Lee Jae-myung's Approval Rating Falls to 20s... Cabinet Reshuffle Backfires

According to a Realmeter poll, President Lee Jae-myung's overall approval rating was 37.4%. In particular, the Seoul region recorded a relatively low approval rating of 29%.

This is even lower than the approval rating in the Daegu-Gyeongbuk region, and negative evaluations of President Lee Jae-myung were highest in Seoul.

Political commentator Lee Min-chan cited the worsening public sentiment regarding real estate as the biggest reason for the decline in approval ratings. Beyond just rising home prices, dissatisfaction among the public has grown as prices for sales, jeonse, and monthly rents have all increased, with no effective measures in sight for a long time.

In addition to this real estate sentiment, the moral issues of several recently controversial cabinet nominees are said to have combined to foster overall distrust.

President Lee Jae-myung announced the nomination of six minister candidates to recover his wavering approval rating and change the political landscape. However, despite this cabinet reshuffle announcement, the decline in approval ratings has not stopped; instead, it has accelerated.

It is understood that the controversies surrounding the past actions and morality of some minister nominees, such as Kim Seung-won and Yong Hye-in, have continued to emerge, further deepening negative public perception.

Broadcaster Kim Eo-jun diagnosed a structural problem regarding President Lee Jae-myung's declining approval rating: any measures announced or messages conveyed are not properly reaching his supporters. He pointed out that this structural issue makes it difficult for approval ratings to rise.

Kim Eo-jun emphasized that communication through SNS alone has its limits and urged President Lee Jae-myung to personally step forward to apologize for and re-examine the overall state of national governance. He also raised the importance of direct communication with the public, such as press conferences.

The Democratic Party's stance, as observed through Assemblyman Kim Seung-won's morning door-stepping and various DP assembly members' broadcast appearances, is to maintain the current direction of national governance. It appears that there will be no immediate changes, such as a shift in policy or withdrawal of nominee designations.

The Democratic Party is observed to have firmly established a strategy of simply trying to endure the current situation.

During the regular National Assembly floor leader's speech, Assemblyman Kim Min-seok of the Democratic Party expressed his intention to pursue a constitutional amendment. As the first speaker for the ruling party, Assemblyman Kim Min-seok emphasized the need to include the spirit of the May 18 Democracy Movement in the preamble of the Constitution, presenting a direction for national development through constitutional revision.

However, some critics argue that raising the issue of constitutional amendment in the absence of tangible achievements in people's livelihoods might be an attempt to disperse national momentum and evade fundamental problems.

The timing of Assemblyman Kim Min-seok's proposal for constitutional amendment, coinciding with his floor leader speech, is analyzed as a strategy to obscure issues unfavorable to the Democratic Party. It is interpreted as an attempt to fill media coverage with the constitutional amendment debate, diverting attention from fundamental problems.

Constitutional amendment, despite its low feasibility, is a potent topic that can generate national interest and debate, suggesting an attempt to navigate the current crisis through this means.

The fact that the President has not made a clear declaration that he will not pursue a constitutional amendment for his re-election is causing controversy in political circles. This evasion of mention is raising public concerns in connection with the President's judicial risks.

The mention of constitutional amendment during a dinner with labor union executives also gives rise to various interpretations of the President's intentions.

The People Power Party insisted that before starting constitutional discussions, the President must first declare that he will not pursue a re-election amendment. This is understood to be an effort to allay concerns that constitutional revision could be used for specific political purposes.

They also demanded that the President clearly state his intention to accept trial, presenting this as a prerequisite for constitutional debate.

A criticism has emerged that by reusing old strategic cards such as constitutional amendment or coalition proposals to change the current political landscape, the Democratic Party is pointlessly depleting its major options. This is interpreted as a failure to prepare fundamental alternatives like personnel reform or new policy proposals.

Criticism is growing over their inability to present meaningful new solutions for changing the situation and their reliance on reusing existing methods.

The Democratic Party is criticized for failing to provide clear explanations for various allegations against them, instead employing a strategy of attacking the prosecution. This appears to be an attempt to shift the narrative by attacking the messenger rather than addressing the substance of the allegations.

This strategy is also linked to the controversy over abolishing prosecutorial investigative powers and is observed to not be effectively resonating with public opinion so far.

The controversy surrounding Assemblyman Kim Seung-won has intensified as it was revealed that he falsely explained an establishment registered as an entertainment bar as a regular restaurant. Media reports disclosed court judgment details stating that the establishment was an entertainment bar that employed female hostesses to serve male customers.

These persistent false explanations are deepening public distrust and amplifying doubts about Assemblyman Kim Seung-won's morality.

Lobbyist Yang claimed that the scope of his lobbying was not limited to Assemblyman Kim Seung-won but also involved more Democratic Party figures, including former Assemblyman Choi Jae-sung, Assemblyman Kim Eui-kyeom, and former Chairman Song Young-gil. Yang hinted at leveraging these connections by flaunting his ties with Democratic Party figures through his SNS and profile pictures.

These claims raise the possibility of multiple Democratic Party figures being involved in illegal lobbying, and the repercussions are expected to spread.

Allegations have surfaced that former MFDS Minister Kim Kang-lip, who served as Chief of Planning and Coordination at the Ministry of Health and Welfare immediately after the Moon Jae-in administration took office, intervened in the clinical trial approval of a specific company as MFDS Minister during the COVID-19 period. The content states that former Minister Kim Kang-lip, at the request of a ruling party assemblyman, directly instructed staff to grant clinical approval.

Following this clinical approval, the stock price of a company that invested in the related firm experienced repeated surges and drops. This suggests the possibility of collusion between stock manipulation forces and Democratic Party figures, escalating into a serious suspicion.

The host mentioned the need for the People Power Party to raise related allegations through confirmation hearings before going to a special prosecutor investigation. The People Power Party is expected to verify the allegations using public interest whistleblowers and internal prosecution data.

The argument was made that as an opposition party, they must actively request witnesses to uncover the truth of the allegations.

Criticism arose that in past confirmation hearings, witnesses and referrers were not adopted, and necessary data was not properly submitted, leading to hearings proceeding under such conditions. This is analyzed as the Democratic Party's strategy to use its majority status to exclude witnesses and data unfavorable to them, thereby defending against allegation verification.

In particular, an intention to strategically coordinate the timing of final arguments and confirmation hearings to prevent key witnesses from appearing and avoid submitting evidence is apparent.

It was pointed out that the 'Brother Gate' allegations related to nominee Kim Seung-won are escalating to a serious level. Panelists suggested that this incident is not just a simple corruption case but potentially a widespread gate requiring a full investigation into all COVID-19 related projects during the Moon Jae-in administration.

Specifically, the allegations of investment and solicitations among lobbyist Yang, nominee Kim Seung-won, and Mr. Kang are even being discussed in terms of the possibility of third-party bribery charges.

They argued for a thorough investigation into whether illegal lobbying and special favors occurred across the Moon Jae-in administration's COVID-19 related policies and projects.

It was pointed out that it is difficult to understand why the case related to nominee Kim Seung-won was investigated for three years and then concluded with a prosecution deferral. It is known that prosecution working-level officials had considered seeking an 8-month prison sentence, raising questions about the background behind the final deferral.

This leads to the argument that further investigation is needed into whether the prosecution's decision was appropriate or if certain intentions were at play.

Doubts about the transparency of the investigation process and the legitimacy of the final disposition remain unresolved.