2000 Taiwanese presidential election

The ruling Kuomintang (KMT) ran vice president Lien Chan for president and Premier Vincent Siew for vice president.[2] Both were career civil servants and Lien, originating from the Taiwanese aristocracy, was seen as aloof and unable to empathize with the common people.[3]

Though more popular and consistently ranked higher in the polls, the outspoken former Taiwan governor James Soong failed to gain the Kuomintang's nomination.[4] As a result, he announced his candidacy as an independent candidate. The Kuomintang responded by expelling Soong in November 1999.[5] It is a very common belief among KMT supporters that president Lee Teng-hui was secretly supporting Chen Shui-bian, and purposely supported the less popular Lien in order to split the Kuomintang,[6][7] and this belief was given a great deal of credibility after the 2000 election with Lee's defection to the Pan-Green coalition, though Lee's defection came only after his expulsion by the KMT.[8] Soong, a mainlander, tried to appeal to the native Taiwanese by nominating surgeon Chang Chao-hsiung, who is a native Taiwanese, as his running-mate.[9] This, combined with the fact that Chang had connections to both the Democratic Progressive Party and the KMT reinforced Soong's campaign message of bridging political and cultural divide.[10]

In December 1999, the KMT began to attack Soong's integrity. They sued Soong for theft, alleging that as party secretary-general, he stole millions of Taiwan dollars in cash[11] intended for the family of the late president Chiang Ching-kuo and hid the money in the Chunghsing Bills Finance Co.[12][13] Soong defended himself by saying he was acting under Lee's direction,[11][12] though Lee denied this and many found the explanation unconvincing.[14] Initially holding a commanding lead in the polls,[5] Soong ended up losing by just over 300,000 votes.[2]

Both candidates had some obstacles presenting themselves as reform candidates with regard to corruption, given their high rank in the Kuomintang government. Soong's strategy was to openly admit his past wrongdoing and present his insider status as an advantage: i.e. that he could most easily tackle the corruption because of his experience with it; however, many saw his credibility as a reformer as broken by his financial scandal.[15] Lien advocated for reform, but had some difficulty in direct criticism as such attacks may have offended the ruling government; this is thought to have contributed to his defeat.[16]

The DPP ran former Taipei mayor Chen Shui-bian and Taoyuan County magistrate Annette Lu for vice president.[2] Having run for the 1996 election on a radical independence platform and lost by a landslide,[17][18] the DPP in May 1999 moderated its stance[19] by issuing the "Resolution on the Future of Taiwan".[20] The resolution accepted the status quo and promoted the moderate view that Taiwan was already independent, so any formal declaration would not be urgently necessary, if at all,[21] and Chen presented a more conciliatory stance regarding the mainland.[18] Also included was the pledge that any change in Taiwan's international status will have to be done through a referendum,[20] thus alleviating the fear that, if elected, a DPP government would unilaterally declare independence without popular approval. The Chen-Lu ticket also promised to be more aggressive in fighting black gold,[22][18] a system of connections and corruption which had become intertwined with the KMT.[23] The last minute public endorsement of Chen Shui-bian by President of the Academia Sinica and Nobel laureate Yuan T. Lee is also thought to have played a role in his election,[24] with Yuan T. Lee offering to negotiate with the PRC on Taiwan's behalf.[25]

All independent presidential tickets were required to turn in a petition of 224,000 names to the Central Election Commission to confirm their candidacy and appear on the ballot.[26]

Former DPP Chairman Hsu Hsin-liang, who had quit the party after failing to prevent Chen from running, ran as an independent with New Party (NP) legislator Josephine Chu as his running mate.[2] As DPP Chairman, Hsu had moderated the platform of the party, promoting reconciliation with the People's Republic of China and the opening of direct links,[27] a move not then supported by the KMT.[28] During the 2000 campaign, the Hsu-Chu ticket promoted unification under something similar to, but not the same as, 'one country, two systems', claiming that that exact system would be "bound to bring immediate loss to Taiwan".[29]

The New Party nominated independent social commentator Li Ao—an acclaimed author, historian, and former political prisoner[30]—for president and legislator Elmer Fung for vice president.[31] Li, who supported "one country, two systems",[32][33] said he took the election as an opportunity to educate the people in Taiwan on his ideas, and show them the nation's "dark side".[34] Despite his nomination Li refused to join the NP.[31] Both he and the NP publicly encouraged people to vote for James Soong to the point of stating during the televised presidential debates that he was not planning to vote for himself and that people should vote for Soong so that the pro-unification vote would not be split.[35]

A white paper issued by the People's Republic of China (PRC) prior to the election had mentioned that they would "not permit the 'Taiwan question' to drag on", which generated condemnation from American leaders, including John Kerry and Stanley Roth; along with a downturn in the stock market, but little in terms of a Taiwanese reaction.[36] Then, shortly before the election, Zhu Rongji, the premier of the People's Republic of China attempted to influence the outcome, warning that voters should "not just act on impulse at this juncture, which will decide the future course that China and Taiwan will follow" and should "shun a pro-independence candidate", further stating that "[n]o matter who comes into power in Taiwan, Taiwan will never be allowed to be independent. This is our bottom line and the will of 1.25 billion Chinese people."[37][38] According to Christopher R. Hughes, emeritus professor of International Relations at the London School of Economics, a conclusion was made that the statements of Chinese government had actually been counterproductive and helped Chen to win;[18] consequently, China avoided making such an open attempt to influence the 2004 elections, adopting a "wait and see" attitude with Chen.[39]