Taiwan’s Election and Democratization Study

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	Economic development	459	20.0%
2	Cross-strait problem	202	8.8%
3	National identity	19	0.8%
4	Alternation of power	3	0.1%
5	Political stability	19	0.8%
6	Diplomatic and international status issues	9	0.4%
7	Judicial reform issues	12	0.5%
8	Educational reform	17	0.7%
9	Environmental protection	1	0.0%
10	Gap between the rich and the poor	9	0.4%
11	Unemployment issues	8	0.4%
12	Aboriginal issues	0	0%
13	Social welfare	8	0.4%
14	Living justice	0	0%
15	Military apartments	4	0.2%
16	Land spectulating	3	0.1%
17	Tzuyu apologied for waving the ROC national flag	2	0.1%
18	Sunflower Student Movenment	3	0.1%
19	Low starting wage	13	0.6%
20	Clean politics	7	0.3%
21	Constitution reform	6	0.3%
22	Food safety	27	1.2%
23	Youth employment	0	0%
24	1992 Consensus	6	0.3%
25	President's leadership ability	6	0.3%
26	Party assets	2	0.1%
27	Pension reform issues	6	0.3%
28	Taiwanese Solidarity	0	0%
29	Clear away notorious partisan conflicts	9	0.4%
30	KMT candidate replacement	3	0.1%
31	Labor issues	6	0.3%
32	Comfort women issue	0	0%
33	people's livelihood	24	1.1%
34	Social stability	7	0.3%
35	sovereignty problem	9	0.4%
36	Distribution jusitice	2	0.1%
37	Crime	5	0.2%
38	Local resource allocation	2	0.1%
39	Ethnic cleavage	4	0.2%
40	Legislative process issues	1	0.0%
41	Ability of government executive	3	0.1%
42	Issues manipulation	1	0.0%
43	Ethnic Fusion	4	0.2%
44	Political attribution	1	0.0%
45	International status	6	0.3%
46	National internal struggle	7	0.3%
47	One-party dominance	1	0.0%
48	Communicate between government and the public	0	0%
49	Rulers' low Democratic literacy	0	0%
51	KMT inability	2	0.1%
52	Appointment	1	0.0%
53	Renewable energy	1	0.0%
54	Boycott KMT	1	0.0%
55	Quality of life	0	0%
57	Individualism	1	0.0%
58	Quailty of beuraucracy	0	0%
59	International trade and economic exchange	2	0.1%
60	Citizens' engagement	1	0.0%
61	Interpersonal trust	0	0%
62	Medical system	1	0.0%
63	Freedom of speech	0	0%
64	Safe nuclear power	0	0%
65	Clean politics	1	0.0%
66	Finacial issues	1	0.0%
67	Generational alternation	1	0.0%
992	No	51	2.2%
995	Refuse to answer	18	0.8%
998	Don't know	213	9.3%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

2. Which presidential candidate do you think is most capable of dealing with it?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	CHU Lil-luan and WANG Ju-hsuan	156	6.8%
2	TSAI Ing-wen and CHEN Chien-jen	383	16.7%
3	James SOONG and HSU Hsin-ying	170	7.4%
91	All of them	11	0.5%
92	None of them	134	5.9%
95	Refuse to answer	14	0.6%
97	No opinion	11	0.5%
98	Don't know	80	3.5%
99	Skipped	282	12.3%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

3. Where 0 means you strongly dislike that candidate and 10 means that you strongly like that candidate. The first is TSAI Ing-wen

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Strongly dislike	54	2.4%
1		20	0.9%
2		33	1.4%
3		64	2.8%
4		53	2.3%
5		259	11.3%
6		136	5.9%
7		147	6.4%
8		170	7.4%
9		69	3.0%
10	Strongly like	137	6.0%
95	Refuse to answer	11	0.5%
96	It's hard to say	18	0.8%
97	No opinion	21	0.9%
98	Don't know	49	2.1%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

4. [Like]How would you rate CHU Lil-luan

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Strongly dislike	133	5.8%
1		57	2.5%
2		97	4.2%
3		159	6.9%
4		108	4.7%
5		279	12.2%
6		119	5.2%
7		82	3.6%
8		58	2.5%
9		13	0.6%
10	Strongly like	32	1.4%
95	Refuse to answer	12	0.5%
96	It's hard to say	14	0.6%
97	No opinion	16	0.7%
98	Don't know	62	2.7%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

5. [Like]How would you rate James SOONG?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Strongly dislike	72	3.1%
1		37	1.6%
2		62	2.7%
3		162	7.1%
4		122	5.3%
5		298	13.0%
6		138	6.0%
7		110	4.8%
8		72	3.1%
9		29	1.3%
10	Strongly like	28	1.2%
95	Refuse to answer	14	0.6%
96	It's hard to say	9	0.4%
97	No opinion	29	1.3%
98	Don't know	59	2.6%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

6. [Capability]How would you rate TSAI Ing-wen using 0 to 10 scale?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Capability is very poor	16	0.7%
1		13	0.6%
2		31	1.4%
3		76	3.3%
4		47	2.1%
5		221	9.6%
6		148	6.5%
7		179	7.8%
8		200	8.7%
9		75	3.3%
10	Capability is very good	94	4.1%
95	Refuse to answer	10	0.4%
96	It's hard to say	21	0.9%
97	No opinion	12	0.5%
98	Don't know	98	4.3%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

7. [Capability]How would you rate CHU Lil-luan?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Capability is very poor	79	3.5%
1		48	2.1%
2		105	4.6%
3		106	4.6%
4		120	5.2%
5		288	12.6%
6		142	6.2%
7		119	5.2%
8		76	3.3%
9		11	0.5%
10	Capability is very good	16	0.7%
95	Refuse to answer	10	0.4%
96	It's hard to say	12	0.5%
97	No opinion	14	0.6%
98	Don't know	95	4.1%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

8. [Capability]How would you rate James SOONG?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Capability is very poor	34	1.5%
1		32	1.4%
2		51	2.2%
3		115	5.0%
4		101	4.4%
5		266	11.6%
6		171	7.5%
7		157	6.9%
8		108	4.7%
9		48	2.1%
10	Capability is very good	31	1.4%
95	Refuse to answer	8	0.4%
96	It's hard to say	12	0.5%
97	No opinion	22	1.0%
98	Don't know	85	3.7%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

9. [Understand the needs of people]How would you rate TSAI Ing-wen using 0 to 10 scale?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Does not understand at all	19	0.8%
1		19	0.8%
2		26	1.1%
3		56	2.4%
4		54	2.4%
5		200	8.7%
6		155	6.8%
7		171	7.5%
8		214	9.3%
9		87	3.8%
10	Completely understands	96	4.2%
95	Refuse to answer	10	0.4%
96	It's hard to say	18	0.8%
97	No opinion	12	0.5%
98	Don't know	104	4.5%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

10. [Understand the needs of people]How would you rate CHU Lil-luan?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Does not understand at all	82	3.6%
1		56	2.4%
2		86	3.8%
3		121	5.3%
4		120	5.2%
5		275	12.0%
6		158	6.9%
7		110	4.8%
8		57	2.5%
9		9	0.4%
10	Completely understands	13	0.6%
95	Refuse to answer	11	0.5%
96	It's hard to say	13	0.6%
97	No opinion	12	0.5%
98	Don't know	118	5.1%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

11. [Understand the needs of people]How would you rate James SOONG?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Does not understand at all	33	1.4%
1		32	1.4%
2		50	2.2%
3		93	4.1%
4		94	4.1%
5		255	11.1%
6		164	7.2%
7		158	6.9%
8		123	5.4%
9		55	2.4%
10	Completely understands	36	1.6%
95	Refuse to answer	11	0.5%
96	It's hard to say	9	0.4%
97	No opinion	18	0.8%
98	Don't know	110	4.8%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

12. [Protecting Taiwan's interests]How would you rate TSAI Ing-wen using 0 to 10 scale?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Completely incapable	21	0.9%
1		16	0.7%
2		27	1.2%
3		69	3.0%
4		56	2.4%
5		207	9.0%
6		148	6.5%
7		145	6.3%
8		201	8.8%
9		93	4.1%
10	Completely able	109	4.8%
95	Refuse to answer	12	0.5%
96	It's hard to say	16	0.7%
97	No opinion	12	0.5%
98	Don't know	109	4.8%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

13. [Protecting Taiwan's interests]How would you rate CHU Lil-luan?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Completely incapable	88	3.8%
1		54	2.4%
2		82	3.6%
3		102	4.5%
4		92	4.0%
5		275	12.0%
6		169	7.4%
7		124	5.4%
8		69	3.0%
9		15	0.7%
10	Completely able	19	0.8%
95	Refuse to answer	13	0.6%
96	It's hard to say	15	0.7%
97	No opinion	12	0.5%
98	Don't know	112	4.9%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

14. [Protecting Taiwan's interests]How would you rate James SOONG?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Completely incapable	45	2.0%
1		35	1.5%
2		46	2.0%
3		105	4.6%
4		108	4.7%
5		287	12.5%
6		168	7.3%
7		140	6.1%
8		90	3.9%
9		37	1.6%
10	Completely able	29	1.3%
95	Refuse to answer	13	0.6%
96	It's hard to say	13	0.6%
97	No opinion	14	0.6%
98	Don't know	111	4.8%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

15. [Maintain Cross-Strait peace]How would you rate TSAI Ing-wen using 0 to 10 scale?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Completely incapable	39	1.7%
1		24	1.1%
2		37	1.6%
3		94	4.1%
4		77	3.4%
5		267	11.7%
6		144	6.3%
7		125	5.5%
8		151	6.6%
9		49	2.1%
10	Completely able	80	3.5%
95	Refuse to answer	14	0.6%
96	It's hard to say	19	0.8%
97	No opinion	11	0.5%
98	Don't know	110	4.8%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

16. [Maintain Cross-Strait peace]How would you rate CHU Lil-luan?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Completely incapable	55	2.4%
1		24	1.1%
2		46	2.0%
3		67	2.9%
4		64	2.8%
5		260	11.3%
6		162	7.1%
7		156	6.8%
8		173	7.5%
9		46	2.0%
10	Completely able	35	1.5%
95	Refuse to answer	17	0.7%
96	It's hard to say	12	0.5%
97	No opinion	13	0.6%
98	Don't know	111	4.8%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

17. [Maintain Cross-Strait peace]How would you rate James SOONG?

Values Categories		n	percentage
0	Completely incapable	43	1.9%
1		27	1.2%
2		31	1.4%
3		71	3.1%
4		61	2.7%
5		297	13.0%
6		162	7.1%
7		148	6.5%
8		151	6.6%
9		43	1.9%
10	Completely able	49	2.1%
95	Refuse to answer	16	0.7%
96	It's hard to say	10	0.4%
97	No opinion	15	0.7%
98	Don't know	117	5.1%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

18. How serious do you think the gap between rich and poor?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	Very serious	752	32.8%
2	Serious	419	18.3%
3	Not very serious	47	2.1%
4	Not serious at all	2	0.1%
95	Refuse to answer	0	0%
96	It depends	2	0.1%
97	No opinion	6	0.3%
98	Don't know	13	0.6%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

19. Which candidate do you think have more ability to solve the problem of the gap between rich and poor?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	CHU Lil-luan and WANG Ju-hsuan	98	4.3%
2	TSAI Ing-wen and CHEN Chien-jen	478	20.9%
3	James SOONG and HSU Hsin-ying	168	7.3%
91	All of them	21	0.9%
92	None of them	267	11.7%
95	Refuse to answer	10	0.4%
97	No opinion	20	0.9%
98	Don't know	179	7.8%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

20. How serious do you think low income of salaryman?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	Very serious	643	28.1%
2	Serious	465	20.3%
3	Not very serious	64	2.8%
4	Not serious at all	5	0.2%
95	Refuse to answer	1	0.0%
96	It depends	11	0.5%
97	No opinion	7	0.3%
98	Don't know	45	2.0%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

21. Which candidate do you think have more ability to solve the problem of low income?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	CHU Lil-luan and WANG Ju-hsuan	126	5.5%
2	TSAI Ing-wen and CHEN Chien-jen	469	20.5%
3	James SOONG and HSU Hsin-ying	145	6.3%
91	All of them	23	1.0%
92	None of them	252	11.0%
95	Refuse to answer	10	0.4%
97	No opinion	25	1.1%
98	Don't know	191	8.3%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

22. How serious do you think food safety?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	Very serious	871	38.0%
2	Serious	295	12.9%
3	Not very serious	49	2.1%
4	Not serious at all	3	0.1%
95	Refuse to answer	0	0%
96	It depends	2	0.1%
97	No opinion	3	0.1%
98	Don't know	18	0.8%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

23. Which candidate do you think have more ability to solve the problem of food safety?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	CHU Lil-luan and WANG Ju-hsuan	86	3.8%
2	TSAI Ing-wen and CHEN Chien-jen	592	25.8%
3	James SOONG and HSU Hsin-ying	122	5.3%
91	All of them	44	1.9%
92	None of them	179	7.8%
95	Refuse to answer	11	0.5%
97	No opinion	24	1.1%
98	Don't know	183	8.0%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

24. Has any candidate ever made you feel angry?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	CHU Li-luan	548	23.9%
2	TSAI Ing-wen	140	6.1%
3	James SOONG	109	4.8%
91	All of them	13	0.6%
92	None of them	289	12.6%
95	Refuse to answer	28	1.2%
97	No opinion	42	1.8%
98	Don't know	72	3.1%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

25. Has any candidate ever made you feel afraid?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	CHU Li-luan	439	19.1%
2	TSAI Ing-wen	282	12.3%
3	James SOONG	175	7.6%
91	All of them	20	0.9%
92	None of them	168	7.3%
95	Refuse to answer	24	1.1%
97	No opinion	37	1.6%
98	Don't know	96	4.2%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

26. Has any candidate ever made you feel hopeful?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	CHU Li-luan	144	6.3%
2	TSAI Ing-wen	580	25.3%
3	James SOONG	173	7.5%
91	All of them	15	0.7%
92	None of them	174	7.6%
95	Refuse to answer	21	0.9%
97	No opinion	25	1.1%
98	Don't know	109	4.8%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

27. Has any candidate ever made you feel proud to be a Taiwanese?

Values Categories		n	percentage
1	CHU Li-luan	108	4.7%
2	TSAI Ing-wen	569	24.8%
3	James SOONG	105	4.6%
91	All of them	21	0.9%
92	None of them	286	12.5%
95	Refuse to answer	26	1.1%
97	No opinion	25	1.1%
98	Don't know	101	4.4%
Sysmiss		1051	45.9%
	Frequency :	2292	100%

Go Top

Taiwan’s Election and Democratization Study

Menu

Login