U.S. polls and Taiwan’s nomination process

While the most frequent question is “Which candidate would be the best U.S. President for Taiwan,” we defer this policy issue. This first article looks at the implications for the Taiwanese political process, the next the general foreign policy implications for Taiwan, and the final speaks about specific Taiwan concerns.

An initial insight regards selecting the parties’ candidates. Candidate selection is often left to an inner core of committed party members. In the U.S. this often happens in caucuses or when public interest in primaries is low. In these cases, an inner core of committed, often single-issue party members determines the outcome. Hence, Republican candidates traditionally appease the right wing while Democrats similarly contend with both the left and large interest blocs like labor. In Taiwan this means that the extremes of the identity/unification debate often wield the strongest influence.

The argument in America for this narrow process is that these people pay for, work on, care about, and know about elections. While inherently undemocratic, it has the advantage of bringing specialized knowledge and clear commitment to the political process. Reminiscent of Plato’s philosopher kings, it puts a premium on people who have concern for the public good and knowledge about public policies. Similarly, in Taiwan, the selection of candidates is also usually ceded to a combination of dues paying party members, elders, and political polls.

We will see a major test of this premise if the Democratic superdelegates are forced to choose between Clinton and Obama at their National Convention this summer.

For primaries, the significant structural difference is that in the U.S. you register specifically to be a voter, and when you register, you declare your affiliation, usually Republican, Democrat, or Independent; although small parties get a few registrants. In Taiwan you are registered by your official address.

Hence primaries in the U.S. include anyone who has taken the effort to register, even if not a dues paying party member. In fact, there are very few dues paying members and registration, not dues, is the usual definition of party identification.

Thus in primaries in the U.S., all registered voters are eligible and the process is inherently more democratic (even if the turnout is often very low). Although citizens can only vote in one primary, in some U.S. states they can actually choose the primary in which they vote. Independents are excluded from primaries in some states but in other states they choose. In some states Democrats are even allowed to vote in the Republican primary or visa versa.

This year has been special. Given the current close count of delegates, the competition for the Democratic nomination will probably continue right through the convention, making even the latest primaries very important. These American primaries show that selecting a preferred candidate can be good for both democracy and parties and that those primaries can affect history. None expected this situation in 2007. In March, we still have three capable, exciting, distinctive, history-making candidates. They have brought new voters, independents, minorities, the young, and the chronically cynical to the polls and to the public debate. Especially on the Democratic side, the turnout is dramatically increased.

1|2|3|Next Page>>

SharePrintEmail

Write a Comment

Terms

Enter your comments - 3000 characters max

Type in image code

Submit

 Receive China Post promos
 Respond to this email