 |
|
| ▲ In addition, Democratic Party representative Lee Nak-yeon speaks at the first meeting of the post-corona inequality TF held at the National Assembly Hall in Yeouido, Seoul on the afternoon of the 15th. | |
| Ⓒ Joint coverage photo |
See related photos |
There are no recent articles related to Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol. The centerpiece of Jungkook is the remarks of the two former presidents’ pardons by Lee Nak-yeon and the Democratic Party leader. Whether positive or negative, the turn of issues has certainly happened. This transition began in the last New Year’s interview. After this remark, on the surface, it caused a wave within the ruling party rather than the opposition party. A representative example of this is Nak-yeon Lee’s New Year’s interview, and the Democratic Party of Korea held an emergency supreme committee on January 3 to derive two conditions for amnesty: consensus and reflection of the parties. The party would have wanted to respond quickly and move on to a probationary phase, but it is still not fading away easily because of the nature of the issue and the current opinion of the ruling party that was born out of candlelight. Then, why did Nak-yeon Lee, the influential presidential candidate, raise the issue of amnesty so suddenly, what kind of consequences does this remark have for now, and what will be the political impact on this?
First of all, why did Nak-yeon Lee suddenly raise the issue of amnesty, the president’s own authority? From the perspective of Lee Nak-yeon’s individual political philosophy, Lee Nak-yeon seems to have a politics of national unity rather than antagonism and confrontation, although politics is a confrontation between political parties. The reason for this is’I told you of my long-standing loyalty to achieve national unity,’ for the reason for remarking once amnesty in interviews with various media, and does not bend the meaning of his falling approval rating and internal opposition from the ruling party. Another reason can be found in the relationship with former President Kim Dae-jung. Party leader Lee Nak-yeon, from Gwangju, Jeollanam-do, entered politics as a member of the National Assembly in 2000, but was already receiving deep attention from former President Kim Dae-jung during his life as a reporter for the Dong-A Ilbo. Specifically, in 1989, then the Pyongmin Party President Kim Dae-jung actively recommended initiation to politics. In many interviews, Lee Nak-yeon revealed himself, and from this relationship, it can be interpreted that just as former President Kim Dae-jung pardoned Chun Doo-hwan, who tried to kill him, Lee Nak-yeon made this amnesty remark, taking former President Kim Dae-jung’s political philosophy as his political philosophy. have.
At the same time, from a political engineering perspective, the reason can be found in the recent unseen approval ratings of the ruling party leader. Lee Nak-yeon, a prominent candidate for the next presidential election at the August 29 National Assembly, ran for the party’s representative. Following the presidential election in March 2022, according to the Democratic Party’s Party Constitutional Regulations, Lee Nak-yeon was elected by challenging the party leader with risks despite being only a 7-month party leader. However, after that, Nak-yeon Lee was not seen. There was no convention effect, and no issues were preempted. Was it because of the excessively stable party operation? Rather, the approval ratings of Lee Nak-yeon continued to decline due to Chu Mi-ae, Yoon Seok-yeol, and Lee Jae-myeong.
According to a poll conducted by Real Meter on January 1-2, Lee Nak-yeon’s approval rating was 15%, far behind Yoon Seok-yeol (30.4%) and Lee Jae-myeong (20.3%).(YTN commissioned the nationwide for January 1~2. The survey was conducted on 1,000 people aged 18 and over, with a sample error of ±3.1% with a 95% confidence level. For more information, refer to the website of the Central Election Survey Deliberation Committee). The dignity of the unwavering presidential candidate’s first place, which he showed only 4-5 months ago, has become difficult to find. In particular, compared to Lee Jae-myeong, who preoccupies progressive issues for each issue and extends its extension to the middle, the presence of the giant ruling party leader with 180 seats seems to be too insignificant. In this context, it can be said that Nak-yeon Lee used political battles to create an image of a leader in harmony and unity in the New Year’s interview. However, I think this is an analysis of political critics who are too narrow and overlooked Lee Nak-yeon’s personal characteristics in light of the side effects currently occurring.
At this point, about ten days after the controversy over Nak-yeon Lee’s amnesty, the negative effects on the passport and the individual Lee Nak-yeon are largely summarized in two ways. The first is putting a burden on the Blue House. As mentioned earlier, even though amnesty is the president’s own authority, the president of the ruling party suddenly revealed through an interview with the media without consulting the Blue House, and the Blue House was embarrassed. This issue can flow into a flow where the Blue House seems to have to step forward and seal it. In particular, as the President has to give an answer to this issue rather than explain other policy issues in the New Year’s interview, politically, the range of luck has narrowed. In addition, considering that the opposition party continued to attack in the last Chuyun conflict that President Moon Jae-in was behind and did not solve the problem, Lee Nak-yeon’s remarks seem to have resulted in a burden on the Blue House. Not surprisingly, President Ahn Chul-soo of the People’s Party said,’Amnesty is the president’s intrinsic authority’ and raised his voice that President Moon Jae-in should step forward and announce his position to resolve the problem.
Second, the passport itself seems to have caused a division and to the opposition party, it seems to have caused an attack. Park Soo-hyun, a former Blue House spokesman, showed a nuance of standing in the position of CEO Lee Nak-yeon through a Facebook post, and revealed that some members of the ruling party could never accept it. In addition, among Democratic Party members, opinions that Nak-yeon Lee should be removed from the candidate for the presidential election, and further criticism of the need to withdraw from the presidential election are rising. On the other hand, as the election approaches, considering the public sentiment of Daegu and Gyeongsangbuk-do, I would like to say the pardon of President Park Geun-hye, but internally, the impeachment of former President Park Geun-hye has not been sealed, so it would have been difficult to notice the pardon. In this situation, the ruling party’s party representative first brought out the story, creating an environment in which the legitimacy of the amnesty can be said more strongly. Specifically, Ho-young Joo argued that he should not play with a pardon, and Lee Nak-yeon insisted that he should be responsible for his own words. Rep. Jang Je-won said, “If the ruling party’s representative once threw the issue of the former president’s pardon without rapport with the Blue House If you are not qualified, and you have not been able to reconcile the disagreements within the party even though you threw a sympathy with the Blue House, you have shown that not only Lee, but also President Moon Jae-in fell into a lame duck,” he began to attack both President Lee Nak-yeon and President Moon Jae-in.
In the end, if you look at the situation so far, it seems that Nak-yeon Lee has fallen into the beginning of the slope. He was under tremendous pressure both from his support and from the opposition. This seems to be a stupid strategy, not a fact or a big skill. However, no matter how much I thought about it, would Lee Nak-yeon really use such a big technique without predicting the current situation? If so, I don’t think I have any qualifications since the presidential election that represents the candlelight public sentiment. And now I think it’s good to put down expectations for Lee Nak-yeon.
Simply looking at the current situation, it seems reasonable that Nak-yeon Lee, the Democratic Party, and the majority of the people who participated in the impeachment of former President Park Geun-hye, should be criticized. However, if you think of Lee Nak-yeon, who was favored by President Kim Dae-jung, Lee Nak-yeon, who supported Roh Moo-hyun in the 2002 Millennium Democratic Party presidential election, and Roh Moo-hyun, who served as the spokesperson shortly after the president was elected, and Lee Nak-yeon, who served as the first and longest prime minister of the Moon Jae-in administration. I think this amnesty remark is a highly political target. The Moon Jae-in administration’s approval rating is falling and the situation is not easy at the moment ahead of the re-election of the Mayor of Seoul and the Busan Mayor in April and the presidential election next year. In this situation, the weapons that opposition parties will attack against the Moon Jae-in government in the election phase are economic frame attacks centered on real estate, unfair frame attacks through the suspicion of children of former Minister Cho Kuk/Cho Mi-ae, and imprisonment of two former presidents and amnesty. It is a semi-integrated frame attack that does not. Attacks against K-quarantine and vaccines are obviously not effective if they go to the election phase. Rather, they can attack now, but they can be used in the election phase, especially the presidential election. It is difficult to do. If so, the three incompetent economic frames, unfair frames, and anti-integrated leadership frame attacks mentioned above will dominate.
Then, why did Nak-yeon Lee cope with the third attack like this? First of all, the incompetent economic frame and the unfair frame can be predicted, and the supporters of the Democratic Party can also counterattack. However, the third case is not only difficult to predict, but also difficult to mention considering the ruling party’s support base. However, as party leader Lee Nak-yeon first mentioned, it has the effect of twisting the staff internally. CEO Kim Jong-in apologized to the public for the arrest of the two former presidents despite strong opposition from the party in December. Why did you do that? The reason for this is that if President Park Geun-hye is sentenced to a re-appeal by the Supreme Court in the case of Gukjeong Nongdan on January 14, when the opposition representative first apologizes before the election season returns, discussions will come out little by little if the pardon is centered on the opposition. Then, at this time, CEO Kim Jong-in would have tried to burden the Blue House like a fox. Until now, if there is no case of not pardoning the former president, and if the opposition party leader does not pardon even though the opposition party apologizes to the people, President Moon Jae-in is not a president of unification that unites the people as one, but until the end, drives half of the people into enemy forces and hopes only his supporters He would have attempted to attack the anti-integrative leadership of reporting and politics.
As President Lee Nak-yeon first tackled this issue, he knew that he would be in an unfavorable situation in the Democratic Party’s presidential election, but the opposition party blunted the blade of this attack in the future. Because, on the basis of two conditions within the party: public consensus and reflection of the parties, Lee Nak-yeon attacked that the opposition party should pardon, the opposition party’s representative also directly apologized to the people. I created a situation that I could take back. In addition, if you ask why you are not pushing for an amnesty for the unification of the people as a presidential candidate as a political philosophy, you can say that no matter how much your political philosophy, you cannot abandon the will of the people and party members.
In conclusion, Lee Nak-yeon’s amnesty remarks so far seem to be true. However, as the mayor of Seoul and the mayor of Busan enter the by-election and subsequent presidential elections, members of the Democratic Party will know why this remark was a highly political target. Candidate Nak-yeon Lee would not have chosen this path if he found a shortcut in an impatient way while seeing his falling approval rating. Looking a little further away, I think that together with President Moon Jae-in, I made a lonely and criticized choice for the Democratic Party. I hope that I will not forget the comments made to the party members and supporters who are criticizing Lee Nak-yeon so much that Roh Moo-hyun should replace the candidate with a lower approval rating during the 2002 Millennium Democratic Party presidential election.
If you don’t know the shortcut, go to the main road.
If you don’t know the main road, go straight.
If that’s difficult too, stop and think
I think it is not an easy shortcut for Lee Nak-yeon to raise his approval rating, but rather, he chose the main road alone for the Democratic Party with President Moon Jae-in. However, if this choice turns out to be a wrong choice in the future, I think that when I look back on Lee Nak-yeon’s life, he will stop and think about his presidential race. I hope to watch a little more. Is it Lee Nak-yeon’s true story or is it a big skill?
* Related information on YouTube <민중의대화>You can also check. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7JuGjOGyG8&t=161s)