Lee Jae-myung's centrist shift

To walk the talk, Lee must cooperate to pass K-Chips Act

Rep. Lee Jae-myung, chairman of the main opposition Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), knows that he needs a political breakthrough to fulfill his presidential aspirations, especially in the event of an early presidential election.

Though all public opinion polls show Lee as the undisputed frontrunner, there is a catch: His approval ratings have stalled in the mid-30 percent range. To make matters worse, he is also the most disliked candidate, topping the list of those people say they would never consider voting for.

If an early presidential election were to take place and Lee is serious about his presidential bid, he must devise a bold strategy to broaden his support base. Currently, his supporters are mostly loyal DPK members, and he needs to appeal to centrist voters.

Lee recently described himself as a pragmatist who is more focused on people’s livelihoods and the economy than on political ideologies. This remark was seen as a premeditated effort to win over swing voters.

On Tuesday, he claimed that the DPK’s political orientation is center-right, rather than the progressive stance many perceive it to hold. He made this comment while emphasizing his party’s focus on economic issues. However, it backfired. Within the DPK, lawmakers were left embarrassed as their leader attempted to redefine the party’s long-established ideological identity. Im Jong-seok, who served as presidential chief of staff during the Moon Jae-in administration, publicly refuted Lee’s statement. “The DPK is not a center-right party. The party’s political orientation is not something that can be changed overnight by one person, even if he is the leader,” he said on social media.

Outside of the DPK, Lee’s redefinition of the party’s political stance has sparked mockery. Rep. Kim Gi-hyeon of the ruling People Power Party (PPP) called Lee’s claim absurd, likening it to the concept of “hot ice cream.” “He’s telling the public he’s selling hot ice cream. I wonder who would buy such an absurd idea,” Kim said.

Despite the backlash, Lee didn’t back down. On Wednesday, he reiterated that the DPK is indeed a center-right party, arguing that it prioritizes economic growth, and accused the PPP of being a far-right party. “People tend to think of politics as a binary choice, black or white, and expect others to choose a side. These people are misleading, if not wrong, because there is a gray area that incorporates both. This middle ground is not inherently bad, as some suggest,” he said.

His remark is seen as an attempt to reshape his image as a reasonable, centrist politician.

In elections, there’s a golden rule for victory: Candidates must secure the loyalty of their traditional supporters, ensuring they turn out in full force on Election Day. However, this alone is not enough to win. Candidates also need to gain more support from swing voters than their rivals. In this regard, Lee’s strategy to appeal to centrist voters isn’t inherently flawed.

The question, however, is whether Lee is genuinely committed to his words and has the will to implement them if elected.

Voters are increasingly disillusioned with self-serving politicians who promise anything to win votes but fail to deliver once in office. The public has grown tired of empty campaign pledges.

So, how can we determine whether a certain politician is trustworthy? How can we discern who will follow through on their promises and who won’t? These are difficult questions to answer. However, one reliable standard exists: We can gauge a politician’s integrity by looking at their past actions.

For a politician like Lee, his record in the National Assembly can offer some insight into his responsibility and commitment. Recently, his stance on the K-Chips Act has come under scrutiny.

The crucial bill is currently stalled in the National Assembly, with the PPP and DPK unable to reach a consensus due to disagreements over the 52-hour workweek rule. The ruling party insists the semiconductor industry should be exempt from this rule, while the DPK takes the opposite view. Earlier this month, Lee hinted at a shift in his party’s position, suggesting that the DPK would review its stance. However, no changes have been made, leading to a failed trilateral policy consultation meeting between the PPP, the DPK and the government over the legislation.

The DPK has long positioned itself as a party for unionists and the underprivileged. If Lee is serious about prioritizing economic growth and people’s livelihoods, as he claims, his party must work with the government to push the crucial bill forward. This bill serves as a litmus test for Lee’s sincerity regarding his commitment to pragmatism. If Lee is serious about appealing to centrist voters, he must demonstrate that he can walk the talk.