TAIWAN’S 2016 PRESIDENTIAL AND LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS

Kharis Templeman Program Manager, Democracy Project Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law Freeman Spogli Institute, Stanford University January 26, 2016

1 SPOILER ALERT:

2 SPOILER ALERT:

President-elect Tsai Ing-wen

3 SPOILER ALERT:

President-elect Tsai Ing-wen DPP Majority in Legislature

35

68 3 2 5

4 WHERE W E’RE HEADED

• What was at stake • Presidential election: candidates, campaign, results • Legislative election: parties, campaign, results

5 WHAT W AS AT STAKE? • Presidency: Ma Ying-jeou term-limited out • Legislature: always controlled by KMT or pan-blue majority • President Ma and KMT very unpopular for last four years • Sunflower Movement: students occupied legislature for three weeks in March 2014 • DPP did well in December 2014 local elections

6 WHAT W AS AT STAKE? • Presidency: Ma Ying-jeou term-limited out • Legislature: always controlled by KMT or pan-blue majority • President Ma and KMT very unpopular for last four years • Sunflower Movement: students occupied legislature for three weeks in March 2014 • DPP did well in December 2014 local elections

7 WHAT W AS AT STAKE? • Presidency: Ma Ying-jeou term-limited out • Legislature: always controlled by KMT or pan-blue majority • President Ma and KMT very unpopular for last four years • Sunflower Movement: students occupied legislature for three weeks in March 2014 • DPP did well in December 2014 local elections

8 WHAT W AS AT STAKE? • Presidency: Ma Ying-jeou term-limited out • Legislature: always controlled by KMT or pan-blue majority • President Ma and KMT very unpopular for last four years • Sunflower Movement: students occupied legislature for three weeks in March 2014 • DPP did well in December 2014 local elections

9 KEY QUESTIONS GOING INTO 2016 CAMPAIGN

1. Would KMT be able to recover from 2014 defeat? 2. Would DPP be able to capitalize on unhappiness with Ma Ying-jeou and KMT? 3. Would so-called “Third Force” parties and candidates convert protest energy into actual votes, especially the (NPP)?

10 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN

11 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN

DPP: Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英⽂ ) 12 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN

DPP: Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英⽂ ) KMT: Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱 ) 13 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN

PFP: James Soong (宋楚瑜 ) DPP: Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英⽂ ) KMT: Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱 ) 14 PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN

PFP: James Soong (宋楚瑜 ) DPP: Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英⽂ ) KMT: Eric Chu (朱⽴倫 ) 15 KMT DYSFUNCTION • President Ma very unpopular for most of 2nd term • Split with LY Speaker Wang Jin-pyng in Sept 2013 • Sunflower Movement in March 2014 • KMT trouble with nominee, and Soong

16 Source: Taiwan Indicators Survey Research, 1.14.2016 17 KMT DYSFUNCTION • President Ma very unpopular for most of 2nd term • Sept. 2013: Ma split with LY Speaker Wang Jin- pyng • Sunflower Movement in March 2014 • KMT trouble with nominee, and Soong

18 KMT DYSFUNCTION • President Ma very unpopular for most of 2nd term • Sept. 2013: Ma split with LY Speaker Wang Jin- pyng • March 2014: Sunflower Movement • KMT trouble with nominee, and Soong

19 KMT DYSFUNCTION • President Ma very unpopular for most of 2nd term • Sept. 2013: Ma split with LY Speaker Wang Jin- pyng • March 2014: Sunflower Movement • KMT trouble with nominee: Hung—>Chu

20 KMT DYSFUNCTION • President Ma very unpopular for most of 2nd term • Sept. 2013: Ma split with LY Speaker Wang Jin- pyng • March 2014: Sunflower Movement • KMT trouble with nominee: Hung—>Chu

21 KMT DYSFUNCTION • President Ma very unpopular for most of 2nd term • Sept. 2013: Ma split with LY Speaker Wang Jin- pyng • March 2014: Sunflower Movement • KMT trouble with nominee: Hung—>Chu

22 ECONOMIC DOWNTURN IN 3RD-4TH QUARTER 2015

23 KMT DYSFUNCTION + ECONOMIC DOWNTURN: TSAI W IN EXPECTED FOR MONTHS

24 PRESIDENTIAL RESULTS: 2012 VS 2016

KMT DPP PFP 2012 2016

31.04%

45.63% 51.60% 56.12%

12.84% 2.77%

25 PRESIDENTIAL RESULTS: 2012 VS 2016

KMT DPP PFP 2012 2016

31.04%

45.63% 51.60% 56.12%

12.84% 2.77%

26 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RESULT MORE ABOUT KMT AND MA Y ING-JEOU T HAN DPP

• Ma’s cross-Strait policies increasingly unpopular • Lack of progress in many domestic areas: tax base, inequality, youth employment, etc. • Tsai had to be “not Ma Ying-jeou,” and she was. • But long-term trends bode poorly for KMT: lost youth vote (age 20-29) 5-1, no young leaders.

27 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RESULT MORE ABOUT KMT AND MA Y ING-JEOU T HAN DPP

• Ma’s cross-Strait policies increasingly unpopular • Lack of progress in many domestic areas: tax base, inequality, youth employment, etc. • Tsai had to be “not Ma Ying-jeou,” and she was. • But long-term trends bode poorly for KMT: lost youth vote (age 20-29) 5-1, no young leaders.

28 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RESULT MORE ABOUT KMT AND MA Y ING-JEOU T HAN DPP

• Ma’s cross-Strait policies increasingly unpopular • Lack of progress in many domestic areas: tax base, inequality, youth employment, etc. • Tsai had to be “not Ma Ying-jeou,” and she was. • But long-term trends bode poorly for KMT: lost youth vote (age 20-29) 5-1, no young leaders.

29 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RESULT MORE ABOUT KMT AND MA Y ING-JEOU T HAN DPP

• Ma’s cross-Strait policies increasingly unpopular • Lack of progress in many domestic areas: tax base, inequality, youth employment, etc. • Tsai had to be “not Ma Ying-jeou,” and she was. • But long-term trends bode poorly for KMT: lost youth vote (age 20-29) 5-1, no young leaders.

30 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RESULT MORE ABOUT KMT AND MA Y ING-JEOU T HAN DPP

• Ma’s cross-Strait policies increasingly unpopular • Lack of progress in many domestic areas: tax base, inequality, youth employment, etc. • Tsai had to be “not Ma Ying-jeou,” and she was. • But long-term trends bode poorly for KMT: lost youth vote (age 20-29) 5-1, no young leaders.

31 Credit: Lucien Wei Hickman, Ketagalan Media 32 Credit: Lucien Wei Hickman, Ketagalan Media 33 LEGISLATIVE CAMPAIGN

34 THE BASICS: TWO T IERS, THREE GROUPS OF SEATS

• 73 single-member district seats chosen through plurality rule • 6 reserved aborigine seats chosen through SNTV in two national districts • 34 closed-list proportional representation seats, chosen through a separate party vote, with a 5% threshold

35 THE CAMPAIGN IN THE DISTRICT RACES

• Minor party district candidates a challenge for both major parties • For KMT: PFP, MKT (Republic Party), New Party, independents • For DPP: TSU, New Power Party, Social Democratic-Greens alliance • DPP cooperated fairly well, but pan-blue coordination failures were rampant

36 THE CAMPAIGN IN THE DISTRICT RACES

• Minor party district candidates a challenge for both major parties • For KMT: PFP, MKT (Republic Party), New Party, independents • For DPP: TSU, New Power Party, Social Democratic-Greens alliance • DPP cooperated fairly well, but pan-blue coordination failures were rampant

37 THE CAMPAIGN IN THE DISTRICT RACES

• Minor party district candidates a challenge for both major parties • For KMT: PFP, MKT (Republic Party), New Party, independents • For DPP: TSU, New Power Party, Social Democratic-Greens alliance • DPP cooperated fairly well, but pan-blue coordination failures were rampant

38 EX: HAU LUNG-BIN IN KEELUNG

• Hau (KMT): 36.1% • Liu (PFP): 12.1% • Yang (MKT): 10.0% • Tsai (DPP): 41.5%

39 KMT CANDIDATES RAN AWAY FROM T HE PARTY AND MA Y ING-JEOU

40 DPP CANDIDATES EMBRACED T SAI, BUT PLAYED DOWN PARTY

41 THE PARTY LIST V OTE

• 18 (!) parties qualified for the party list ballot • Open question how viable new parties would be • Coordination problem within camps, e.g. DPP vs NPP vs Green-SPD

42 RESULTS

43 REGULAR DISTRICT RACES

• DPP won 49 constituencies • KMT won only 20 • New Power Party won 3 • Independents won 1

Freddy Lim, lead singer of metal band Chthonic and now legislator-elect

44 REGULAR DISTRICT RACES

• DPP won 49 constituencies • KMT won only 20 • New Power Party won 3 • Independents won 1

Freddy Lim, lead singer of metal band Chthonic and now legislator-elect

45 ABORIGINE DISTRICT RACES

• 4 KMT incumbents won • 1 DPP challenger won • 1 independent incumbent won

46 PARTY LIST V OTE

Existing LY Parties: 80% New Parties: 20% • DPP: 44.1% = 18 seats • NPP: 6.11% = 2 • KMT: 26.9% = 11 • New Party: 4.18% • PFP: 6.5% = 3 • Green-SDP: 2.51% • TSU: 2.5% = 0 • FHL: 1.70% • DPP: 44. • MKT: 1.62% • KMT: 26.9%

47 LEGISLATIVE Y UAN SEATS BY PARTY: 2012 VS 2016

KMT DPP TSU / NPP Other PFP 2012 2016

35 40

64 68 3 2 3 5 3 3

48 LEGISLATIVE Y UAN SEATS BY PARTY: 2012 VS 2016

KMT DPP TSU / NPP Other PFP 2012 2016

35 40

64 68 3 2 3 5 3 3

49 Credit: Lucien Wei Hickman,50 Ketagalan Media LY CAMPAIGN T AKE-AWAYS • DPP cooperation with minor parties helped it avoid splits. • Came at cost of yielding winnable seats to New Power Party, which will have a party caucus. • KMT incumbents wiped out: 19 lost, 9 didn’t run. Those close to Ma Ying-jeou did especially badly. • “Third Force” and other minor parties only played spoiler roles, except NPP replaced TSU.

51 SOME FINAL T HOUGHTS

• Taiwan’s election practices are a model for Asia and the world: vigorous campaigns, smooth voting and efficient counting • Turnout very low for a national election • Year of the Woman in Taiwan: 38% of incoming legislators are women

52 SOME FINAL T HOUGHTS

• Taiwan’s election practices are a model for Asia and the world: vigorous campaigns, smooth voting and efficient counting • Turnout very low for a national election • Year of the Woman in Taiwan: 38% of incoming legislators are women

53 54 SOME FINAL T HOUGHTS

• Taiwan’s election practices are a model for Asia and the world: vigorous campaigns, smooth voting and efficient counting • Turnout very low for a national election • Year of the Woman in Taiwan: 38% of incoming legislators are women

55 TURNOUT IN ELECTIONS, 2004-2016

100

80.3 76.3 71.7 74.4 75 67.6 66.2 65.8 63.3 66.3 59.4 58.5

50 Turnout (%) Turnout 23.4 25

0 2004-Pr 2008-Pr 2004-LY 2008-LY 2005-NA 2012-Pr/LY 2016-Pr/LY 2005-Local 2009-Local 2014-Local 2006-Sp Mun 2010-Sp Mun

56 SOME FINAL T HOUGHTS

• Taiwan’s election practices are a model for Asia and the world: vigorous campaigns, smooth voting and efficient counting • Turnout very low for a national election • Year of the Woman in Taiwan: 38% of incoming legislators are women

57 THANKS!

58 59 PARTY VOTE SHARES BY EXECUTIVE ELECTION, 2004-2014 KMT DPP Other

60

45

30 Vote Share Vote 15

0 2004-Pr 2005-6-Local 2008-Pr 2009-10-Local 2012-Pr 2014-Local

60 PARTY VOTE SHARES BY EXECUTIVE ELECTION, 2004-2014 KMT DPP Other

60

45

30 Vote Share Vote 15

0 2004-Pr 2005-6-Local 2008-Pr 2009-10-Local 2012-Pr 2014-Local

61 PARTY V OTE T OTALS BY EXECUTIVE ELECTION, 2004-2014 KMT DPP Other

8000000

6000000

4000000

Total Valid Votes Valid Total 2000000

0 2004-Pr 2005-6-Local 2008-Pr 2009-10-Local 2012-Pr 2014-Local

62 PARTY V OTE T OTALS BY EXECUTIVE ELECTION, 2004-2014 KMT DPP Other

8000000

6000000

4000000

Total Valid Votes Valid Total 2000000

0 2004-Pr 2005-6-Local 2008-Pr 2009-10-Local 2012-Pr 2014-Local

63 PARTISAN ID 2004-2015

64 PARTISAN ID 2004-2015

65 PARTY CAMP ID, 2004-2014

66 PARTY CAMP ID, 2004-2014

67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83