.png)
A few days ago, I had a phone conversation with a professor I am acquainted with. Naturally, the topic of Cho Jeon-hyeok, the candidate for Seoul Superintendent of Education, came up. The professor said, “Since the conservative candidate has been unified this time, we should almost consider it a victory, right?” expressing an optimistic outlook for Cho’s win. Upon hearing this, I thought, "This could be a problem." Over the past ten years, the conservative camp has struggled in the Seoul Superintendent of Education election due to a failure to unify its candidates. Therefore, conservatives have widespread hope that this unification will lead to victory. However, the reality is not so simple.
According to a survey conducted by KSOI (Korea Society Opinion Institute) commissioned by CBS from the 30th of last month for two days, asking 804 men and women aged 18 or older residing in Seoul about a hypothetical match-up between the two candidates, Jeong Geun-sik polled at 37.1%, while Cho Jeon-hyeok followed with 32.5%. The gap between the two candidates was 4.6 percentage points (p), within the margin of error. Additionally, 18.3% responded with "undecided," and 12.1% said "no preference."
Despite the success of unifying the conservative candidate for the first time in 10 years, why has this kind of polling result emerged? Cho's situation in this by-election transcends a simple competitive structure and is entangled with structural issues. These factors can be categorized into three major aspects: first, the overconfidence of conservative voters; second, Cho’s political recognition and track record; and third, the lingering instability of the electoral system. Each of these factors is critical in its own right, but when combined, they create an even more disadvantageous situation.
The most significant obstacle for Cho in this election is the excessive optimism of conservative voters. The conservative camp is confident of victory after succeeding in unifying the candidate for Seoul Superintendent of Education for the first time in a decade. The fact that Cho is running as the sole conservative candidate has raised expectations of consolidating conservative votes. However, Cho is not leading Jeong Geun-sik, the progressive candidate, by any significant margin in the polls, and in some cases, he is trailing behind.
According to surveys from Hangil Research and Gallup Korea, Cho is trailing Jeong by an average of 3 to 5 percentage points. These results suggest that the overconfidence of the conservative base may lead to misjudgment. Elections are not decided by poll numbers alone. Final voter turnout and unexpected variables often determine the outcome, with moderate voters playing a decisive role. Yet, within the conservative camp, these variables are being overlooked, and victory is being treated as a foregone conclusion. This attitude risks lowering turnout among the already consolidated conservative supporters. The most dangerous thing in an election is complacency. The conservative camp is resting too much on the laurels of candidate unification. Unification is merely a strategy; it does not guarantee victory.
The second major issue for Cho is his political history and relatively low public recognition, which serve as critical weaknesses. Cho gained recognition within the conservative camp for his prolonged battle with the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union (KTU). He took a hardline stance, calling for the dissolution of the KTU, earning the support of conservative voters. However, since then, he has not been particularly prominent in political activities. His long absence from the political spotlight means that many politically disengaged voters are unfamiliar with his name. The election for Superintendent of Education in Seoul does not involve political parties or numbers on the ballot. Only the candidates' names appear on the ballot on Election Day, making the direction of education policies far more important than party affiliation in this election. Thus, it is not easy for Cho to garner the support of moderate or politically indifferent voters.
While his past is appealing to conservatives, it may not be as attractive to the general electorate. His prolonged absence from the political scene and lack of active messaging as an education policy expert could turn voters off. His past focus on specific issues, such as his battles with the KTU, may not appeal to voters who are looking for a deeper understanding of and vision for education policies. Additionally, his combative image from the past could be off-putting to moderate and younger voters.
Cho’s lack of political exposure and public recognition is a fatal weakness in his campaign. Voters who are less engaged in politics may not know who he is or what vision he has for education. They may not see a compelling reason to make the effort to go to the polls. This is a critical variable in the election. Candidates with low political recognition must make extra efforts to convey their message to a broader audience. However, due to Cho's long absence from the political scene, he is at a disadvantage both in terms of time and resources.
Lastly, the persistent issues with the election system, which have not been addressed since the April 15th general election, remain a crucial variable in this election. The Korean electoral system still carries concerns about fairness and transparency. Despite evidence of mixed ballots during the 2002 presidential election when the electronic counting system was first introduced, no corrective action was taken.
Despite evidence of serious flaws during the electoral process, such as during the 21st general election recount, where more than 1,000 invalid ballots, including stiff, seemingly untouched ballots, were found, the judiciary did not recognize these issues as grounds for election invalidation. Instead, they were dismissed. This legacy of unresolved electoral integrity issues remains a concern in this election as well.
The use of electronic vote counters, which have been questioned since 2002, is also planned for the Superintendent of Education election. The absentee voting system, which has been criticized for disproportionately favoring the Democratic party in the last three major elections, is still in place. Low turnout, especially in an election with relatively low voter interest, such as the Superintendent election, could increase the potential for vote manipulation, leading to a distorted outcome.
The combination of conservative overconfidence, Cho's lack of public recognition, and an unstable electoral system creates a challenging environment for Cho’s candidacy. These three factors combined are reducing his chances of winning. If Cho is to improve his chances, he must address each of these issues.
First, Cho must reinforce a message that raises "a sense of urgency." He needs to clearly warn about the specific policy changes that will occur if his opponent wins, as well as the negative educational and social consequences that may result. For example, highlighting the potential damage to educational quality and children's character under his opponent’s policies could rally the conservative base and reinforce the need for them to vote.
Second, he needs to drastically increase media exposure and adopt a more aggressive campaign strategy. Short, impactful video content effectively communicating his policies and vision could work well. For instance, concise 30-second videos explaining how his policies will improve education should be widely shared on social media, encouraging voters to share them. Additionally, he should increase his local campaigning efforts, meeting voters in person and listening to their concerns. By presenting concrete solutions to their real problems, Cho can build trust with the electorate.
Finally, Cho's camp must significantly increase the number of election observers and organize a system of volunteers to monitor the entire voting process. At the same time, Cho should advocate for reforms to ensure fair elections. He should campaign for electoral law reforms to address the procedural transparency issues, and reassure voters that their votes will be properly counted. By emphasizing the need for overwhelming voter turnout to overcome any potential manipulation, he can build momentum for his campaign. He should consistently push for a fair election system and integrate this message into his campaign.
If Cho can address these three challenges effectively, his chances of winning will significantly improve. He has a good chance of turning the tide in his favor by rallying complacent supporters, increasing his public recognition, and advocating for fair election practices.
Comments