Professor Scheiner emphasized on three arguments which can be attributed to the LDP's longevity. Despite the party's unpopularity, it miraculously served Japan at its best. The first is due to the "institution" long established by the LDP since the day it was founded. Japan achieved a successful economy through the years of LDP's rule. Who would not want among the Japanese people a better economy, or more appropriately a better standard of living? It has also valued Japanese culture through the appeals it makes to the people. This can be seen in the campaign periods wherein candidates themselves go to different places perseveringly repeating their names so as to inform everyone about his candidacy, shaking the hands of bystandards while handing them pamphlets as well but most importantly stating their political platforms. Maybe the fact how Japanese candidates conduct their campaigns so differently compared here in the Philippines makes them appear to me more sincere in what they are doing. A candidate campaigning mostly all by himself is not an easy task to do. Amazingly, the policies the LDP implements also seems to favor elites and as well normal Japanese people.
The second is that the majority of the public does not support reform. Reform in a way that they are afraid to risk the chances of improving Japan by supporting other political parties. They have the notion "The LDP is serving its purpose well in all aspects promoting anything that is Japanese, why should we consider other alternatives (parties)"? It all boils down to the fact the public is contented with what the current system offers.
The third has something to do with the composition of the parties, the candidates. The speaker mentioned in the video that the new electoral system whereby the voters are given two ballots, one for the party and another for an individual candidate. This situation highlights the opposing parties failure to overthrow the LDP. The scenerio given was when in terms of party votes, the LDP is on the loosing end since the leading opposition party is doing much better during the year 2003. As I mentioned above, they are the most disliked party among all others. But in terms of individual candidacy votes, the LDP candidates dramatically exceed those of oppositional candidates. Why is that so? Opposition parties are having a hard time finding good candidates while compared to the LDP wherein most candidates are incumbents. The term "quality" was introduced here which was defined as a candidate's level of experience in politics and his ability to do well on it. The LDP's possession of quality candidates is considered an advantage since as I mentioned most candidates are former local heads of subnational level which have already done something beneficial to the public like projects and services. Another thing about LDP candidates are their influence in the government. The pipeline system as what the people have coined it in which the candidates get support from the government mostly the financial kind of support in order to answer the needs and requests of the localities.
In liue with what I have written above, I cannot help but to speak my mind on the third argument since I am trying to understand how is it possible to hate the party while liking the people behind it. In other words, it is difficult for me to isolate the body and its parts. It is like saying I hate Nihonggo but I like studying Kanji. Shouldn't the parts reflect the whole condition of the body? Shouldn't the scenario be since the LDP is composed of good quality candidates, then LDP as whole is a good political party?
