Written by Aleksandrs Gross. This article examines Cheng Li-wun’s leadership through the eyes of the younger generation. Not only did her statements on identity and Taiwan’s future fail to resonate with younger people, but she also failed to address livelihood issues such as high housing prices, inflation and employment pressure, which are seen as the most critical issues for younger Taiwanese.
Written By Paula Perez. This article analyses the promises and positions of Cheng Li-wun. It argues that Cheng offers nothing new in terms of its identity claims and the 1992 Consensus and questions who is the audience Cheng is speaking to. However, she brings something other leadership candidates did not, personifying the redemption of a generation who she claims is misled by de-Sinicised education.
Written by Brian Hioe. This article compares the new KMT party chair Cheng Li-wun to Hung Hsiu-chu. Both made waves on the basis of their deep blue political leanings and hardline stance on advocating for unification. She already faces some internal pushback against her leadership, though it remains to be seen whether Cheng will follow Hung’s trajectory of falling from grace.
Written by Dr Chieh-chi HSIEH. This article analyses the winners and losers of the great recall election in Taiwan. It argues that while the two opposition parties (KMT and TPP) neither gained nor lost and the DPP is undoubtedly the main loser, the main winner is the Taiwanese society. The self-motivated attempts to recall their respective legislators, albeit unsuccessful, consolidate Taiwan’s democracy.
Written by Jonathan Leung. This article argues that the 2025 mass recall campaign is an attempt to overthrow the legislative election result in 2024. It is also a form of snap election. It is also a delegitimisation of democracy and a derecognition of the previous election results. Therefore, there is no winner in this campaign.
Written by Chang, Chunhao. This article argues that the defeat of the recall campaign indicates that Taiwanese voters are unwilling to reverse electoral outcomes through post-election manoeuvres. The DPP fails to understand the priorities of moderate, unaffiliated, or floating voters. They want responsible governance, not political revenge, and are deeply committed to the democratic process.
