[EAI Opinion Review] Presidential Election Competition One Month In: Views of Unaffiliated Voters in Their 40s in the Seoul Metropolitan Area – Coexistence of Anxiety and Expectation

Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with Unaffiliated Voters in Their 40s in the Seoul Metropolitan Area, <The Sunday Donga>

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

With the support bases of the ruling and opposition parties solidifying, the direction of the 2012 presidential election is likely to be determined by the voting intentions of unaffiliated voters in their 40s in the Seoul metropolitan area. Therefore, about a month after the major presidential candidates were decided, we held a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) to understand how these voters currently evaluate the three major candidates, the criteria they use to choose their preferred candidate, and their future expectations. Eight participants, unaffiliated voters residing in the Seoul metropolitan area in their 40s, were recruited based on gender and preferred candidate to discuss the current presidential election process. The participants were predominantly college graduates or higher, working in general office jobs, and leaned towards opposition party support. Two participants supported Park Geun-hye, two supported Moon Jae-in, two supported independent candidate Ahn Chee-chong, and two were undecided voters who had recently changed their support. We present the discussion results on four topics: overall assessment, evaluation of each candidate's image, proposed reforms for political distrust, and candidate unification.

1. One Month Since the "Big 3" Officially Entered the Presidential Race: More Disappointment Than Expectation, Only a Glimmer of Hope

Disappointment over the Lack of Policy and Substance

Park Geun-hye, the Saenuri Party's presidential candidate, was nominated early in August, followed by Moon Jae-in as the Democratic Party's candidate a month later. Ahn Chee-chong entered the presidential race just before Chuseok. How do unaffiliated voters in their 40s view them? While there is a mix of expectation and disappointment, the discussion participants who observed the three major presidential candidates for over a month were generally lukewarm.

The participants commonly cited concerns about economic issues, children's education, and retirement – problems directly related to daily life – as pressing issues for the presidential election. However, they expressed considerable disappointment, finding no vision or hope for solutions in the candidates' current platforms. The primary reason for this disappointment was the perceived lack of discussion on concrete policies and visions that address real-world problems. They showed a strong aversion to "ivory tower" discussions rather than policy alternatives that could easily solve practical, everyday issues. Nevertheless, voices were also raised criticizing the candidates' qualifications and conduct rather than policy issues, given that the official campaign period had not yet begun.

E: "In my case, it feels like the three candidates are not yet fully prepared. Looking at them, I don't see any policy vision at all. It seems they want to run the country without having the capacity to do so."

F: "By now, there should be some policy proposals, but because they are focused on negative campaigning, such policies haven't emerged. It's truly disappointing."


G: "Honestly, I don't really grasp what "economic democratization" means. If it's just vague talk from think tanks, it's meaningless..."


A: "Frankly, creating policies isn't the biggest issue. The problem is whether they are people with sound ideology and spirit? Honestly, it feels like these three only care about winning votes. I wish one more candidate would run..."

Pessimistic Expectations

Of course, there were expectations for new leadership, a new political paradigm, and policy pledges offering direct solutions to everyday problems. However, even participants expressing these expectations questioned whether they could be realized. In other words, it is noteworthy that there is an underlying political cynicism and pessimism, characterized by a passive hope – a "what if" scenario despite knowing it's unlikely. However, it was notable that for participants supporting Ahn Chee-chong, his candidacy itself was a source of expectation.

F: "I would like to see half-price university tuition. Honestly, if the tuition is halved, the other half could be used for retirement funds. I hope this is achieved. Even though I know it won't happen, I still have expectations for this simple and clear proposal."

C: "We need a new era, new leadership... In terms of individuals, I think the current options are the best available. However, given their strengths and weaknesses, I don't have high expectations, but I hope it might be slightly better than what we've had so far."


D: "I think most people feel the same way. If I had to pick a point of expectation, it's that Ahn Chee-chong is a relatively new candidate. His entry might bring about a fresh change."

2. Evaluating the "Big 3": A Mirror-Opposite Effect Among Candidate Images

With the competition on policies and visions lacking, voters' choices are naturally focusing on the personal attributes of the three candidates. While it is true that personal factors generally have a greater impact in presidential elections than in general or local elections, the lack of political experience and track record among non-Saenuri Party candidates means that evaluations of personal history and overall image, rather than political achievements and leadership styles, are shaping preferences. Interestingly, when comparing the images of the three candidates, no single candidate monopolizes the leadership image; instead, each candidate's strengths and weaknesses seem to intertwine with those of the others. This suggests a situation where the balance of power is difficult to break.

Park Geun-hye: Perceived as lacking sincerity in change and as a political opportunist, though some see her as a politician who sticks to the basics.

In 2002, the 40s demographic was divided between supporting Roh Moo-hyun and Lee Hoi-chang. Five years later, in 2007, they overwhelmingly supported Lee Myung-bak. Current opinion polls during the incumbent government's term show a generally anti-government, pro-opposition sentiment among the 40s who are disappointed with the ruling party. Overall, the evaluation of Park Geun-hye is quite harsh.

To summarize the discussion: First, Park Geun-hye's image of emphasizing economic democratization and welfare is significantly undermined by her perceived inconsistency in past historical issues, such as the May 16th coup and the recent Jeong Soo-janghak Foundation issue. Second, from a positive perspective, her image of being cautious and valuing fundamentals and principles is seen by some as a lack of assertiveness, a lack of conviction, or political opportunism where she avoids responsibility. It is crucial for her to overcome the image of being swayed by her aides and the media without her own philosophy. This criticism was even raised by participants who support her.

A: "At the very least, I believe this person, if entrusted, would maintain the basic standards of the country, even if not excel. The negative aspect is that she seems unable to make decisions alone... I am concerned that she appears to be a puppet, swayed by some of her aides..."


D: "Some people call it a strength, but she seems too quiet and inscrutable. She should assert herself when necessary, but why is this considered a strength? It's different from the modern image of women."


H: "Regarding the Inhyukdang incident and the May 16th coup, wasn't it a case of her reluctantly agreeing at the last minute? ... She cannot let go of vested interests. So, how can she talk about unification..."

Moon Jae-in: Strengths include integrity and horizontal leadership; the "pro-Roh" image is a burden.

His integrity as a candidate was cited as a major strength. Furthermore, the absence of significant ethical controversies during the campaign process instilled strong trust in his 청렴함 (integrity). Compared to Ahn Chee-chong, his affiliation with a political party appears to provide a relative sense of stability. This was evident in the high personal favorability, with even Park Geun-hye supporters stating they would have voted for him 100% if he had been the Saenuri Party candidate.

However, the core of Moon Jae-in's negative image was the "pro-Roh Moo-hyun" label. While the negative connotations of "pro-Roh" in political circles and the media often imply the hegemonic tendencies of a political faction within the Yeongnam region, the public's perception of "pro-Roh" differs. It strongly implies responsibility for the deepening economic polarization and political failures during the participatory government era, as well as responsibility for political distrust driven by party interests. Furthermore, even among Moon's supporters, his lack of sufficient preparation and vetting, and his irresponsible ideological stance on issues like chaebol reform, were pointed out as weaknesses.

A: "If Moon Jae-in were from the Saenuri Party, I would have voted for him 100%. His biggest weakness, frankly, is being associated with the Democratic Party."


B: "Moon Jae-in was heavily promoted by 'Naggomsu' (a popular podcast). Although he emerged from Roh Moo-hyun's shadow and became prominent, eventually becoming the Democratic Party's candidate, he seems to lack influence. He is a candidate who has been pushed forward by the party."


H: "He seems human. He has a human touch. And his horizontal relationships, lack of vested interests, integrity, and cleanliness are remarkable. He is steadfast and unchanging. We can empathize with what he honestly conveys."


E: "Society has been thrown into chaos, and in terms of economy and democratization over the past 10 years, it seems we have regressed rather than progressed. Hasn't it leaned too far to the left? In the general election, the Democratic Party's code doesn't match that of the former Democratic Labor Party..."

Ahn Chee-chong: Fresh and ethical leadership, but frustration over lack of preparation and decisiveness.

Ahn Chee-chong's greatest strength is undoubtedly his symbolism of hope for a new kind of politics. This hope for new politics was often associated with his perceived cleanliness and ethical conduct, but it also stemmed from his novel approach to politics, built upon his foundation as a CEO and his extensive network of experts.

On the other hand, his weaknesses clearly include a lack of political preparation and decisiveness, which create political uncertainty. Even among participants who expressed support for Ahn Chee-chong, some voiced frustration, and pessimistic forecasts were made about his ability to survive in the harsh political arena. Conversely, there were also concerns that his strong social reputation and respect, earned through significant societal contributions, might fade in the political process. However, it is noteworthy that compared to before his announcement to run, Ahn Chee-chong's supporters now highly value his political determination to see things through to the end.

B: “Lee Myung-bak was obsessed with money and only pursued personal gain, failing to govern effectively. Ahn Chee-chong, on the other hand, is not someone who is concerned with such things, and even without political experience, he can practice clean politics as I mentioned earlier.”


H: “If he were a doctor or a businessman, it would be fine, but as a potential husband, he seems frustrating... He needs to fix his way of speaking or speak with absolute confidence.”


G: "The support base isn't about his lack of political backing; the 20-30% support isn't just because he's clean or seems good. It means the support base existing in the market, excluding his political foundation, is very strong."

3. Political Reform Debates Disconnected from the Public: Normalization of Politics First

The greatest political reform: Normalization of politics and institutional reform, prioritizing accountability over representation.

With Ahn Chee-chong's political reform proposals, such as reducing the number of National Assembly members to 200 and relocating the Blue House, gaining traction, political reform debates are intensifying not only within the opposition but across the political spectrum. However, there appears to be a significant gap between the major problems and proposed solutions for Korean politics as diagnosed by unaffiliated voters in their 40s and the political reform plans put forth by each candidate.

First, the participants in the discussion identified the main problems in Korean politics not as the introduction of special systems or grand reforms, but as the failure to fulfill the basic functions of an legislative body, such as its 조정기능 (coordination function). The ongoing debate on "institutional reforms" like the proportion of proportional representation and the reduction of National Assembly seats seems distant from the public's perspective, as it prioritizes the "normalization of politics" in political behavior and function.

Second, regarding institutional reform, many voices advocated for reforms that would strengthen government and political accountability and policy consistency, rather than those aimed at enhancing overall representativeness, such as proportional representation. A prime example is the strong interest in proposals for extending presidential terms (e.g., re-election or consecutive terms) to ensure accountability and consistency in state affairs, rather than the current single five-year term. This also indicates a disconnect between the public's perspective and the focus of these discussions.

F: My child asked, "Mom, is politics about fighting?" The moment I heard that, I realized if this is the politics shown to children, then there's a problem with us and with them.

C: "For me, the most irritating thing is the failure to pass legislation during the regular National Assembly sessions... What are these people here for?"


A: "In my case, the failure to pass legislation during the regular National Assembly sessions... If you're conservative, you're called a stubborn old reactionary; if you're progressive, you're called a communist. This polarization is significant."


E: "I believe the President of our country should at least serve consecutive terms, whether two four-year terms or two five-year terms. Because during a five-year term, they try one thing and then another, unable to pursue their own political convictions before stepping down. We need to judge whether they did well or poorly, but if they do well, they should be allowed to serve longer..."

4. Divergent Views on Candidate Unification

Regarding the major issue of opposition candidate unification, supporters of Moon Jae-in and Ahn Chee-chong are generally positive, with the exception of Park Geun-hye supporters. However, there are significant differences in the intensity of their support and their attitudes towards the scenario where unification does not occur.

First, Moon Jae-in supporters appear to have stronger expectations and demands for unification than Ahn Chee-chong supporters. However, in terms of preference for the unified candidate, both groups are evenly split, with each wanting their preferred candidate to be the unified one.

Relatively speaking, Moon Jae-in supporters, due to their stronger emphasis on the justification and necessity of unification, seemed less resistant to the idea of their candidate not being the unified one. In contrast, many Ahn Chee-chong supporters expressed that while unification would be good, it wasn't essential. Given that most of these participants showed strong aversion and distrust towards both the Saenuri Party and the Democratic Party in terms of party support, their reluctance to focus solely on unification for the sake of electoral victory, especially if it means unifying behind Moon Jae-in, foreshadows potential difficulties in future unification discussions.

H: "If unification doesn't happen, it would be foolish. I think Moon Jae-in would be the one... (Ahn Chee-chong's) support base seems like it could collapse easily. To put it simply, it's like having an intern at a company; they need to gain experience step by step. If there's no unification, I will abstain from voting."


C: "I hope unification happens smoothly, with a proper candidate chosen, but I don't know if it will... Regardless of who becomes the unified candidate, I will vote for the opposition anyway, as I am not supporting the ruling party."


D: "I prefer Ahn Chee-chong... Whether unification should happen or not is irrelevant to me. A flaw in Korea is its lack of acceptance of diversity. In that sense, the insistence on unification, like a black-and-white logic, somewhat provokes my opposition. It's not bad for diverse people to cast their votes in various ways."


G: "Unification, as it exists, is unique to South Korea. It's more like a withdrawal, not unification. Furthermore, unification deprives the public of their right to choose..."

[Table 1] Characteristics of FGD Participants