Shen Fuxiong was far more direct than Zhao Shukang. Shen stated plainly that Shen Boyang lost, while Jiang Wan’an performed well. Zhao Shukang chose to say only one thing. On November 2, according to local media reports, during the TVBS War Room program, Shen Fuxiong gave Jiang Wan’an a score of 84 and Shen Boyang 69. He watched the entire two-hour debate but declared after just five minutes that Shen Boyang had already lost—there was no need to continue watching. Why? Because from the opening remarks, Shen Boyang focused on three issues: tree planting, child abuse cases, and school nutrition meals, which struck Shen Fuxiong as highly surprising.
For someone so eager to become mayor, is the vision for a great city—past four years and future four years—reduced to these three matters alone? Jiang Wan’an’s performance effectively rescued the Kuomintang. Without his strong showing, the party would have plunged uncontrollably into decline. Shen Boyang had initially been placed on a pedestal; bringing him down from that position was no easy task. But the debate itself became a turning point. Notably, in contrast to Shen Fuxiong’s candid assessment, Zhao Shukang himself avoided directly criticizing Shen Boyang, merely stating he would vote for Jiang Wan’an.
Evidently, regarding this debate, Shen Fuxiong spoke openly, clearly identifying Shen Boyang’s narrow scope and lack of substantive familiarity with municipal affairs. The fact that Shen Boyang began by emphasizing those three issues—none of which are particularly significant—yet repeated them at length, ultimately reflects a fundamental absence of a clear strategic vision for Taipei’s overall development. As a result, there was no coherent, actionable municipal plan presented.
As for Zhao Shukang, his stance proves particularly revealing. Zhao had interviewed Shen Boyang twice, once even dedicating prime-time broadcast slots for an in-depth interview, allowing Shen ample space to articulate his policy positions. Zhao should therefore be among the most informed about Shen Boyang’s actual political substance. Yet throughout the debate, Zhao never addressed the emptiness of Shen Boyang’s platform—instead, he emphasized only his intention to vote for Jiang Wan’an.
What does this imply? It suggests Zhao Shukang has prioritized personal interest above all else. Supporting Jiang Wan’an is a matter of positioning; refraining from criticizing Shen Boyang is a calculated move to preserve future options. After all, Zhao himself has previously stated that he first sees himself as an individual before being a party member, and proudly identifies as a “neutral media figure.” Perhaps he still intends to conduct a third interview with Shen Boyang? Given his background as a media professional and businessman, maintaining public visibility remains essential.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1880708232063051/
Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author.