I remember listening to Ma Ying-jeou explain why his 6-3-3 policy failed miserably; his advisers simply missed the boat, made bad evaluations, and caused Ma to make a false promise. Is a man responsible for the poor judgment of his advisers? Technically, Ma did not make the judgment that 6-3-3 was achievable in his first term. (Note that after it was seen to be failing miserably, Ma changed the time-line and said he really meant he would do that by the end of a 2nd term) Of course if it failed by that time as well, Ma would be long gone and with a hefty pension to live on.