自1970年代中期以來，在全球民主化浪潮衝擊下，東歐各國以及第三世界絕大多數 原威權或極權統治者，不論是個人或政黨，若非被迫下台、讓位，就是身首異處。但台 灣的國民黨政權卻能夠擺脫第三世界威權統治者的宿命，繼續執政，構成一大奇觀。國 民黨爲何尙未失去政權？是一個値得探究的問題，也是本文的中心問題。作者從選舉及 政黨體系的維持與變遷的角度切入，並提出兩個問題：第一，台灣選民的「漸進重組」 (secular realignment)是如何發生的？第二，台灣自解嚴迄今，爲何仍未出現Key所 描述的「關鍵性選舉」（criticalelection)?作者相信，假如這兩個問題能獲得適當的解 答，就等於回答了本文的中心問題。因爲在台灣特殊的歷史脈絡下，只有在選舉中國民 黨才可能失去政權。 爲回答上述兩大問題，作者根據一項全國性的、有關二屆國大選民的調査硏究資料，驗證了十個相關的假設。實徵資料強有力地證實了所有的假設，亦支持了我們的中心論證：「政黨形象和意識型態是導致台灣有漸進的選民重組但仍沒有關鍵性選舉的主要因素。政黨形象和意識型態一方面提供反對黨成長的機會，另一方面也侷限了反對黨的壯大。在缺乏強烈社會分歧的條件下，政黨形象、意識型態和政黨領導者對選舉議題及立場的選擇將繼續重大地影響台灣選民黨派偏好的形成和選舉結果。」此外，經驗證據顯示，當我們要解釋台灣選民的政黨偏好與抉擇時，態度分歧變項的重要性遠超過社會分岐變項，包括省籍、族群或經濟地位。

Given the process of democratization in Taiwan, how do we explain that the KMT, by all standards a harsh immigrant and authoritarian regime for nearly four decades, still remains in power? This question can be explored by examining the nexus between elections and the transformation of the party system. This in turn raises two additional questions. First, how did the secular realignment take place, especially during the past two decades? Second, why has an electoral day of reckoning fail to materialize sometime since the lifting of martial law in 1987? I argue that explanation of two phenomena - secular realignment without critical election - are central to understand why the KMT remains in power. Survey-based data of Taiwanese voters indicates that the persistence of secular realignment without critical election may be chiefly caused by attitudes toward political parties and ideological preferences. The overall party image and ideological propensity of Taiwanese voter, to a significant degree, favor the growth of opposition forces; on the other hand, these two factors simultaneously help the ruling party to retain power. Since Taiwan lacks segmental social cleavages, the following three factors will probably be decisive in shaping Taiwanese partisan preference structure and election outcomes in the future: (1) voter’s party image, (2) ideological propensity, (3) issue-positions taken by rival political party leaders.