SDP will withdraw.

[rogerroger]

already, i am bored of having only pap and wp as the only choices. i hope to see other opposition parties secure 25% of the vote, wp 25% and pap 50%. such a result will help sporeans to respect each other more as no one is a clear majority. pap may appeal to 1/2 of the voters but the other 1/2 prefer someone else. wp supporters will stop asking other parties to bugger off when it actually only appeals to 1/2 of the opposition voters.

 

[Fook Seng]

I am not believing or unbelieving whether LTK is racist. As you can read for yourself elsewhere on this thread, I am still questioning his accuser. This is not the first charge of racism, if you can recall earlier there was the issue with Indian members and cadreship.

No matter how much you think that Low Thia Khiang achieved in his career, right now it is still very early for him. There is a Chinese saying hao xi hai zai hou tou - the best part hasn't been played out yet. You have still not seen the true colours. Wait until he actually speaks up in parliament, wait until you get him involved in policies involving race. Then we will have a better picture of his record. The lack of evidence that he is a racist is not the same as evidence that he is not a racist. I'm just saying - it's not impossible.

It seems you are only begging people to believe in your haunches. Why should they? If your identity is openly known, you can be sued for scandal.

 

[SgParent]

And a 3 corner fight is more competition or less competition than a 2 corner fight?

I asked a simple question and all I've got so far from you are just childish avoidance, meaningless sidetracking.

Look here. If you dun have the courage nor the courtesy to engage in a meaningful discussion, then make this our last exchange. No need to sidetrack, waste SBF bandwidth, bored others to death in this thread.

 

[metalmickey]

Both these two scenarios are the least probable of all the scenarios. Scenario A - WP has a bigger obligation to its 41% supporters than SDP to stand for election and it is extremely idealistic and, may I say, self-pointed to expect WP to move aside for SDP to stand alone.

You misunderstand me. When I said "SDP just ownself go compete in BE" I meant "SDP unilaterally enter into a three corner fight with PAP and WP without asking WP first".

 

[metalmickey]

I asked a simple question and all I've got so far from you are just childish avoidance, meaningless sidetracking.

No, as we can see, I'm the one who asked a simple question that you avoided.

As for your sidetrack question, "Do you think the SDP's latest tear jerking stunt causing more good or harm to Oppo cause? "

You can see for yourself what I wrote in posts 32, 34, 38 and 102 in this thread. No need for me to repeat.

 

[metalmickey]

It seems you are only begging people to believe in your haunches. Why should they? If your identity is openly known, you can be sued for scandal.

Why would Low Thia Khiang sue me? Are they the PAP? I didn't know the WP were in this suing business. They ought to be suing the PAP for the AIM thing instead.

I'm not going to comment anymore on whether Low Thia Khiang is a racist. Otherwise I can say a hundred times that I'm not going to take a position on this issue, and you can say a hundred times that I'm begging people to believe in my hunches.

 

[Fook Seng]

A market is not a monopoly, a monopoly is not a duopoly, a duopoly is not full competition. When people talk about competition, it really means competing between many many people and not just two. I hope you're aware of that and not merely bluffing when you say you know economics.

So, more competition always always benefits the consumers, except when the competitor is SDP, except when there is a three corner fight, except when there is paralysis by analysis.

Don't get confused between the two: market and an election. In a market, you can buy what you want to buy, so the more choices the better. You can pick and choose.

In an election, you cannot get the candidate you pick to occupy the seat. It has to be decided together with the other voters and the candidate with the most supporters will win the contest. In a highly contest, a much hated minority can emerge as the winner. A good example is the last PE.

Your argument holds no water. None of the political parties want a multi-cornered fight if they are serious in wanting to win unless they have a very special attraction to a small group of hardcore supporters who will stay with them, no matter how many the number of corners there are. In other words, they can win only with a minority win with others all diluted by the multi-cornered distribution. But I must say, this works in contradiction to the majority wishes of the people and is therefore not a democratic election.

 

[metalmickey]

Don't get confused between the two: market and an election. In a market, you can buy what you want to buy, so the more choices the better. You can pick and choose.

In an election, you cannot get the candidate you pick to occupy the seat. It has to be decided together with the other voters and the candidate with the most supporters will win the contest. In a highly contest, a much hated minority can emerge as the winner. A good example is the last PE.

Your argument holds no water. None of the political parties want a multi-cornered fight if they are serious in wanting to win unless they have a very special attraction to a small group of hardcore supporters who will stay with them, no matter how many the number of corners there are. In other words, they can win only with a minority win with others all diluted by the multi-cornered distribution. But I must say, this works in contradiction to the majority wishes of the people and is therefore not a democratic election.

Thanks for typing that out for me.

A little bit of background. Mr SgParent here is the braindead moron who keeps on harping on "more competition always always benefits the consumers" I keep on telling him there are exceptions but he doesn't believe me. Thanks for whacking him on my behalf.

If there is a multi-corner fight, then the issue is no longer about winning a seat, and the WP and the SDP has to play it like this is a report card on SDP and WP.

 

[Fook Seng]

But instead they did not respond. They just said nothing. No message is a message. That message is: we're not sure if we're going to win PE anyway. If you want to contest in BE, go ahead. If you kill yourself in the process it's not my fault. I'm not going to turn this into a screaming match.

I don't think WP cares a bit what SDP does here. They are used to SDP's way of doing things. It is not like they have a seat to lose. Even if they don't win this, they are confident of beating SDP by 5 to 10 % points.

WP wouldn't want to give SDP the pleasure of an answer because all the possible scenarios and their outcomes of holding a meeting can easily be worked out. The ball is in SDP's own court to make their decision. But one word of advice. A 3 or even 4-cornered fight is very different from a straight fight and it can be very damaging to your ego. Ask Desmond Lim. If DL comes in this time, he will not even be able to get 4.5%. In a 4CF, he will only get 0.5%, according to my supercomputer.

 

[metalmickey]

I don't think WP cares a bit what SDP does here. They are used to SDP's way of doing things. It is not like they have a seat to lose. Even if they don't win this, they are confident of beating SDP by 5 to 10 % points.

There is a small but significant difference. Without the SDP joining, the WP has a small but significant chance of winning. With the SDP joining, that chance is basically zero.

SGParent asked me a question he thinks has an obvious answer: are SDP's antics good for the opposition cause? Suppose SDP contests. They they get raped and lose their deposit. Then they have to fold because they have no credibility, and 2016 takes place with SDP no longer being a credible force. Good or bad?

Or in a 3 corner fight, what if WP and SDP both get 25%. Then we have 2 strong opposition parties for 2016. Good or bad?

You can say that when WP and SDP are not fighting for a seat anymore, this by-election is not important to them. I say think about it this way: This by-election has turned into a report card. This report card could be ultimately more important than one seat.

 

[AhFook]

Why do you still doubt competition always, always benefits the consumers?

So can we finally go back to my simple question to you?

Why do I need WP in parliament?

CPF withdrawer age and sum increased -- Silent from WP
COE -- about 100k now ---- Silent from WP
Housing price still going up --- Silent from WP
FTs still coming in by planeload --- Silent from WP
Old folks still collecting cardboards for a living --- Silent from WP
Whitescums still highest paid in the world --- Silent from WP

Unless I need a road sweeper for my estate at $16k per month, why do I need WP in parliament????

 

[metalmickey]

Interesting. Let's see what actually happens.

1 hour ago I said that SDP are not going to lose their deposit in a 3 corner fight.

Then I saw this:

http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/sdp-proposes-joint-campaign-wp

So the good news is that it made me laugh and make my day.
The bad news is that I have to revise my statement that SDP will not lose their deposit in a 3 corner fight.

My earlier post that SDP were fapfapfapfapfaping away has proven to be eeriely accurate.

 

[metalmickey]

Why do I need WP in parliament?

CPF withdrawer age and sum increased -- Silent from WP
COE -- about 100k now ---- Silent from WP
Housing price still going up --- Silent from WP
FTs still coming in by planeload --- Silent from WP
Old folks still collecting cardboards for a living --- Silent from WP
Whitescums still highest paid in the world --- Silent from WP

Unless I need a road sweeper for my estate at $16k per month, why do I need WP in parliament????

Shiiiiiit SGParent getting a lot of unwanted attention. Sorry SGParent!

 

[PTADER]

That depends on who side you are on.

If we assume there was no threat, then act of publishing the content means CSJ/SDP slapped WP in the face WITHOUT warning. Which is worse.

Relax bro. You and your fellow WP members/astroturfers and supporters need to calm down.

Publishing content is all about "always open door".

Don't believe me? Then read what your master has to say.


"A closed-door session that wasn't
147th Prostitute Press, 23 June 2012

ORGANISERS of a post- Hougang election dialogue this week were adamant that the session, featuring Workers' Party chief Low Thia Khiang and People's Action Party MP Baey Yam Keng, was not for reporting.

Before the session started, the National University of Singapore Society (NUSS) reminded the audience that the dialogue was closed-door and that there was to be absolutely no reporting.

The move to keep things under wraps was a curious one, especially at a time of growing interest in Singapore politics.

At any rate, the embargo proved futile. This dialogue on the Hougang by-election evidently had its own 'secret squirrels'.

Within three hours of the session ending late on Thursday night, postings on online forums had reported on the session.

The Workers' Party itself later also saw fit to put up photos and the transcript of Mr Low's speech at the event on Facebook and Twitter - which some netizens quickly picked up as well.

Mr Low himself was overheard saying after the closed-door forum: 'For me, I am always open door.'

 

[SgParent]

Don't get confused between the two: market and an election. In a market, you can buy what you want to buy, so the more choices the better. You can pick and choose.

In politics, you can also vote (buy) who you want to vote.

And if it's a level playing field, it is also "the more choices the better".

In an election, you cannot get the candidate you pick to occupy the seat. It has to be decided together with the other voters and the candidate with the most supporters will win the contest.

In a market, only you (1 vote) buy product A (candidate A) while all the other consumers buy product B to Z. Probably you will only get to buy product A once before it is off the shelf forever.

In a highly contest, a much hated minority can emerge as the winner. A good example is the last PE.

That will and have been the case in market with a monopoly. Example, Microsoft.

 

[metalmickey]

In politics, you can also vote (buy) who you want to vote.

And if it's a level playing field, it is also "the more choices the better".

In a market, only you (1 vote) buy product A (candidate A) while all the other consumers buy product B to Z. Probably you will only get to buy product A once before it is off the shelf forever.

That will and have been the case in market with a monopoly. Example, Microsoft.

Sorry hor, my strategy from now on is I don't debate your dumfuck theory myself. I just mention it here and there and I let some random passerby tell you why it's wrong. It seems to be working so far. Bye bye!!!

 

[SgParent]

There is a small but significant difference. Without the SDP joining, the WP has a small but significant chance of winning. With the SDP joining, that chance is basically zero.

SGParent asked me a question he thinks has an obvious answer: are SDP's antics good for the opposition cause? Suppose SDP contests. They they get raped and lose their deposit. Then they have to fold because they have no credibility, and 2016 takes place with SDP no longer being a credible force. Good or bad?

Or in a 3 corner fight, what if WP and SDP both get 25%. Then we have 2 strong opposition parties for 2016. Good or bad?

You can say that when WP and SDP are not fighting for a seat anymore, this by-election is not important to them. I say think about it this way: This by-election has turned into a report card. This report card could be ultimately more important than one seat.

No wonder you refused to answer my question. It's because you are confused.

Ok let me make it simpler for you.

SDP's screwing around only means the 40% market has some sort of competition - cannibalization between WP, SDP. So the 40% are given a choice, and they benefited.

Looking at the bigger picture, the Oppo cause or the 100%. The White Scums' rear admirer nobody-before-PE2013 is almost guaranteed a win. So SDP's screwing around does more harm because the monopoly is still there. There is not competition in the 100% market. And the 100% lose out.

Got it?

 

[SgParent]

Why do I need WP in parliament?

CPF withdrawer age and sum increased -- Silent from WP
COE -- about 100k now ---- Silent from WP
Housing price still going up --- Silent from WP
FTs still coming in by planeload --- Silent from WP
Old folks still collecting cardboards for a living --- Silent from WP
Whitescums still highest paid in the world --- Silent from WP

Unless I need a road sweeper for my estate at $16k per month, why do I need WP in parliament????

In a market with a monopoly that has absolute control over just about everything, you expect a small player to change the way the game is played?

 

[metalmickey]

No wonder you refused to answer my question. It's because you are confused.

Ok let me make it simpler for you.

SDP's screwing around only means the 40% market has some sort of competition - cannibalization between WP, SDP. So the 40% are given a choice, and they benefited.

Looking at the bigger picture, the Oppo cause or the 100%. The White Scums' rear admirer nobody-before-PE2013 is almost guaranteed a win. So SDP's screwing around does more harm because the monopoly is still there. There is not competition in the 100% market. And the 100% lose out.

Got it?

OK. Translation: in this particular case, more competition has caused the consumer to lose out. Case closed!

 

[SgParent]

Shiiiiiit SGParent getting a lot of unwanted attention. Sorry SGParent!

What a surprise !!!!! I am proven wrong !!!!!!!!

You are not only confused, but childish. Make that "damned childish".