Chee: Opposition Parties Should Cooperate

[SgParent]

Agree. Mostly

D. NSP - they surprised us all in GE2011 and we will be surprised again even anything material occurs. It is probably the only party whose vision is not to win but to give a show and they have not failed all these years.

Jeanette Chong is an exception

E. Reform Party -

Did you intentionally leave a big nothing for RP?

 

[SgParent]

... it will make the next 3rd party spoiler-to-be think twice again before choosing to throw away $16k

Your point is valid, if the $16k was originally from the candidate's/candidates' own pocket.

 

[scroobal]

Yes, on leaving Reform Party blank - not sure what KJ can do as he is not a good listener. Jeanette strikes me as a civic activists rather than a politician however will be an asset to any party as she did well in 2011. I am sure she is looking for suitable party who can accommodate her in the same ward.

A number of newbies in NSP/SDP who did well in 2011 will be looking for new parties. Michelle was the first to make the move. The trouble is WP is quite rigid in candidate selection, surprisingly even more rigid than PAP. And there are no other viable parties to go to unless a new party formed.

The DNAs of these newbies are very different from the older chaps and the current parties are in the old form. These people won't take authoritarian role easily as the RP exodus showed. Only SDP appeals in this regard but there are too many nuances that need to be addressed in SDP. Both VW and Chee fit well in this regard but how prior to 2011 they keep getting wrong is a mystery and concern.

Agree. Mostly



Jeanette Chong is an exception




Did you intentionally leave a big nothing for RP?

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

Granted.

You also know that SDP performed fourth best of the opposition parties in 2011, beating only RP, and losing to WP, NSP and SPP (in that order) when percentages scored in contested constituencies are considered.

I would like to see an upheaval of ground support for SDP first before even considering if SDP should be "leading the way" (as what you imply in the last paragraph). As it stands only WP broke the GRC treshold, and NSP/SPP came close but couldn't enter the door. SDP didn't even come close.

Results first, please. Prove that your method works with the population, then other oppositions will listen to you and follow your "lead".

Sorry to disabuse you of your notion, but I've never identified myself as a 'staunch SDP supporter'.

If you've followed my posts since Delfi days, I've always been an opposition supporter first. Over the years my support for SPP and WP (opposition torchbearers in parliament) had shifted to the SDP because I felt that SDP's left-centre ideology was what was needed to correct the malaise in governance here and I was increasingly disappointed with both SPP and WP. WP in particular because they promised so much in terms of ground support and parliamentary representation..

To reiterate, the opposition cause supersedes any individual party's interests, and at this point in time SDP is the best outfit to lead that cause ... if we truly want a better Singapore for all Singaporeans.

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

Now, the Worker's Party will definitely be looking to expand in PE2016 and compete in more constituencies that they have in PE2011. Should they have to yield to the other parties just for the sake of opposition unity? If the Worker's Party believe that they are the strongest party, do they have the right to compete wherever they want and all the opposition parties must back off? Of course not! The Worker's Party have far from proven that they deserve to dominate the other opposition. Only with the endorsement of the voters in a 3 corner fight can they have the legitimate claim to be the strongest opposition party.

I believe you meant GE2016.

I'm in agreement with you here. With a few parties joining the fray, and even more parties coming up that are in fact "friends of the PAP", yielding to all of them for the sake of some vaunted "opposition unity" is only going to keep WP stagnant.

I have repeated GoldenDragon's words many times, but I have to repeat it again: OPPOSITION UNITY IS A MADMAN'S NOTION.

I also notice that no one really has ever defined what "opposition unity" means in real life. To me its just a catchphrase to hookwink voters. I'd rather spend 10 grand hanging flowers.

You get 4 or 5 opposition parties (some of which are PAP-run outfits) contesting at the same time, if WP yields to them all, it will have to forever limit itself to 20 seats. How to grow the party like that?

That's why you must fight your case and stand your ground. If NSP had the balls it would have stood its ground in MK. Why did NSP back off and let WP have its way? Because it acknowledged WP was a better party.

Its this simple logic that will forever elude folks like YA and GMS.

 

[yellowarse]

I don't share your pessimism about the feasibility of an opposition alliance. I believe working together the opposition parties can come up with 44 good men to win a majority in Parliament.

But I agree with the following statement:

So are we lost ? No. It just means that Singaporeans must continue to back the opposition parties and the latter must continue to lift their game.

That's what I've always been saying, yet there are people who'll say, if GMS runs in my constituency, I'll spoil my vote. Or, if SDP contests here, I'd rather vote PAP. Supporters of one oppo party bickering with another, with PAP supporters snickering from the sidelines.

The opposition cause must prevail over and above the individual party's interests at all times.

 

[steffychun]

Opposition today dont even know what is a Westminster style democracy...how to win

 

[tanwahp]

That's what I've always been saying, yet there are people who'll say, if GMS runs in my constituency, I'll spoil my vote. Or, if SDP contests here, I'd rather vote PAP. Supporters of one oppo party bickering with another, with PAP supporters snickering from the sidelines.

The opposition cause must prevail over and above the individual party's interests at all times.

I know where you are coming from. But you have to blame these people for repeatedly saying that they should be voted based on the amount of noise they make. So if people don't like their noise, it becomes nothing wrong for people to vote against them.