☭ marselip0910 叶俊华™

溫家堡已經準備好了 麥香堡報到 小蜜蜂向前行 胖虎準備好了 上海加油 珠海不能放棄 3/22
兩人相招投1號
小葉0321


Protect Taiwan Together & Join the UN

相招顧台灣 ． 加入聯合國 (台語版)

曲：路寒袖
詞：詹宏達

咬牙吞忍數百年
孤兒早就變大人
出錢出力沒輸人
坐桌開會沒我們
台灣四邊都是海
海水連到全世界
地球天頂破一洞
獨無遮著我們台灣
欠一個台灣來補天
地球不平也不會圓
台灣加入聯合國
世界完整大家族









China shoots Tibetans, itself in foot
Posted by Lhasa Rising 2008/3/21
By carrying out its bloody crackdown in Tibet, China may have just shot itself in the foot in Taiwan. 

People in Taiwan are rightly appalled at the the Chinese government’s harsh response to the pro-independence protests in Tibet.  And they are taking a more skeptical look at Beijing’s favored candidate, Ma Ying-jeou of the KMT, who is advocating closer ties with Beijing. 

Apparently, the Chinese government showing its vicious side in Tibet is causing some Taiwanese to feel that more formal independence for Taiwan might just be the island’s best protection against becoming a “second Tibet.”

Frankly, we can’t say we blame them.

Reports the BBC:

Taiwan’s presidential rivals have been campaigning hard ahead of elections on Saturday, in which the Tibetan protests have become a key issue.

Frank Hsieh, of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, faces a tough battle against Ma Ying-jeou of the Kuomintang.

Both men advocate closer economic ties with China, but after the protests both have spoken out against Beijing.

Mr Ma mooted an Olympic boycott while Mr Hsieh warned that his rival could make Taiwan a “second Tibet”.  […]

Earlier this week [Mr. Ma] talked of a possible Olympic boycott if the situation in Tibet deteriorated, but on Friday he said he would not “push the issue to the extreme”.

The BBC’s Caroline Gluck, in Taipei, says it is not clear what impact events in Tibet will have on the electorate.

Most have already made up their minds, our correspondent says, but the issue could sway the undecided voters.

Taiwan By The Numbers (03/20/2008)
(Wikipedia) Here is a reprise of the poll results for the 2008 presidential election in Taiwan.

T台
搶救! 請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號
March 11, TVBS: Ma-Siew 54%; Hsieh-Su 29%
March 10, TVBS: Ma-Siew 53%; Hsieh-Su 29%
March 9, TVBS: Ma-Siew 50%; Hsieh-Su 31%
March 7, TVBS: Ma-Siew 54%; Hsieh-Su 28%
February 29, TVBS: Ma-Siew 54%; Hsieh-Su 30%
February 24, TVBS: Ma-Siew 49%; Hsieh-Su 29%
February 22, TVBS: Ma-Siew 53%; Hsieh-Su 31%
February 15, TVBS: Ma-Siew 53%; Hsieh-Su 29%
January 31, TVBS: Ma-Siew 56%; Hsieh-Su 30%
January 29, TVBS: Ma-Siew 53%; Hsieh-Su 26%
January 26, TVBS: Ma-Siew 54%; Hsieh-Su 23%
January 15, TVBS: Ma-Siew 56%; Hsieh-Su 26%
September 19, TVBS: Ma-Siew 53%; Hsieh-Su 30%
August 28, TVBS: Ma-Siew 54%; Hsieh-Su 32%
August 15, TVBS: Ma-Siew 51%; Hsieh-Su 30%
August 2, TVBS: Ma-Siew 47%; Hsieh 28%
July 11, TVBS: Ma-Siew 49%; Hsieh 25%
June 24, TVBS: Ma-Siew 51%; Hsieh 27%
May 22, TVBS: Ma 50%; Hsieh 25%
May 4, TVBS: Ma 50%; Hsieh 29%
January 29, TVBS: Ma 60%; Hsieh 20%

中國時報
搶救! 請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號
March 10, China Times: Ma-Siew, 49%; Hsieh-Su 22%
March 5, China TImes: Ma-Siew 53%; Hsieh-Su 21%
February 24, China TImes: Ma-Siew 49%; Hsieh-Su 23%
February 21, China Times: Ma-Siew 47%; Hsieh-Su 22%
January 25, China TImes: Ma-Siew 46%; Hsieh-Su 23%
January 16, China TImes: Ma-Siew 53%; Hsieh-Su 21%
January 13. China Times: Ma-Siew 52%; Hsieh-Su 20%
January 9, China Times: Ma-Siew 48%; Hsieh-Su 25%
January 3, China Times: Ma-Siew 48%; Hsieh-Su 23%
December 28, China Times: Ma-Siew 45%; Hsieh-Su 24%
November 20, China Times: Ma-Siew 37%; Hsieh-Su 21%
November 16, China Times: Ma-Siew 37%; Hsieh-Su 22%
November 8, China Times: Ma-Siew 36%; Hsieh-Su 25%
August 14, China Times: Ma-Siew 37%; Hsieh-Su 25%
June 24, China Times: Ma-Siew 40%; Hsieh-Su 20%

聯合報
搶救! 請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號
March 10, United Daily News: Ma-Siew, 52%; Hsieh-Su 22%
March 9, United Daily News: Ma-Siew 49%; Hsieh-Su 21%
February 29, United Daily News: Ma-Siew 55%: Hsieh-Su 18%
February 24, United Daily News: Ma-Siew: 49%; Hsieh-Su 21%
February 14, United Daily Press: Ma-Siew 56%; Hsieh-Su 18%
January 13, United Daily News: Ma-Siew 60%; Hsieh-Su 18%
December 28, United Daily News: Ma-Siew 52%; Hsieh-Su 23%
October 24, United Daily News: Ma-Siew 50%; Hsieh-Su 25%
September 22, United Daily News: Ma-Siew 51%; Hsieh-Su 27%
August 14, United Daily: Ma-Siew 52%; Hsieh-Su 22%
June 24, United Daily News: Ma-Siew 50%; Hsieh 23%
June 4, United Daily News: Ma 58%; Hsieh 17%
May 6, United Daily News: Ma 43%; Hsieh 28%
April 29, United Daily News: Ma 52%; Hsieh 21%

蘋果日報
搶救! 請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號
March 7, Apple Daily: Ma-Siew 41%; Hsieh-Su 20%
February 13, Apple Daily: Ma-Siew 36%; Hsieh-Su 20%

Augsut 14, ERA: Ma-Siew 46%; Hsieh-Su 22%

[Note: 遠見雜誌Global View Magazine applies a formula to allocate the Undecideds/Refusals based upon historical patterns, and therefore their number add up to 100%]
搶救! 請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號請投①號
March 10, Global View: Ma-Siew 62%; Hsieh-Su 38%
February 20, Global View: Ma-Siew 63%; Hsieh-Su 37%
January 18, Global View: Ma-Siew 62%; Hsieh-Su 38%
December 19, Global View: Ma-Siew 61%; Hsieh-Su 39%
November 19, Global View: Ma-Siew 59%; Hsieh-Su 41%
October 18, Global View: Ma-Siew 59%; Hsieh-Su 41%
September 20, Global View: Ma-Siew 61%; Hsieh-Su 39%
August 21, Global View: Ma-Siew 62%; Hsieh 38%
July 20, Global View: Ma-Siew 62%; Hsieh 38%
June 20, Global View: Ma 57%; Hsieh 43%
May 20, Global View: Ma 57%; Hsieh 43%
March 3, Global View: Ma-Siew 62%; Hsieh-Su 38%

March 9, Southern Society: Ma-Siew 41%; Hsieh-Su 38%
August 9, Kuomintang: Ma-Siew 58%; Hsieh-Su 52%

Most of the public opinion polls have been stable without fluctuating too much. New and significant revelations such as the extramarital affair of Ma Ying-jeou's father, his sister cheating on examinations on behalf of others, his wife stealing newspapers from the Harvard-Yenching University Library and Ma's American 'green card' seemed to have failed to impress the public.

The lone exception against the comfortable lead by Ma-Siew is the poll conducted by the South Society with the statement: "South Society believes that the media reports, commentaries and public opinion polls have always been highly not credible. Therefore, it has decided to publish these poll results for a fair and balanced consideration." The South Society contains no description of sample size, response rate and methodology as the other polls have disclosed.

On election day, reality will show who was right and who was wrong here. By law, poll results cannot be disclosed as of ten days before election day. So things may have changed since the last polls (e.g. the March 14 Lhasa 'oppression').