Talk is growing that Seoul is tilting sharply to one side. One poll put Jung Won-oh at 45.6% and Oh Se-hoon at 35.4% — a 10.2-point gap outside the margin of error. The figures came from a survey CBS commissioned from the Korea Society Opinion Institute (KSOI). Taken alone, the numbers can make the election look settled. But in politics, the most dangerous moment is mistaking numbers for certainty.
A poll is not an outcome; it is a snapshot. It is not the destination of public sentiment, but a point along the way. In that same survey, support for the Democratic Party stood at 44.2%, compared with 31.5% for the People Power Party. Respondents who said they would choose a ruling-party candidate also totaled 46.6%. In that sense, Jung’s 45.6% reads less as personal strength than as a reflection of the broader party current carrying him.
That narrows the central question: Is this election about choosing a party, or choosing a mayor? Seoul’s swing voters have long split along that line. Some contests have been decided by party momentum, others by the candidate. Yet at decisive moments, Seoul has tended to choose who appears more prepared to design the city’s future.
The Seoul mayor is not a lawmaker, and the job is not a referendum on party loyalty. The mayor is expected to plan the city, anticipate and prevent risks, and at times pull the future forward even in the face of public opposition. From that perspective, the current polling invites scrutiny of what kind of leadership each candidate offers. Jung has spoken of being “a mayor who does what citizens want.” It sounds appealing, but it is political language, not the language of administration.
Seoul is not a city that can simply follow demands; it must read needs first. If leaders chase only what residents want today, changes that will be essential tomorrow will be delayed. What the city needs is not just a hand that processes complaints, but the judgment to design what comes next.
Oh, whom the writer has watched in the field for more than a decade, has long been a polarizing figure. Some have called him a hard-driving politician; others have criticized him for wasting budgets or pursuing unnecessary experiments. But one point is clear, the writer argues: Oh has consistently presented himself as a mayor focused on planning Seoul’s future. The writer cites initiatives such as Design Seoul, the Han River Renaissance, public transportation innovation, air-quality improvements and waterfront-city projects. Oh, the writer says, has often prioritized what will be needed ahead over what is immediately demanded — a politically risky approach that draws criticism. But the city’s timeline is longer than politics, and the ultimate evaluation may come over that longer span.
What this poll suggests is that Seoul is riding a party-driven current, but the choice is not finished. One sign, the writer notes, is that in the same survey a conservative candidate led a progressive candidate in the Seoul superintendent of education race. That points to voters making issue-by-issue decisions rather than moving as a single bloc. Seoul, in other words, is not a place where the polling leader is guaranteed to win.
Seoul has not decided. A 10-point gap now is not a result, but a starting position. And elections are decided at the finish line, not at the start. Dismissing unfavorable numbers can be costly — but so can becoming intoxicated by them.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.