Jan 13, 2010
GENERAL ELECTION
Surprised by 'cooling off' idea
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
MY REACTION to the recent announcement of the 'cooling off' period of 24 hours before Polling Day ('24 hours to cool off before Polling Day', Dec 1), was of great surprise, followed by a single thought: 'Why, the People's Action Party (PAP) must be feeling very insecure.'
My analysis of the situation went something like this:
The decision must have been driven by self-interest.
It meant that the PAP is convinced the new ruling will give it an advantage at the polls, that is, more Singaporeans would vote for the PAP than if there were no ruling.
Since 'cooling off' can only refer to emotions, there must be a PAP fear that the wildly enthusiastic display of emotions by the large crowds at opposition rallies in past general elections is likely to be exploited by the opposition in this coming one. It will build up to a climax towards the end, affecting the voting pattern, and hence, must be prevented.
The emotional approach, though it has its uses, is completely alien - and contemptible - to the pragmatic, no-nonsense PAP leadership that has always prided itself on its rational approach, solidly backed by charts and figures showing its many achievements, and by constant reminders of the good life made possible by strong, efficient leadership.
Despite its distrust of emotions, the PAP realises that in the coming General Election, emotions could actually become the rogue factor in the political equation.
For, the electorate will include a large number of new, young voters who belong to the noisy, rumbustious world of the Internet, where emotions rather than cool reason prevail. The opposition is sure to make opportunistic use of this new force.
Since the PAP could never adopt the 'If you can't beat them, join them' strategy of using the same emotional approach, the only way is to reduce its impact especially at the point where it is expected to be maximal, that is, just before Polling Day itself. Hence the 24-hour clampdown.
I was surprised that a shrewd leadership like the PAP could come up with a ruling that first, is of doubtful value and could even backfire; second, exposes an anxiety that could provide political fodder for the opposition, and third, exposes an insecurity that must make even its supporters wonder about how strong, after more than four decades of leadership, the bond between the Government and the people really is.
Catherine Lim (Ms)
GENERAL ELECTION
Surprised by 'cooling off' idea
<!-- by line --><!-- end by line -->
<!-- end left side bar --><!-- story content : start -->
MY REACTION to the recent announcement of the 'cooling off' period of 24 hours before Polling Day ('24 hours to cool off before Polling Day', Dec 1), was of great surprise, followed by a single thought: 'Why, the People's Action Party (PAP) must be feeling very insecure.'
My analysis of the situation went something like this:
The decision must have been driven by self-interest.
It meant that the PAP is convinced the new ruling will give it an advantage at the polls, that is, more Singaporeans would vote for the PAP than if there were no ruling.
Since 'cooling off' can only refer to emotions, there must be a PAP fear that the wildly enthusiastic display of emotions by the large crowds at opposition rallies in past general elections is likely to be exploited by the opposition in this coming one. It will build up to a climax towards the end, affecting the voting pattern, and hence, must be prevented.
The emotional approach, though it has its uses, is completely alien - and contemptible - to the pragmatic, no-nonsense PAP leadership that has always prided itself on its rational approach, solidly backed by charts and figures showing its many achievements, and by constant reminders of the good life made possible by strong, efficient leadership.
Despite its distrust of emotions, the PAP realises that in the coming General Election, emotions could actually become the rogue factor in the political equation.
For, the electorate will include a large number of new, young voters who belong to the noisy, rumbustious world of the Internet, where emotions rather than cool reason prevail. The opposition is sure to make opportunistic use of this new force.
Since the PAP could never adopt the 'If you can't beat them, join them' strategy of using the same emotional approach, the only way is to reduce its impact especially at the point where it is expected to be maximal, that is, just before Polling Day itself. Hence the 24-hour clampdown.
I was surprised that a shrewd leadership like the PAP could come up with a ruling that first, is of doubtful value and could even backfire; second, exposes an anxiety that could provide political fodder for the opposition, and third, exposes an insecurity that must make even its supporters wonder about how strong, after more than four decades of leadership, the bond between the Government and the people really is.
Catherine Lim (Ms)
