中華民國憲法，制度上不可能聯合政府 ROC constitution does not believes in cabinet system by HoonTing 20231124

To win the 2024 Presidential Campaign, two opposition parties, the KMT and the People’s Party, along with Terry Gou, planned to unite as a coalition to challenge the ruling DPP. However, uniting three separate participants is no easy task.
The most challenging aspect is Taiwan's political culture.
Regardless of the cultural influences from China, pre-war Japan, or the US, Taiwan lacks experience in forming political unions. While Japan has employed a cabinet system since the Meiji era, it governed Taiwan through military occupation or military governor dictatorship before the end of the Pacific War.
Despite the abandonment of the ROC constitution by the Chinese people in 1949 and its replacement by the PRC with a provisional constitution on September 29, the ROC constitution still applies in Taiwan and is currently effective.
The notable aspect is that the ROC constitution neither follows a cabinet system nor a presidential system. Instead, it resembles a “quasi” constitutional monarch system where the president is positioned above the separation of powers and can oversee all five branches without a specific title.
Although the ROC constitution has been amended for several times and the said “quasi-constitutional monarch” system has been transferred into a “sui generis presidential system” in late 1990s, in which the power of the president is outside the checks from the legislative branch.
The absence of both practice and legal guidance for Taiwanese political figures and their culture makes the task seem impossible though it worth a try.

為贏得2024年總統競選，兩個在野黨，國民黨和民眾黨，以及郭台銘計畫結成聯盟，挑戰執政的民進黨。然而，結合三個獨立參與者並非易事。
其中最具挑戰性的部分是台灣的政治文化。
不論是受到中國、戰前日本，或美國的文化影響，台灣在形成政治聯盟方面缺乏經驗。儘管日本自明治時代以來一直採用內閣制度，但在太平洋戰爭結束前，它通過軍事佔領或軍事總督制度統治台灣。
儘管中國人民於1949年放棄〈中華民國憲法〉，中華人民共和國於9月29日以〈臨時憲法〉取代之，「中華民國憲法」仍然適用於台灣並且目前有效。
顯著的一點是，中華民國憲法既不遵循內閣制度也不是總統制度。相反，它更像是一個「（準）立憲君主制」，其中總統位於權力分立之上，可以在沒有特定頭銜的情況下監督所有五院。
儘管中華民國憲法已經多次修訂，並於1990年代末將先前所謂的「（準）立憲君主制」轉變為獨一無二的總統制度，其總統的權力仍然不受立法機構的檢視。
台灣政治人物和文化缺乏實踐和法律指導，使得這項任務看似不可能完成，即便值得一試。