Re: What went terribly wrong in Holland-BT for the best qualified opposit team in the
This is now the new buzz and questions are plenty. Here is the outcome of the breakfast session post GE.
As expected there were number of schools thought with some having some very strong positions. But first the background;
The team was made of Vincent Wijeyasingha, Tan Jee Say, Ang Yong Guan and Michelle Lee. Everyone one of them was amply qualified with sterling qualities and not one of them was a passenger in terms of some minority crap associated with GRC. They spoke well, they grabbed the attention of Singaporeans from day one and had an excellent logistical and social media support from SDP. Everyone of their formal and informal comunications went well even when compared to the Behemoth PAP. The presence of Prof Paul Tambyah from NUH and his excellent speech. What went wrong and terribly wrong as the margin was 20% when VB had a perception and popularity issue with YOG, homelessness and price of meals albatrosses hanging his neck.
3 strong school of thoughts
1) Holland-BT is where the rich, famous, and the movers and shakers reside. They may be 100% behind this team, see all the logic behind the arguments and may even be friends with them, but practically might have been a factor. These people traditionally really on access to power. They rely on the PAP to approve their development plans, their business models, the building approval plans with mansion, access driveways etc. They need a govt team in residence as their MP to get the approvals etc. Vincent and team are practically useless to them. These are not heartlanders. They are not your usual salaried staff. They know that Town councils are either non existent in their ward or meaningless.
2) SDP Banner - The worse performing in previous GEs and with a negative legacy of not connecting with the people. As one pundit expressed - "the moment Alec Tok returned such a poor result knowing his credentials, the writing was one the wall". In fact all the well regarded candidates who joined SDP but were not associated with SDP such as Teo Soh Lung performed badly. I understand that Ms Teo cried and was upset that she left for home with close confidants. It is common knowledge that SDP was not the first choice as a party and in 3 of the cases were turned down by other opposition parties. SDP saving grace was having RP who performed badly as expected but both SDP and RP were buoyed by negative sentiments against the PAP. In comparison, SPP in Bishen-TP did very well.
3) The Gay / Sex with Boys smear. They outing of VW plus the video with the idiotic Ravi must have taken its toll. It video became viral before and after VB comment. The social media backlash did not seem to have VB who already is not popular have clashed with PAP Lily Neo and with some many negatives. The religious / conservative might have dealt a significant blow.
So which school of thought prevails or is it a combination of a number of factors. These are however quite conclusive
- the best slate of opposition candidates of qualification and performance
- they did badly when you compare the fact that every single one of WP candidates out performed them including some NSP candidates facing string PAP wards with entrenched sr cabinet figures.
Bear in mind that the PAP strategy team felt that the seat was under threat that they removed Lim Swee Say from it. It left a PAP team that was not even sino-centric which is not the normal PAP model and something which falls as a cardinal sin in party politics.
Do note that Dr Chee and the SDP followed the book on political campaigning and communication and completely differed from usual and past ethos of confrontational and PAP centric messaging.
Bro Scro,
This team did pretty well actually especially the ability to garner votes from the upper and higher middle classes. To expect them to win after 9 days of compaigning in this ward is too much to ask.
The feedback in this thread is good as I read thru, and I just write my thoughts, but some of them are already mentioned.
1. A lot of damage has been done to SDP branding by the poor tactics of CSJ over the years. He is totally out of sync with Singaporeans. If he continues to follow this track, nothing will come out of it. First of all, PAP-led government, for all its faults, is not the totalitarian machine it is made out to be. Hence civil disobedience does not work when generally, many Singaporeans feel PAP has done a "good job" in governing. Nobody can dispute this fact at all.
2. No groundwork done by SDP at all in this constituency unlike WP's thorough preparations in the East and North East spanning over 10-15 years. All their candidates just drop into the wards without much of a groundwork. Again, you can't fool Singaporeans.
3. Candidates' credentials are good but on bread-and-butter issues, they could not appeal to the heartlanders at all. The results really show. They are candidates on a liberal bent. There is a need to appeal to Chinese-speaking masses.
4. Agreed with most forumers here that their public-speaking capabilities can be improved. Dr Ang sounds like a joker, and does not appear to be a serious politician. Tan Jee Say could improve further by appearing more like a stateman politician. He really sounded too serious as though he has an axe too grind. Michelle is pleasant but in one clip, she laughed far too much in her speech. Vincent W, is cut out to be like CSJ.
5. Fighting for gay rights - although SDP said they will not pursue one, nobody believes that is the case with Vincent W. He has openly stepped forward to be in a gay rights forum. This will be a black mark against him, and he has to work harder to change this image. Vincent W and CSJ are cut from the same cloth, and they are "angry" and want to right the wrongs they perceived in this country's system. The problem with their angst, is that it is a different type of anger felt by Singaporeans. They are not of sync. They need to change and ally with Singaporeans' sense of anger rather than their own. Fighting for fringe issues does not appeal to Singaporean masses and only appeal to fringe groups, and how to win votes?
6. Prof Paul Tambyah did what all those above did not do in just one speech - humble, light-mannered yet serious, hit at the right issues, great soundbites, highly narrative and his credentials backed up SDP did a lot but it came a bit too late, and not much effort was made to publicise it, and most folks I spoke to, are very impressed by his speech. I am curious why he endorse SDP to date as he would have known CSJ and his past antics. You need more folks like Paul Tamyah.
To do an image transformation takes a lot of time, and it is a difficult process. Most of these credible candidates joined SDP at the last minute as SDP offered them a platform to stand as candidates for this election. It is really a marriage of convenience if you are to look at it. For example, even James Gomez is likely booted out of WP, and he joined SDP. James Gomez only appeared during elections time, and this does not help. Look at SDP's indigenous candidates in Sembawang and they fared badly. SDP confrontational model will not bring votes to itself at this juncture of Singapore's political happening. So much damage has been done and I am surprised they are still at it. If they continue with this approach, I dare say Tan Jee Say and those recently joined, will probably leave this party. Will they be able co-opt this group? At some point there will be a clash if CSJ and his gang do not want to change. You can't adopt 2 styles and try to co-exist. It is schizophrenic. Better leave earlier and start your own party, and that would be my advice, or join another. But there are not many choices. It is either WP or NSP. The rest of the parties are not up to mark. It is far easier to create a new image than to rework the extensive damage that has already been done to SDP's brand.
