Voting is a constitutional right,not a privilege. This has been affirmed by none other than our hotshot Law Minister Shanmugam in the Press in response to Dr Thio Su Ann's query. He said it is not explicitly stated but implied in the fact that we have General Elections. Of course, this may be just a face-saving mechanism to admit first and then behind the scenes, quietly amending the Constitution to put it in. We should check on this in due course.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
An Election STRATEGY that could TOPPLE this government.
- Thread starter Nice-Gook
- Start date
Voting is a constitutional right,not a privilege. This has been affirmed by none other than our hotshot Law Minister Shanmugam in the Press in response to Dr Thio Su Ann's query. He said it is not explicitly stated but implied in the fact that we have General Elections. Of course, this may be just a face-saving mechanism to admit first and then behind the scenes, quietly amending the Constitution to put it in. We should check on this in due course.
How do you execute yr first strategy of triggering infighting? This is a definitely not a practical strategy.
As for a boycott, whatever we have gained since JBJ's first win in Anson will be lost. The Barisan Sosialis boycotted parliament and took to the streets. They became history. If Dr Lee Siew Choh can be defeated using this strategy, let alone the present Opp parties which are so disunited. The 2 remaining seats on the Opp bench will never be recouped, never.
Forget about world pressures. Only the Singapore electorate can throw them out.
The best way is to field a strong GRC to fight against their weakest link. The challenge is to guess where that is, and marshall your forces accordingly. Prepare all the hot issues and don't get trapped into slander suits. Even if the Opp dont get in, at least garner enough votes to notonly retain the deposit but walk in as NCMP and then prepare the stage for the next election by showing impressive performance as a shrewd questioner, skilled debater and a logical thinker. The rest - future success -will follow.
Agree with the changing demographics, things won't be the same.You do have a point.
I think the opposition should highlight the facts and figures of the gov screw ups....then those scums cannot sue them in return for defaming them...i mean things like the losses GIC and Temasek have been incurring in investing the nation reserves in failing banks despite warning signs all over...are the people going to be bought over by a couple of hundred of dollars when losses of billions from country piggy bank is staring them hard in the face...
This is interpreted in so many ways.
One belief appears to be that they have a divine right to be voted in.
"If you are against the PAP, then you must be for me"
..
The implicit assumption is that once you voted for the oppositions, life will get better.
But as history shows, a large majority does not believe it. (Though the GRC concept has a way of not reflecting the true figures in Parliament)
..
It is easy for disgruntled opposition voters to lay all the blame on those who voted PAP by saying that they deserved all the PAP gave.
But the PAP also gave stability.
Don't the 33% enjoy the stability that the PAP brings? Even if they go to Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Cambodia and throw stones at the PAP, is it not the PAP that gave the singapore dollar strength that allows them to enjoy life in those countries?
And what if the reverse happens? Will the oppositions bring to the electorate stability?
The answer is 'yes, but only under certain circumstances'.
But does the opposition seek to work within these specific circumstances?
..
Therefore if the key lies in the singaporean electorate, then it lies in showing the electorate that their strategies and platforms definitely enhance the electorate's lives, for the better.
..
In the final analysis, i don't think there is an easy answer to this.
I doubt that the oppositions have an answer either.
From several accounts, the oppositions labour under heavy disadvantages. The more potent and effective oppositions had been bankrupted, fled the country or died broken-hearted.
But the key still lies in the electorate.
PAP has established GRC making it difficult for opposition to win,,,, therefore a win in GRC will definitely crushed the confidence of PAP crap.
However to win a GRC comprising 5-7 members, all members must almost be saints in all their ways,,,,, not that easy,,, as much as I would like to see opposition win at least a GRC, I wish I can see a solid dream team that starts on the groundwork by now,,,
Anyway, not only the GRC, even with SMCs, the opposition has not made much improvement for the past few elections,,,, so opposition, start preparing now
However to win a GRC comprising 5-7 members, all members must almost be saints in all their ways,,,,, not that easy,,, as much as I would like to see opposition win at least a GRC, I wish I can see a solid dream team that starts on the groundwork by now,,,
Anyway, not only the GRC, even with SMCs, the opposition has not made much improvement for the past few elections,,,, so opposition, start preparing now
But it is also not easy for all the pap grc members to be "saints" right?
Same theory applies.
If Singaporeans continue to be ignorant, stupid, apathetic or fearful, then they fully deserve what they get (or don't get).
TO THE OPPOSITION AND ANY ASPIRING OPPOSITION,
for you fellas to stand a fighting chance the next GE, you got to get yourselves organised and you got to have to a sound plan on winning those votes.
1. Remember that Rome was not built in a day.
2. Disavow clowns like chee.
3. Recruit more credible PROFESSIONALS. ie Lawyers, doctors, accountants, bankers, engineers, teachers.
This will show to the populace that you have the Brains who can keep the country running ie the Organs of State, the ministries, and stat boards, if there ever will be a transition of power.
4. Next you gotta appeal to the electorate with issues that concern them. The general populace is politically apathetic. Most of them are not into the democracy-freedom of speech thingy but rather into the bread n butter issue.
5. Offer to the populace a lower cost of living ie cheaper HDB flats based on cost subsidy NOT the current market subsidy. 5 rm for 50k?
6. Offer to cut GST on essential items like healthcare and staples.
6. Vow to decorporatise the government. ie Look at how the HDB charges the rents on their commericial lots in the HDB housing estates. GLCs are snuffing out local enterprise. Aim to take their focus to offshore markets. consider running the our public transport companies as not-for-profit, making fares much cheaper.
7. If you can fulfill a promise to bring down drastically the cost of living, the longstanding problem of depressed wages (to help S'pore stay competitive in the globalised economy) will not be felt by the man on the street. And u will win more votes the subsequent elections.
8. Lastly, offer to take less generous ministerial salaries. For it should be an honour to hold high office in the service of your people.
for you fellas to stand a fighting chance the next GE, you got to get yourselves organised and you got to have to a sound plan on winning those votes.
1. Remember that Rome was not built in a day.
2. Disavow clowns like chee.
3. Recruit more credible PROFESSIONALS. ie Lawyers, doctors, accountants, bankers, engineers, teachers.
This will show to the populace that you have the Brains who can keep the country running ie the Organs of State, the ministries, and stat boards, if there ever will be a transition of power.
4. Next you gotta appeal to the electorate with issues that concern them. The general populace is politically apathetic. Most of them are not into the democracy-freedom of speech thingy but rather into the bread n butter issue.
5. Offer to the populace a lower cost of living ie cheaper HDB flats based on cost subsidy NOT the current market subsidy. 5 rm for 50k?
6. Offer to cut GST on essential items like healthcare and staples.
6. Vow to decorporatise the government. ie Look at how the HDB charges the rents on their commericial lots in the HDB housing estates. GLCs are snuffing out local enterprise. Aim to take their focus to offshore markets. consider running the our public transport companies as not-for-profit, making fares much cheaper.
7. If you can fulfill a promise to bring down drastically the cost of living, the longstanding problem of depressed wages (to help S'pore stay competitive in the globalised economy) will not be felt by the man on the street. And u will win more votes the subsequent elections.
8. Lastly, offer to take less generous ministerial salaries. For it should be an honour to hold high office in the service of your people.
And after doing all these, the PAP come back with 'you will bankrupt the nation' - ask them how.
Because the current gst, taxes and indirect taxes does not lead to much improvements in roads and infrastructure in relation to the revenue collected - use the LTA record of new roads, new MRT tracks, etc - use the HDB records of new houses build with each flat paying for all the associated costs plus a build in profit, and so on so forth.
It would then appear that a large portion of these taxes and indirect taxes go into surplus which are then used for investments. Even part of our town council charges go into investments.
How then, if the opposition seek to apply these back to the singaporeans welfare - how will this bankrupt the nation as compared to investing them in citibank and ubs and lehman brothers and paying the ever increasing ministers and MPs salaries?
Actually if such questions had been asked in parliament by the two elected opposition MPs, the other oppositions would be able to make use of the answers confidently during the election period.
But as it is not, then tread carefully but ask nonetheless.
Because it shows that the opposition might have an alternative plan after all.
A plan that may result in far less losses than the current plan by the PAP.
I concur. There are some who seem to expect guarantees from the opposition before they will even consider voting for them.
Even the PAP can never guarantee anything. Just recap all their empty promises. Just look at their so-called A-team with the backing of scholars who were so ill prepared even though obvious signs of a financial meltdown were staring at them in their faces. Then when realising the monster is at the doorstep they were at a loss as to what needs to be done. They lived in a dreamworld of the Golden Period and never knew what hit them in their face.
I concur. There are some who seem to expect guarantees from the opposition before they will even consider voting for them.
Even the PAP can never guarantee anything. Just recap all their empty promises. Just look at their so-called A-team with the backing of scholars who were so ill prepared even though obvious signs of a financial meltdown were staring at them in their faces. Then when realising the monster is at the doorstep they were at a loss as to what needs to be done. They lived in a dreamworld of the Golden Period and never knew what hit them in their face.
And that point is only half true.
Because we are talking about a global crisis that leaves countries stumped for words. (This crisis is America's making but so far no one wants to condemn them).
And if you take on the opposite scenario and if the opposition were in control. How would they handle it? Or can they handle it?
..
Finally the golden period espoused by LKY has some basis in fact. As you looked into the overall strategy by LHL, it is a good strategy. In my opinion, two failure points derailed their strategy. If things had gone smoothly for them, singapore would have experience golden years.
What is neglected in these golden years is that the average singaporeans would not have enjoyed them. They would have spent their lives servicing the golden years of the wealthy and the PAP elites.
..
Still i realize all these are chicken and duck talk, unless you treat the oppositions are politicians and not as saviour of singaporeans.
Then perhaps you may reach the same conclusion as me.
..
But even if you don't, or i don't, it doesn't matter - what matters is that the opposition reach out to the electorate. And if they do not win, it is the fault of the electorate in not believing the opposition as much as the oppositions fault in not convincing the electorate. And both suffer the consequences of PAP's unbridled rule.
..
We know for sure two facts: the PAP is relying on the crisis and the new singaporeans to give them another win. The opposition is relying on dissatisfaction by the citizens to give themselves a higher margin.
And what i am saying is: the oppositions need to show they can be an alternative or at least reduce the risk to singaporeans by means of their strategy, so that at least they can win another 6% of votes.
If they do, their chances of winning a GRC in a weak ward is higher.
And an extra 5 opposition in Parliament will demoralize the PAP a bit.
Which may lead to some good for the citizens.
The crisis is real and yes, it started from the US, but having all the resources the PAP has, it was evident that they were caught unaware when the writing was already on the wall. Was this another indication of their arrogance when they went head in first to further pump more of our money into failing institutions?
Good question, but remember they are not the current government and they are under no obligation to let the opposing party, viz. PAP, know what are their plans. The PAP has never made known what their plans are from the time they were in the opposition during colonial rule, during their presence in the Malaysian parliament and even this present day.
They just decide on a policy and then it might/not get a parliamentary debate which we have all seen for ourselves is merely academic. So why are we asking the opposition to reveal their plans and no one is asking the PAP this same question?
If an elected government implements a strategy to intentionally bring rich rewards to only a select group of elites, then this cannot be considered a good strategy at all. Maybe it is regarded as good to those select few who benefited from the rewards, but definitely not a good national strategy.
So you do not go around shouting to the citizens, "This is a Golden Period" but in actuality the majority of citizens were sliding backwards economically while they watch the select elite group telling them they are not entitled to the spoils.
All of them are politicians, opposition or the ruling party, but the ruling party has the immediate obligation to look after all its citizens, rich or poor, the healthy and the sick.
I am never going to say, at this time at least, the opposition are the saviours of Singaporeans but the way the PAP operates today, it is evident they are never going to be saviours. Save themselves, yes, but not us. They are too engrossed with self enrichment so how could they be counted on to save us?
Earlier generations gave the PAP the chance of leading us out of colonial rule with just word of mouth promises. They were never tested before so it was also anyone's guess at the time what the future holds for us. Were they able to make good all their promises? No one could tell. Were they capable leaders? We were just sold on an idea to trust them.
The opposition has to do a lot more to reach out to the people. This I am in agreement with you. In other words, more PR, sell themselves. However, do you realise that they have a difficulty in naming possible candidates too early because these new guys will immediately come under the microscope of the PAP in their usual witch hunt and if they so much as borrow a pencil from their neighbour without returning during their school days, the PAP will use that excuse to crucify them.
This strategy is needless to say an SOP. The PAP harped on the dissatisfaction of Singaporeans under under colonial rule so this is nothing new between the governing party and the opposition. The PAP made use of "Malaysian Malaysia" to whip up emotions of the other races to gain support to counter the Alliance party. It was never an alternative.
I can only say this. Most of us here are looking forward to a better future for Singaporeans, you and I included. I am of the opinion that we have to give the opposition unconditional support as the PAP was given when they asked for and gained support of Singaporeans to come into power.
If we are to aim for just 5 more oppo in parliament, it will go the same way as during the years when we had about the same number. They will be overwhelmed by the PAP bully boys and the media will make them out to be totally incompetent. Moreover, if we keep on limiting this number of representation in our minds and the way we vote, the result will turn out to be just the same 2 seats.
I am for an all out attack by the opposition on almost every PAP incumbent. Even if they do not take over the government they will form a very substantial representation in parliament instead of PAP MP's who are facilitated to be in there to count and compare the dollars they make from directorships and to treat the rest of us as lesser mortals.
There will be no gain if there is no pain, as the saying goes. We have had gone through major set backs before so this is no time for being soft on ourselves. As LKY has himself said, we are going for the long term investment.
Exactly. This is the part that Singaporeans must realise.
PAP claimed that they have an exceptional team and received exceptional remuneration with the expectation that they will outperform the market.
Though it was a global crisis whose genesis cannot be attributed to the PAP, its nevetheless seem to be caught out like any other govt. However unlike other countries where transparency is importantn part of the order of business and govt, it is not the case in Singapore. In fact, no one really knows what the actual exposure is.
The opacity is further compounded by a govt managed press and the true picture cannot be stated with real confidence.
In a nutshell, they did not do anything out of the ordinary.
You keep harping on quality of opposition parties and calling for unity of opposition parties but do not seem to understand why this is a problem.
Does it not seem odd that we are the only country in the world, (besides totalitarian systems) that has difficulty raising quality opposition candidates and parties . Or are we a totalitarian state?
When old man stated "golden period". He said that environment was conducive for Singapore to achieve remarkable growth. No strategy was mentioned. Could you state what the strategy was ?
I think it is especially important that the opposition should lay out its plan at least at a high level how they would go about tackling the economic crisis (isn’t this what Kakowi is asking?) given you are of the opinion that the opposition should take on the PAP in every district and form the next government. Don’t you agree? The PAP has a history with a proven track record in managing the country and their rise to power is not as simple as keeping their strategy under wraps.
They certainly are capable leaders who delivered on most of the promises made to the people. The people gave up their political rights at the behest of the PAP and the rest is history. PAP’s ascend to power was not a simple as you portray it either. They had to deal with protests, riots and had to collude with the communists to gain access to their grassroots and hence the people base and finally had to deal with the British.
Majority Singaporean’s today live relatively comfortable lives so much so they whine at the slightest inconvenience while insisting the govt look after their aged folks. Go into frenzy when the Health Minister suggests a cheaper alternative in JB. Why can’t the grown up kids look care for their aged parents instead? And Singaporeans behave as though the govt owes them a living. Is this what a democratic govt is supposed to like?
You said earlier “We were just sold on an idea to trust them.” Now you are asking the people to just trust the opposition? The problem is not just the PAP or any political party for that matter.
Let’s say we vote the Worker’s Party into power. Most believe this to be the strongest political party next to the PAP. Why the WP has even branded themselves as an alternative party – an alternative to the PAP. Its party leader LTK has openly praised the PAP govt and given it the thumbs up. Its member YSL has publicly declared he voted for the PAP. That his personal choice. At least he was honest about it.
So the WP is now in power. Let’s say they form the new cabinet and hold minister posts with the multimillion dollar salaries. Through the various ACTs already in place, they now have the media, the GLCs, etc and absolute power that the PAP once had. Didn’t the WP label their critics as “armchair critics” after the 06 elections and threaten lawsuits?
Any guarantee that they will not abuse the new found power? Will the Singaporean be better off? See where I am going with this? Sometimes it’s better the devil you know.
Firstly, it is my personal belief that the salvation for singapore lies in quality oppositions. Therefore i will harp on it. The day i ceases to do so, that day i no longer believe in singapore.
Secondly, as you had pointed out - there are problems. But here lies the difference in our opinions. Whilst i acknowledge the PAP has a part to play in the problems, i also acknowledge that the oppositions has a part to play in their failures.
Thirdly, every totalitarian state has difficulty raising oppositions. And if they do not, their oppositions are tacitly approved by the totalitarian government. If you say that Singapore is under a totalitarian PAP, then ask yourself why have they tolerated LTK and CST all these years? Are they particularly effective in making them sit up and do something for singaporeans? Or even in advancing the oppositions' cause?
If you say yes, then how can the PAP be totalitarian? A totalitarian PAP would have demolished them and leave them crying in the streets.
Fourthly, my interpretation of golden years as espoused by MM LKY is mine alone. I am not so privileged to be that close to MM LKY. So all i have are the facts available to everyone. I analyzed what PM LHL had done and from these concrete facts, derived an understanding of his strategy and asked myself - what if it succeeds? It will bring singapore to another dimension.
Lastly, in the final analysis, winning arguments does not win the election. But showing value to the electorate may give them that chance.
Continuing the status quo will not.
Those who think that those guys are A team superstars are stupid.I concur. There are some who seem to expect guarantees from the opposition before they will even consider voting for them.
Even the PAP can never guarantee anything. Just recap all their empty promises. Just look at their so-called A-team with the backing of scholars who were so ill prepared even though obvious signs of a financial meltdown were staring at them in their faces. Then when realising the monster is at the doorstep they were at a loss as to what needs to be done. They lived in a dreamworld of the Golden Period and never knew what hit them in their face.
Those who don't even know who the fcuk they are, are ignorant.
Those who don't give a shit who they are, are apathetic.
And those who know they aren't superstars but pretend to agree they are, are fearful.
Unfortunate but true. :(
In fact, they claim credit when the world economy is dong well, and very quickly put the blame on the crisis to external forces. Nothing special about them despite their over hyped self advertising to justify their obscene remuneration and benefits.
I understand what Kakowi is asking. How do we want to have the opposition lay out its plan "at a high level"? They can promise a truly inclusive form of government, better schemes to take care of the under trodden, sharing the spoils from a better economy, and so forth. Will these "high level" plans or promises be enough for the skeptics?
So if we expect them to go further into details, would it not be like an army going into battle by letting the enemy know what detailed plans you have? We have to be realistic.
I am well aware of how the PAP ascended to power. I lived through the colonial era, David Marshall's, Lim Yew Hock's and the Malaysian administration. My awareness was not just culled from literature and books but from first hand experiences. My point is, before the PAP came into power how was anyone going to know if the PAP was going to deliver on any of its promises? Yet the people gave them their support. So why are we casting aside the opposition because they have not yet been given a chance to prove themselves?
I wouldn't put all grievances under the banner of whining. You have to understand the context. Suggesting to put our elderly in a home especially in a foreign land may be fine as a coffee shop talk, but for a Health Minister to make such a suggestion in parliament is inappropriate. More so after it was let known that he visited the Iskanda development and was approached by the owner of a home there making a pitch for business to come his way.
I am in disagreement Singaporeans behave as though the government owe them a living. They are just asking to be treated as Singaporeans by the Singapore government and not some third rate citizen in our own country. If the nation is to prosper, then its citizens need to feel they are are part of the result so that if the nation is going through hard times the citizens will also buckle up together.
The PAP cannot exclude its citizens when times are good and only they and their select elites are entitled to the spoils whereas when times turn for the worse expect everyone to suffer the pain. In other words, the PAP needs to know that in good times and bad we are all in it together.
Precisely, if the people are to trust the PAP when they are just making promises then why are we not giving the same trust to the opposition?
If the opposition is not an alternative to the PAP then what are they? Would people accept if an opposition says they are opposed to every thing the PAP has done? This is called political posturing.
You can bring out the worst example in YSL for his stupidity, I can bring out even worse examples from within the PAP and they are supposed to be MP's or higher level. For WP's own good they should never field YSL again. We must look at the wider picture. Are we going to let the PAP continue with its ways in treating its own citizens with contempt? If we continue to vote them in then I will say we are just a masochistic society without any backbone.
Those are the very values we are voting against and if any opposition party is to form the government they have to know that their span of administration is as short as the next election. Isn't this what is all about?
Ah, here we go again asking for guarantees from the opposition. What guarantees did the PAP provide when they were seeking support from the people to put them into power? We know that this current way of the PAP in dealing with the people is not sustainable for a democracy and the future of Singapore as a nation. I am not in agreement in living with the devil even if I know him.
Similar threads
