hard to say. The two sides' demands regarding format and technical details led to its cancellation. Frankly this is laughable.

Could it be that neither the Lien nor Ko camp actually wants a debate? If they really wanted a debate. they would not quibble over such petty details. To meet the demands of both camps, why not hold one interactive, cross-examination style debate, then follow it up by holding one town hall forum style debate? What would be wrong with that? In fact the Taipei mayoral elections adopted these two forms of debate long ago. During past election seasons, the candidates were willing to accept the challenges posed by the two formats. It was doable then, why why not today?

The debate between the Lien and Ko camps has been cancelled. One can be sure there were political calculations behind the cancellation. Just exactly what calculations? No one knows. According to current polls, Wen-Je Ko is leading Sean Lien. Theoretically Wen-Je Ko would want a debate, in order to widen the gap between him and Lien. Since Sean Lien is lagging behind, he should want a debate in order to reverse his fortunes. How have the two tacitly ensured that the debates would be cancelled? Where is the clever political calculus amidst all this? One really has to wonder.

Do the Lien and Ko camps really have no reason to look forward to a debate? Do they really have no desire to use this opportunity to present their municipal government policy programs to the public? Do they really not want the public to have an opportunity to compare their campaign platforms? Do they really want to keep talking past each other? Do they really want to continue the current spittle war? Do they really want to conduct negative campaigns? If so, then they are both irresponsible, and owe the citizens of Taipei an apology.

Taipei is the nation's capital. Its voters have undergone countless electoral "baptisms by fire." Two Taipei mayoral candidates later became President of the Republic of China. Two served as Premier, then ran unsuccessful mayoral campaigns. Taipei citizens know all about shrewd, even cunning candidates. Attempting to deceive Taipei voters is a stupid idea. Few Taipei voters will cast their votes for Lien or Ko merely because they dug in their heels over the format of the debate.

We appeal to two candidates. Open the door and walk through it. Do not fear any debate format. Seize every opportunity to express your policy prescriptions to Taipei citizens. That is what a candidate truly qualified to serve as mayor would do. Taipei voters will never support a candidate who uses petty pretexts to avoid debate. The percentage of Taipei City voters unwilling to share which candidate they will vote for remains high. Neither the Lien nor Ko camp should overlook the power of these undeclared voters. Letting them understand you through debate is the key to campaign success.

社論－莫低估不表態選民的最後決定
2014年10月22日 04:09
本報訊

距離九合一選舉投票日已經不到40天，照說最受矚目的政見辯論會早就該登場了，卻傳出台北市選區的連勝文、柯文哲陣營因為在辯論形式與細節的協商上未達共識，導致破局。台北市民若要看到兩陣營的政見陳述，最快恐怕也要到11月才登場。如果屆時台市民是要等到公辦政見會時才能看到兩人公開對話，那也真是創了台北市長選舉史上的先例。

不諱言說，對這樣的結果，我們是感到滿失望的。畢竟首都選舉是此次九合一選舉中的主要焦點，說它是重中之重也不為過。最主要是由於這次代表朝野陣營參選的候選人都是政治素人，都沒有重要的政治經歷可供選民參考，再加上選戰開打以來，兩位候選人都主打負面議題，彼此抹黑的口水遠遠多過正面的議題，因而這兩位候選人究竟要給市民一個怎樣的台北市？從來都沒清楚說明過，而政見辯論正是一個重要的機會，很可惜兩位參選人卻一起放棄了這個機會。

最讓我們不能接受的是，根據媒體報導，導致這場辯論破局的主因，居然是因為技術理由。據說是雙方在交互詰問次數與日期上沒有交集，柯陣營要求採公民提問辯論形式，如果沒有就不參與辯論，連陣營則堅持要一對一辯論政策，且要有交互詰問，結果雙方並未達成共識。這兩個陣營的堅持，在外界看來，都讓人費解，因為它對兩位候選人利弊得失究竟在哪？完全看不出來。

譬如說，以柯文哲的辯才，他為什麼這麼害怕交互詰問？真正要交互詰問起來，連勝文恐怕還不一定能討得到便宜；同樣的，如果有一個完整說明市政規畫，並與市民直接對話的機會，連勝文又何必害怕公民提問的辯論形式？柯文哲在這種辯論形式下就一定會占優勢嗎？恐怕真的很難說。直白一些講，雙方在形式與技術上的堅持，甚至還搞到破局收場，有點讓人啼笑皆非！

所以，重點或許在於：連柯兩個陣營究竟是不是真的想辦這場辯論？如果真是要辯論，那就不可能在辯論形式上這麼鑽牛角尖。試想，要滿足雙方陣營的需求，何妨一場採取有交互詰問的形式，再一場採取公民提問的辯論形式，這樣不是挺好？以往的台北市長選舉，其實早就採取過這種兩樣形式都辦的模式，那時節每位參選人都樂於接受不同模式的挑戰，那時可以，何以今天就做不到呢？

連柯兩陣營讓辯論破局，一定有背後的政治算計，只是究竟在算計什麼，讓人猜不透。依目前的民調顯示，柯文哲暫時領先連勝文，照說柯文哲應期待藉辯論效應，一舉擴大領先差距；連勝文既然是暫時落後，應該會期待藉著辯論的舉行，全面翻轉局面，怎麼會最後弄到兩人不約而同的一起讓辯論破局？這中間的高明算計在哪裡，真讓人猜疑！

難道是說，連柯兩陣營都對辦辯論沒啥期待，兩人都完全不想藉這個難得的機會，向市民完整的交代他們的市政理念，也都不想讓市民有一個公開比較他們兩人政見的機會，寧可維持目前這種各說各話、隔空交火的局面，甚至是維持目前這種吐口水、挖瘡疤的負面選戰局面？如果真是這樣，那麼必須說，他們兩人都有些不負責任，甚至是欠台北市民一個道歉！

台北首都的選民早就經歷過無數選戰的洗禮，這中間有兩位參選人後來成為中華民國的總統，也有兩位擔任過閣揆的人選出馬參選市長並落選，可以說，就算是再精明、再狡猾的候選人，台北市民都經歷過，想要玩機巧去誆台北市聰明的選民，恐怕是很蠢的想法，沒幾位台北選民，會因為連柯兩人在辯論形式上的堅持，而據此做出他們關鍵選擇。

最後，我們誠懇呼籲兩位候選人，開大門走大路吧！不畏任何辯論形式，爭取每一個向台北市民表達理念的機會，才是真正有條件擔任市長的人選，小鼻小眼拘泥形式而躲避辯論的人，永遠不會是市民期待的人選！台北市選民不表態（拒訪及未決定）比例仍高，連柯陣營不要輕忽這些選民的力量。讓他們透過辯論會了解你，才是致勝的關鍵點！