Changing Korean Voters 4: Analysis of the 2010 Local Elections Through Panel Data

Understanding the Unexpected Outcome of the June 2nd Local Elections is Key to Predicting 2012!

2012 is fast approaching. In one year, general and presidential elections will be held consecutively, and some will be chosen by the people while others will not. The results of these choices will be fully returned to the citizens who made them, rather than to those who were chosen or not chosen, making it impossible not to be interested in what choices they will make. The East Asia Institute (EAI) has published "Changing Korean Voters 4: Analysis of the 2010 Local Elections Through Panel Data," a public opinion analysis that examines new voting patterns of voters in the June 2nd, 2010 local elections through panel data. The ability to analyze and predict new voter voting patterns is due to the advantages of the panel survey method adopted by the EAI research team. Panel surveys are the only methodology that allows for the direct investigation and analysis of changes in voter sentiment by conducting repeated surveys on the same respondents. The East Asia Institute has been continuously conducting panel surveys since the 2006 local elections, followed by the 2007 presidential election, the 2008 general election, and the 2010 local elections, despite the challenges in survey costs and data management and analysis that have prevented their use in Korean election research. The EAI Panel Survey Research Team has conducted joint research with a team of election research experts including Kang Won-taek (Seoul National University), Kwon Hyuk-yong (Korea University), Kim Sung-tae (Korea University), Kim Min-jeon (Kyung Hee University), Park Chan-wook (Seoul National University), Seo Sang-min (EAI), Seo Hyun-jin (Sungshin Women's University), Yoo Sung-jin (Ewha Womans University), Lee Gon-soo (EAI), Lee Nae-young (Korea University), Lee Woo-jin (Korea University), Lee Hyun-woo (Sogang University), Lim Sung-hak (University of Seoul), Jeong Won-chul (EAI), Jeong Han-wool (EAI), Ji Byung-geun (Chosun University), and Jin Young-jae (Yonsei University). The accumulated academic authority and credibility from over five years of collaboration among the best election researchers, without bias towards any particular party, are enough to draw interest to their analysis results.

Voting Choices in 2012: The May 31st Version vs. The June 2nd Version

Voter voting patterns are changing as power transitions from the Roh Moo-hyun administration to the Lee Myung-bak administration. Understanding the differences in voter voting patterns between these two periods is crucial for gauging how public sentiment will be expressed in the 2012 general and presidential elections. The June 2nd, 2010 local elections saw an unexpected outcome. While the Grand National Party (GNP) was initially expected to win easily, they only managed to retain power in Seoul, Gyeonggi, Daegu, Gyeongbuk, Ulsan, and Busan, ceding 10 metropolitan mayoralties to the opposition. However, a by-election held in July of the same year ended in a victory for the GNP. This contrasts with the Roh Moo-hyun administration, where, except for the 17th general election which saw the ruling Uri Party win in the aftermath of impeachment, voters consistently cast their ballots for the opposition GNP. For a more concrete prediction, a closer examination of the new voting behaviors observed in the June 2nd, 2010 local elections compared to the May 31st, 2006 local elections is essential.

Punishment Voting or Balancing Voting?

The May 31st, 2006 local elections, held during the Roh Moo-hyun administration, as well as various by-elections, saw voters overwhelmingly support the then-opposition Grand National Party (GNP) due to a sentiment of 'checking and punishing' the incumbent government's failures. This 'retrospective punishment' voting sentiment based on the performance of the current administration continued through the 2007 presidential election and the 2008 general election. In contrast, the choices made by voters in the 2010 elections, as revealed in "Changing Korean Voters 4," are argued to be a typical 'balancing' vote aimed at checking the dominance or power of any single force. Despite the GNP's landslide victories in the 2007 presidential and 2008 general elections, leading up to the June 2nd, 2010 local elections,

the book empirically demonstrates how the sentiment of checking the ruling party, which had shown overwhelming power with slogans such as 'unwillingness to back down from war,' 'judgment of the participatory government,' and 'judgment of the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union,' shifted power to the opposition in the final stages of the election. Will voters engage in punitive voting based on the 'MB judgment theory' in the 2012 general and presidential elections? Or will they seek to strike a delicate balance of power between the ruling and opposition camps? This question is the key point in forecasting the 2012 general and presidential elections.

The Next Presidential Election Agenda: Economy, Welfare, or Peace?

The patterns of issue voting observed among voters during this local election period are also novel. The North Korea issue, which dominated media coverage throughout the election campaign due to the Cheonan함 incident, paradoxically mobilized the opposition more than the conservative base, ultimately working against the ruling party. Meanwhile, issues closely related to the local economy and daily life, such as free school meals and the Sejong City project, emerged as election agendas amidst the shock of the Cheonan함 incident. This suggests a shift in the zeitgeist and voter demands from growth and economy towards progress and welfare, with welfare discourse expected to become a key agenda item for the 2012 presidential election. The analysis of voter issue attitudes in the 2010 local elections will provide clues for understanding the key agendas and the zeitgeist that will shape the 2012 general and presidential elections.

The Revival of the Three Major Political Cleavages and the Ambivalent Voter

How will the three major political cleavages in Korean society—regional, generational, and ideological—unfold in 2012? While regional cleavages weakened in the 2002 presidential election, with generational and ideological cleavages becoming more prominent, the period of power transition in 2006-2007 saw the creation of an 'economic revival' issue black hole, leading to new terms like 'progressive GNP supporters' and 'progressive Lee Myung-bak supporters.' However, the 2010 local elections saw a resurgence of polarization, with support for candidates diverging along lines of young generations and ideological leanings. While the polarization between progressives and conservatives has deepened, the conclusion of "Changing Korean Voters 4" is that the choices of ambivalent voters, who simultaneously accept and reject both values, ultimately became the decisive factor.

The Institutional Effects of Split Voting: Strengthening Alliances or Maintaining Balance?

For the first time in 20 years since 1992, the general and presidential elections will be held in the same year. This institutional effect alone may lead to different calculations in voter choices for the 2012 general and presidential elections. Will voters empower a single party in consecutive elections? Or will they seek balance by making different choices? The analysis of voters who cast unified ballots for one party and those who engaged in split voting, distinguishing their preferred parties in the 2010 local elections—which included elections for metropolitan mayors, metropolitan council members, mayors of basic local governments, members of basic local councils, and superintendents of education under an 8-vote system—provides valuable insights for predicting voting choices in the 2012 general and presidential elections.

Candidate Unification: A Panacea?

In the June 2nd local elections, the opposition is assessed to have succeeded in unifying candidates, thereby simplifying the voting choices for those who opposed MB and preventing the fragmentation of votes. The opposition is currently accelerating preparations for candidate unification for the upcoming general and presidential elections to secure victory. However, there are also pessimistic forecasts suggesting that candidate unification will have little effect, given the significant gap between the leading GNP candidate and the opposition's potential candidates, and the fact that the political landscape is dominated by the pro- and anti-Park Geun-hye sentiment rather than a ruling-opposition confrontation. The experience of opposition candidate unification in the 2010 local elections will serve as a predictive indicator for gauging the impact of candidate unification in 2012.

"Changing Korean Voters 4: Analysis of the 2010 Local Elections Through Panel Data" will provide a deeper understanding of the factors influencing Korean voters' decisions and offer criteria for assessing the key variables that will shape the direction of 2012.

Table of Contents

Foreword

Methodology and Operation of the June 2nd, 2010 Local Election Panel Survey | Kim Chun-seok

Part 1: Key Issues and Voting Behavior in the 5th Local Elections

1. The Cheonan함 Incident and the Local Elections | Kang Won-taek

2. Types and Causes of Split Voting in the June 2nd Local Elections | Ji Byung-geun

3. Characteristics and Voting Behavior of Undecided Voters | Yoo Sung-jin

4. Why Was a President with a 50 Percent Approval Rating Punished? | Jeong Han-wool

5. Incumbency Effect in Metropolitan Mayor Elections | Lee Gon-soo

Part 2: Social Cleavages in Korea and the Local Elections

6. How Faithfully Did Voters Adhere to Ideology in the June 2nd Local Elections? | Lee Woo-jin

7. The June 2nd Local Elections and the Revival of Generational Cleavage | Lee Nae-young

8. Possibilities for Mitigating Regionalism | Lim Sung-hak

Appendix

For the convenience of our readers, portions of the manuscript are made public.