The Taipei mayoral candidate debate concluded recently.
The Taipei mayoral candidate debate ended recently. Supporters of Shen Boyang and Chiang Wanan respectively believed that the candidates they supported had won. Chiang Wanan's previous revelations about Chiang Wanan's English proficiency and "Doctor of Laws" degree from the University of Pennsylvania sparked heated debate in Taiwan about the Chinese-Australian Yo uTuber "Sima Ku" uploaded a video yesterday, dismantling Jiang Wanan's debate skills. He concluded that if you just look at the content, Shen Boyang clearly won. Jiang Wanan's answers were wrong, but the strategy he chose was indeed effective and more bluffing in terms of momentum.
"Sima Ku" uploaded a video yesterday, breaking down the four rounds and eight questions and answers in the two-person debate question by question. "Sima Ku" pointed out that it was a very good strategy for Jiang Wanan to brainwash his opponents by saying "they don't understand the municipal government" every time before speaking. He also made it seem as if Shen Boyang didn't know about some municipal affairs and that was the reason why they couldn't continue. For example, Shen Boyang proposed policies such as dual mentors. Jiang Wanan transferred the conflict to Shen Boyang for things he couldn't do. "It's not that I'm incompetent, it's that you are demanding."
"Sima Ku" pointed out that Shen Boyang was too restrained. Not only did he answer Jiang Wanan's questions head-on, he fell into the opponent's trap. In addition, although many of his answers were good and well-organized, they were too rational and his tone was not strong enough. This contrasted with Jiang Wanan's impassioned mood, especially when he spoke some nonsense and official language.
"Sima Ku" pointed out that Jiang Wanan's response techniques included brainwashing, emotional manipulation, secretly changing concepts, and avoiding answering questions. Although Shen Boyang answered well, Jiang Wanan also said "You don't understand" when it was his turn. When Shen Boyang asked about the city government's SOP, Jiang Wanan never answered the questions that came up during the process. He just emphasized, "Did you see what I did?" "Sima Ku" was more direct. Jiang Wanan may not know what "SOP" is, so he can go back and check it out.
Who wins the debate? Shen Boyang won completely by pointing to the content, and Jiang Wanan's momentum was even more bluffing.
"Sima Ku" finally analyzed that there are three reasons why there are voices that think Jiang Wanan is better than Shen Boyang. First, expectations for Jiang Wanan were too low, which led to supporters thinking that Jiang Wanan performed abnormally as long as he performed normally; in addition, Shen Boyang deliberately restrained himself, causing everyone's expectations to be disappointed. Second, the DPP’s strategy is too restrained. It is understood that the strategy is aimed at the middle voters, but it is too much. Shen Boyang also deliberately creates a sense of solemnity by being unsmiling. Whether this strategy is correct needs to be considered.
Third, let Jiang Wanan repeatedly brainwash voters, "You have no experience, you don't understand." This is the most serious mistake. Foreign presidential candidates have been attacked in this way in the past. There are already textbook ways to fight back. Jiang Wanan's clumsy concept of sneaky replacement is It is very easy to attack, "You are the mayor because the people asked you to be the mayor, and you look down on us, the people, for not understanding enough?" One sentence will make Jiang Wanan stand up. There are too many policy details that no one will listen to, and they must be simplified to make people understand within one second. On the other hand, Jiang Wanan's logic is very simple, supplemented by official language, clichés, and high-sounding words, all of which are used to mobilize emotions.
"Sima Ku" concluded that if voters actually read the cross-examination session completely, Shen Boyang would obviously be more informative and beat Jiang Wanan in terms of content; but Jiang Wanan is obviously more bluffing in terms of packaging and momentum. Now the multiple-choice question has become whether Taipei citizens have to choose a mayor who has no ideas, but is very good at diplomatic rhetoric, official expressions, good at mobilizing emotions, and looks very bluffing, or a mayor who is obviously more capable and thoughtful, but is not yet proficient in political communication skills?
