Opposition singing the same song?

a person can be forgiven if he is totally bewildered by the political scene in sammyboy.com

the general impression appears to be:

Given such impressions, it is very difficult for a moderate voter to convince himself/herself that the opposition can add value to their lives.

Thus it is reasonable to expect the following scenario:



can the opposition consider doing the following:


I was observing a couple of foreign-imported hawkers running a stall. I noticed the way they do things. And it suddenly occurred to me that in less than a decade, these naturalized citizens may well do what you, the opposition, cannot. Some of them will probably be voted into Parliament. And the feeling is very strong within me that the love of money will grow even stronger in the future crop of political leaders. Coupled with lack of vision and elitist caring faces and uncaring hearts, it will usher in a different level of Singapore.

they need to sing the same song...or be aligned in the same way...in order to put up a more concentrated effort to win the voters and tear down a few GRC wards from the pappies...

Too many opposition parties in SG. Look at the US, which Chee supposedly gets his support from. Two main parties, Republican and Democrat. Singapore--so many bickering parties.

in a way...our oppositions have played musical chairs...some jumping from one to other ,,, not sure if they have the mental strength to look past past grievances in order to have united front...

Alu862 said:

Too many opposition parties in SG. Look at the US, which Chee supposedly gets his support from. Two main parties, Republican and Democrat. Singapore--so many bickering parties.

Click to expand...

It's the fascist Lee Kuan Yew who is prostituting Singapore to the US big business and its neocon agents whose naval ships are allowed to pollute our waters with their nuclear waste.

The corrupt Lee regime has sold the country to foreigners and LKY is the champion running dog of US imperialism in this part of the world to contain China.

In a fictitious opposition conference...

SDP chief: Let opposition all stand together, go on the streets to protest.

NSP chief: Protest against what?

SPP chief: What's a protest?

WP chief: There's a law against protest.

SDP chief: Then let's protest against that law too.

RP chief: I just want election contest.

NSP chief: So how?

SDP chief: How what? Can protest against many things, just use brains.

SPP chief: Whose brains?

WP chief: Get a few seats in Parliament better than standing outside Parliament.

SDP chief: No use. You talk and they fall asleep. When they wake up, all vote against you.

NSP chief: If you protest outside Parliament, even worse, they call 999, then go sleep at home.

RP chief: Arguing like that is getting us nowhere. That's why I formed my own RP instead of rejoining WP or joining another party.

NSP chief: Exactly the problem. We should merge all parties.

SPP chief: See how now first. Can talk about that later.

WP chief: My CEC members won't agree unless you all agree to come in as ordinary members, non-cadre and non-CEC.

SDP chief: My CEC members won't agree unless you all agree that I become the new Secretary-General with 6 nominees to the new CEC.

NSP chief: No problem with you being Sec-Gen as long as I'm party President.

SDP chief: No problem with you being party President as long as Sec-Gen is the highest ranking.

RP chief: So where does that put me?

WP chief: Perhaps the Senior Mentor? But anyway, count WP out if this is going to be the way.

All chiefs: So finally we're all in agreement, count us all out!

That's funny.

Romance of the Warring Parties

Singapore is simply too small to have so many different political parties, it is time those clowns in the opposition wake up their ideas unite together under one common party and fight the scums one to one....seat for seat...

They know their situations best. They will also know how far their current behaviour will get them. And if any change will be effective.

Assume that all cannot agree. But assume that they can agree on why they are of value to voters and why this value cannot be provided by the PAP nor by any mechanism like feedback units, NMPs, etc.

Then it will make sense to retain their individualism and group loosely to sing this Value.

If they can stop fighting each other, stop fighting the PAP but concentrate on being of Value to voters, then many voters will be appreciative of their efforts and the opposition leaders themselves can live enriching lives.

kakowi said:

They know their situations best. They will also know how far their current behaviour will get them. And if any change will be effective.

Assume that all cannot agree. But assume that they can agree on why they are of value to voters and why this value cannot be provided by the PAP nor by any mechanism like feedback units, NMPs, etc.

Then it will make sense to retain their individualism and group loosely to sing this Value.

If they can stop fighting each other, stop fighting the PAP but concentrate on being of Value to voters, then many voters will be appreciative of their efforts and the opposition leaders themselves can live enriching lives.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Too many cooks poil the broth. SDP, for example, is all bent on airing the dirty linen of the PAP and promoting the word democracy, but they have to strong policies for supporters/voters. Chee and Co are just focused on destroying the people in charge without thinking about the future.

SDA--Chiam was alright with SDP , but seems like a retiree wit h SDA--play with PP and nothing else. No strong policies too, much due to his age and health. If he goes, SDA better think how to hold on to their small enclave.

WP--Another one too many party. LTK--failing lately with his just checking the govt statement. Manifesto too general and out of date--2006. SL, good speaker but dare not push her boss aside.

NSP--huh? They again are steering the opposition boat in another direction. No policies, no strength.

RP--JBJ, coming back like Anwar. But he better have policies.

As I have said, even major western powers have two/three strong parties at the most.

I am not a politician so I speak only theoretically.

Looking at the listing of political parties, and the other posts, two possibilities emerge:

(1) The parties join together into one.

(1.1) Clear advantages:


(1.2) disadvantages


(2) The parties remain as they are but operate under a single platform - to provide a common Value to voters

(2.1) Clear advantages


(2.2) disadvantages

Three corner fights leave the nation worse off. Even if all parties are harmonious, coalition governments are disastrous.

I maintain my stance that there are too many political parties in SG.

kakowi said:

I am not a politician so I speak only theoretically.

Looking at the listing of political parties, and the other posts, two possibilities emerge:

(1) The parties join together into one.

(1.1) Clear advantages:

(a) greater brand identity

(b) more cohesion

(c) easier to identify in the minds of voters​

(1.2) disadvantages

(a) they will not get together. Instead of separating the personalities and issues, you bring all the personalities and issues under one roof. Such an arrangement may not be stable. It may crack under pressure upon an unthinking remark or action.​

(2) The parties remain as they are but operate under a single platform - to provide a common Value to voters

(2.1) Clear advantages

(a) allow the current party leaders to retain their control

(b) yet present a clear branding to the voters

(c) most importantly, because the parties tailor to different segments of the voting population, this coalition may well capture the entire political spectrum

(d) no more quarrels or at least, less quarrels amongst political parties because clear boundaries make good neighbours and a common but fundamental platform unites them​

(2.2) disadvantages

(a) ?​

Click to expand...

I also want to say that they should consider those FT who became naturalized citizens.

They brought with them unique competences not found in singaporeans. Given that only the cream of the crop migrates, it can be assumed that these people carry with them a great degree of resilence and perseverance. Such qualities can only be helpful to the political parties they join, whatever the flavour.

Singapore may not be ready for a FT leader yet. Not esp since we want to give the the cold shoulder

Alu862 said:

Three corner fights leave the nation worse off. Even if all parties are harmonious, coalition governments are disastrous.

I maintain my stance that there are too many political parties in SG.

Click to expand...

Everything needs a starting point. The starting point must be safe and give the greatest chances for success.

In time to come, should their competences build, creditability built, then it is highly possible that evolvement will occur. Especially when they decide that they are ready to be alternative government. Then a state with two main parties will be ideal. When that happens, my belief is that singaporeans will benefit.

At this time, they cannot even walk properly. Asking them to run will not be feasible. At best, they are credible alternative platforms. They are not ready, in my opinion, to be credible alternative governments.

Alu862 said:

Singapore may not be ready for a FT leader yet. Not esp since we want to give the the cold shoulder

Click to expand...

Not neccessarily leaders but resources. It takes time to build trust.

kakowi said:

Everything needs a starting point. The starting point must be safe and give the greatest chances for success.

In time to come, should their competences build, creditability built, then it is highly possible that evolvement will occur. Especially when they decide that they are ready to be alternative government. Then a state with two main parties will be ideal. When that happens, my belief is that singaporeans will benefit.

At this time, they cannot even walk properly. Asking them to run will not be feasible. At best, they are credible alternative platforms. They are not ready, in my opinion, to be credible alternative governments.

Click to expand...

I don't think they are credible alternative platforms at all. They are in the same boat but steering in different directions and allowing the waves to move them where the waves want to. The one trying to steer no where is the SDP.

Speaking for myself, neither do I.

That is why I said that at best, they are credible alternative platforms.

I cannot imagine myself voting for some of them.

But instead of saying as a voter, "The opposition are lousy, there are no good opposition around", I made some suggestions (which may appear naive to the politically astute). That is however what I can do, give feedback and constructive suggestions.

The rest is up to them.

I was searching the web to find some information and came across a very good post: http://www.youngpap.org.sg/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=2018&sid=990a0916e5614276e053035195f5ca6f by someone who called himself EmptyCage. Yes, it is from the YPAP website.

The post is dated 2004 but the points raised inside are still green simply because the opposition has yet to get their act together.

For your reading pleasure.

To derive from that post:

(a) You need to reduce the risks to voters in order to vote for you.

(b) You need a brand easily identifiable by the voters.

(c) You need a message, a sexy catchline.

(d) You need to attract more than to reach out.

(e) You need to see what is good about others whilst knowing what is good about yourself.

And you have at most 2 years to undo all the negative impressions caused by your behaviour, generated by others about you as well as wrong impressions and misguided ones.

To summarise, tell us: what is so good about you and why should we care about your presence in Singapore.

Are these lyrics and what tune do we sing it to?
Have it been distributed to major KTV nationwide?

kakowi said:

a person can be forgiven if he is totally bewildered by the political scene in sammyboy.com

the general impression appears to be:

(1) opposition is highly fragmented

(2) opposition do not have a game plan

(3) opposition blame everyone except themselves for their failure to get into Parliament

(4) opposition preached a doctrine of hate

(5) opposition agitates but do not offer any alternative​

Given such impressions, it is very difficult for a moderate voter to convince himself/herself that the opposition can add value to their lives.

Thus it is reasonable to expect the following scenario:

3 years before voting day: opposition quarrel amongst themselves
2 years before voting day: opposition snipe each other
1 year before voting day: opposition dig up all the pap problems
3 months before voting day: opposition says let's work out something together
1 month before voting day: opposition keep on saying hate pap, hate pap
1 month after voting day: opposition says unfair, voters silly
3 months after voting day: opposition tells voters - see, serve you right, now everything increase
1 year after voting day: opposition slam each other

repeat this 8 times and another 40 years go by without any seats in Parliament​

can the opposition consider doing the following:

(1) the heads of the opposition go for a strategic retreat similar to the corporate outings for their EVPs

(2) work out what is it that they and only they can do for the people, that the PAP cannot and will never be able to do? That will be their Value as an opposition and don't let anyone detour you from it

(3) how can you spread this message to the voters?

(4) how do you think the voters will take to this message? The FTs, the rich, the apathetic, the selfish, the PAP majority, the disadvantaged? If this is something that you and only you can do, then all will acknowledge the legitimacy of your claim, at least unwillingly

(5) can all of you visit a karaoke bar each week and sing this Value acapella? Each in your own way, each in your own voice and each in your own tune.

(6) can you forego your hatred of the PAP. You need to because the majority of people don't hate the PAP, they just wish that the PAP has the same vision as when singapore was starting out. Without the support of the moderates as well as the FTs, you will not see Parliament and voters will not get your value.

(7) can you agree with this statement without lying to yourself: that politicians, in the main, are meant to serve, not to lord nor to exploit. Maybe 20% of the politicans believe in this but these 20% give 80% of the voters hope that men, both talented and compassionate, are in control.​

I was observing a couple of foreign-imported hawkers running a stall. I noticed the way they do things. And it suddenly occurred to me that in less than a decade, these naturalized citizens may well do what you, the opposition, cannot. Some of them will probably be voted into Parliament. And the feeling is very strong within me that the love of money will grow even stronger in the future crop of political leaders. Coupled with lack of vision and elitist caring faces and uncaring hearts, it will usher in a different level of Singapore.

Click to expand...