• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Serious What the Trump victory means to ordinary Singaporeans

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
Forget about the rhetoric and forget about the divisive campaign with the name calling and all of its negativity. Instead, take a step back and look at what the Trump win can mean to us ordinary Singaporeans.

Here is a man who has absolutely never held any form of political office before. Not as even as a Mayor, councilman, or state representative. He has zero experience in politics and zero experience in any form of public administration. Add to this is the fact that he has never served in the military either. But yet he won election over an opponent who had decades of political office experience, including at a very high level as Secretary of State.

He won despite a media that was much skewed against him and whose coverage was 90% pro-Clinton and almost completely negative against him. In fact, CNN might as well be known as Clinton News Network. Why were Americans not afraid to vote for him in large numbers? Why were they not afraid that he has no experience in government?

Let’s look at it in the Singapore context. We have been deluged by a stream of PAP propaganda proclaiming that they were the most experienced politicians around and the most qualified and therefore should be regularly re-elected and at the same time be paid millions of $. Well, it turns out that you don’t actually need any experience or qualifications for public office at all to run for the most powerful country in the world. Is it possible that a small country like Singapore, with much less complexities could also be run by someone with no qualifications and experience? The answer is a resounding YES. After all, Corazon Aquino, a housewife, basically ran for and won the Presidency of the Philippines after her husband was assassinated. Lee Kuan Yew himself never held any political office nor was even in the public service when he won election as Prime Minister. So, why can’t the same thing happen in Singapore?

Like the Americans, who have endured decades of being ruled by The Establishment, and were sick and tired of not being listened to by their own govt., Singaporeans are reaching this breaking point too. The PAP does not listen to its people and have not done so for a long time. In fact, none other then Lee Wei Ling, the Prime Minister’s own sister, has stated “This current government is not like previous PAP governments”. And that it is taking action not in the best welfare of its people. The govt. did not listen when we did not want 6.9 million people, and they will not listen when we tell them we don’t want the next target of 10 million people either. The voice of Singaporeans in affairs of state and other matters have been ignored and sidetracked for years. When the people tell the PAP that they are afraid that FTs will steal their jobs (this fear has come true), they were ignored and told that FTs will miraculously create jobs instead. When the people told the PAP that gambling is a vice and that the 2 largest casinos in SE Asia should not be located here, they were once again ignored. In fact, the people are ignored on every major policy decision that impacts them. They are increasingly disenfranchised and disillusioned.


Of course there is a percentage of Singaporeans who think that he PAP can do no wrong; these are not dissimilar to diehard Clinton supporters. There are also Singaporeans who hold their nose up and vote PAP because they think that the opposition cannot successfully run a govt. And then there are the 30% of electorate that will never support the PAP. What Trump’s win tells you is not to worry about all of that. It matters not if the opposition candidate has a military track record as a retired general (because Trump himself never was in the military), nor has been holding some political office for donkey number of years. The Singapore voter simply has to look at the personal and career track record of the candidate. The candidate Donald Trump, despite what you think of him, has successfully run a multibillion dollar business empire. Whether he is a teacher, lawyer, doctor, etc. does not matter. Americans want to see a successful person in their chosen field. Singaporeans should look for the same at the next elections too. They should look at the real world and life experience of the candidate and not look for things that the PAP tells them to look for. These things are meaningless. Looking at Trump’s education, you see he when has only a Bachelor degree in a field related to his career, instead of the Masters degree and higher that PAP politicians have in fields not related to their careers. Which makes more sense? Trump’s paper qualification or the unrelated paper qualifications of PAP’s candidates.


Some of you might argue that Trump’s moral fibre is simply not there, and that he is not a nice person. Well, I have news for you. The world is not a safe place. All we have been doing is sending PAP choir boys in white, brought up in a very sheltered system into the world, and in the end, China is mad at us, as is the Philippines, and on occasion, the Indonesians and the Malaysians too. Perhaps it’s time we send our own viper out into the world to do battle with other vipers instead of sending a mouse. So, even of the next opposition candidate has alleged moral shortcomings, ignore them. The Americans did.


Perhaps the main point that Singaporeans should take away from a Trump victory is that Americans do not fear the consequences. They know that the day after he takes office, the planes will still fly, buses and trains will still run, schools will open, and everything will be as it is. Should a Trump like event happen in Singapore, I am here to tell you that everything that you see and take for granted everyday will remain the same. Just like in the US, the MRT will run, taxis will be available, police will be available, and schools will open, etc.

Trump himself is building a team to be in his administration. He is tapping qualified and experienced people to help him run the govt. He knows that he cannot do it all himself. Just like he identified and recruited talented people to run his business empire, he is doing the same for the governing of America. The same will happen if an opposition candidate with no experience is elected. He or she will also likewise tap qualified and smart people to run the govt. We have the budget to hire the best economist, engineers and managers to run this country, if local talent is not avaialable. It’s better to do it this way then the PAP way which is to give lots of money to ex SAF scholar generals who have no qualifications, and to let them run enterprises into the ground. So, be not afraid to make this choice if the opportunity comes at the next election.


……… for the next election will see the PAP at its most vulnerable. Lee Hsien Loong will be putting up a slate of new and sometimes untested next gen leaders, and for once in many decades, a member of the Lee family will not be in govt. This is as best as it will get. The pain is here now. Just like the pain was there for Americans in such quantity that they felt like they had to vote Trump. Look around us. Sometimes, we feel we are in a different country, and that we are a minority. Would we have trains as crowded as this if they were only 3.5 million Singaporeans on the island? Would there be as many layoffs and retrenchment if there were no FTs here taking our jobs? Would we have to wait that long for medical care if hospitals attended to only Singaporeans? Would our children be able to more easily get in the university that they want if there if there were no space reserved for foreign students with free scholarships? This list goes on, but you get the idea. Our pain has arrived now.


SO, look to the Americans for inspiration. It’s time we took this country back for ourselves. Just my 2 cents.
 

WujiBo

Alfrescian
Loyal
Trump is not a scholar.

He gets things done based on his gut feelings.

Unlike those useless politicans who can only change laws to keep themselves in power instead of fixing things like an engineer.
 

bodycells

Alfrescian
Loyal
Trump is not a scholar.

He gets things done based on his gut feelings.

Unlike those useless politicans who can only change laws to keep themselves in power instead of fixing things like an engineer.

Sinkies do things based on their ball-less feelings.
 

Justmythots

Alfrescian
Loyal
They are too stupid to even see the signs. They think everything is hunky dory and the whole place implodes on them. They have been conditioned to think that the island is their world and be-all end-all.

They are also brainwashed to equate PAP a party with the concept of country like what the CCP propagandized to the mainland chinks. So if you go against ruling party they see that you are 反政府 they are not aware that the civil service is separate from partisan politics in democracies. They are even much commie than China in many ways. They are blind to themselves and do not see it.
 

Justmythots

Alfrescian
Loyal
One lao kuay bu I met said in scorn during the last GE "all the areas now challenged by opposition. You all want to kick out the PM? Can you imagine Low Thia Kiang as our PM?? Can you imagine him representing Singapore as PM??"
The funny thing is these peasants had been told for 5 decades how PAP takes in smarties who can study well and they buy the rhetoric hook line sinker. Besides challenging and questioning the rhetoric it's never occurred to the LKB to look at the specimen itself pinky who is shameful and useless. I'd trust LTK anytime over that brainless egotistical fag.
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
Trump is not a scholar.

He gets things done based on his gut feelings.

Unlike those useless politicans who can only change laws to keep themselves in power instead of fixing things like an engineer.

That is exactly right and this is what I want fellow sinkies to see. U don't need the same political establishment to tell you what to do or think or to blow their own horns when they are failing everywhere including putting in a SAF asshole to run MRT with the resultant breakdowns all the time.
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
One lao kuay bu I met said in scorn during the last GE "all the areas now challenged by opposition. You all want to kick out the PM? Can you imagine Low Thia Kiang as our PM?? Can you imagine him representing Singapore as PM??"
The funny thing is these peasants had been told for 5 decades how PAP takes in smarties who can study well and they buy the rhetoric hook line sinker. Besides challenging and questioning the rhetoric it's never occurred to the LKB to look at the specimen itself pinky who is shameful and useless. I'd trust LTK anytime over that brainless egotistical fag.

It does not have to LTK. It can be anyone of a number of current oppos or even someone who is not even on the radar now. There are some humble and well known singaporeans that are not in politics now.
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
They are too stupid to even see the signs. They think everything is hunky dory and the whole place implodes on them. They have been conditioned to think that the island is their world and be-all end-all.

They are also brainwashed to equate PAP a party with the concept of country like what the CCP propagandized to the mainland chinks. So if you go against ruling party they see that you are 反政府 they are not aware that the civil service is separate from partisan politics in democracies. They are even much commie than China in many ways. They are blind to themselves and do not see it.

This is the difference between the american voters and sinkie voters. The americans can see that things are imploding on them thanks to a largely free press. They are not as bad as the imploding happening to singaporeans. that is why i say the pain is here now.
 

JohnTan

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Most sinkies support Hillary. I have since repented of that sin and Trump has forgiven me. On hindsight, why do sinkies not support Trump since we all love Ah Gong so much? Trump and Ah Gong are alike in their strong-man, winner image.
 

kkbutterfly

Alfrescian
Loyal
It does not have to LTK. It can be anyone of a number of current oppos or even someone who is not even on the radar now. There are some humble and well known singaporeans that are not in politics now.

Desmond Lim should be able to make the best pm
 

Wunderfool

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Trump won only 48% of the popular vote, although he won by majority electoral votes.

The winner is not decided by the percentage of popular vote or else , Hillary Clinton would have won. He is not the most popular President. He is a lucky President.
 

Dark Knight

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
There is a Chinese saying 乱世造英雄.
Majority of the Americans are well aware and saw through what kind of 乱世 their country as a whole picture is facing.
Hence among the 2 worst candidates, Trump (in my opinion) with the experience and brain of a business man
will at least be focusing more on growing the economy and provide jobs for the Americans instead of going to war, interfere and intervene other countries business.

On the other hand, sad to say that Sillyporeans don't even bother to see and make themselves aware of the entire picture of what kind of 乱世 Sillypore is facing.
We only care about our own benefits and are extremely self centered. We don't care about the suffering of others and not even united as a whole.
Hence this is the downfall of Sillyporeans.
 

mojito

Alfrescian
Loyal
Trump won only 48% of the popular vote, although he won by majority electoral votes.

The winner is not decided by the percentage of popular vote or else , Hillary Clinton would have won. He is not the most popular President. He is a lucky President.

Silly man you. The federalist system is the bedrock of American democracy. You simply cannot allow the rich and populous states determine what the rest of the country should live just because of wealth. Those actions hurt Middle Americans and their well being. You cannot say the PAP is illegitimate government just because they won less popular vote than actual seats in parliament. Not smart at all. :mad:
 

Charlie99

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
THE DATA BEHIND TRUMP'S WIN


It is better to read and see the charts at The Globe and Mail

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...es-the-data-behind-trumpswin/article32784716/

JOE FRIESEN
The Globe and Mail Last updated: Thursday, Nov. 10, 2016 10:05AM EST
0 Shares45 Comments
The 2016 U.S. presidential election produced an astonishing victory for the insurgent campaign of real estate mogul and reality-TV star Donald Trump. The results confirmed in many cases what observers suspected all along: that Mr. Trump’s support was fuelled by less-educated white voters in suburban and rural parts of the country, and that former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s strengths lay among the highly educated in big urban centres. But there were also several surprises.

Ms. Clinton, vying to become the first female president and boosted by a recording of Mr. Trump making lewd remarks about women, was unable to galvanize female voters any more than previous Democratic nominees. Mr. Trump’s promise to build a wall on the border with Mexico and crack down on immigration was thought to have hurt him among Latino voters, but Ms. Clinton’s support in that group declined slightly compared to that for President Barack Obama.

And although the anger that spurred Mr. Trump’s rise was often attributed to those left behind in the global economy, his support was highest among middle- and upper-income earners.

The numbers are from exit polls conducted by Edison Research on behalf of a consortium of U.S. media organizations.


Age and race at the exit polls
Percentage of respondents
ClintonTrump
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
All others
Latinos 65 and older
Latinos 45-64
Latinos 30-44
Latinos 18-29
Blacks 65 and older
Blacks 45-64
Blacks 30-44
Blacks 18-29
Whites 65 and older
Whites 45-64
Whites 30-44
Whites 18-29
60
34
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE:EDISON
DATASHARE×
Age by race Clinton Trump
Whites 18-29 43 48
Whites 30-44 37 55
Whites 45-64 34 63
Whites 65 and older 39 58
Blacks 18-29 83 9
Blacks 30-44 87 7
Blacks 45-64 90 9
Blacks 65 and older 90 9
Latinos 18-29 70 24
Latinos 30-44 71 22
Latinos 45-64 67 29
Latinos 65 and older 71 24
All others 60 34
AGE AND RACE AT THE EXIT POLLSDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/JWv8eewejicxh74Te/thumbnail.png
White people may compose a declining share of the U.S. population, but they still make up by far the largest group, and they were key to Mr. Trump’s victory. Over all, white people favoured Mr. Trump by a margin of 58 per cent to 37 per cent.

Ms. Clinton dominated with African-Americans, tallying 88 per cent to Mr. Trump’s eight. But it was still a decline compared with the 2008 and 2012 elections, when African-Americans supported Mr. Obama at 95 per cent and 93 per cent respectively, and turned out in very large numbers.

Much was made in the days leading up to the election of a Latino surge in early voting, and given Mr. Trump’s aggressive stand on immigration, the expectation was he would be punished at the polls. But Ms. Clinton’s 65 per cent share of the Latino vote was lower than Mr. Obama’s 71 per cent in 2012.

How women voted
DemocratsRepublicans
0
20
40
60
Percentage of respondents
Percentage of respondents
2012
2016
55
44
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE:UNITED STATES ELECTIONS PROJECT
DATASHARE×
Women voters Democrats Republicans
2012 55 44
2016 54 42
HOW WOMEN VOTEDDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/aMwe8X9aRoAoQejLw/thumbnail.png
Given the chance to elect the first female president, U.S. women stuck roughly to their previous party preferences. Women voted for Ms. Clinton at a similar rate to their support for Mr. Obama in 2012. They gave Ms. Clinton a 12-point margin, 53 per cent to 41 per cent. Among her own demographic group, white women, Ms. Clinton was walloped by Mr. Trump 53 per cent to 43 per cent, similar to the 2012 numbers for Republican candidate Mitt Romney. Mr. Trump’s distasteful remarks and allegations of inappropriate touching do not seem to have hurt him much with that demographic.

How white women voted
DemocratsRepublicans
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
Percentage of respondents
Percentage of respondents
2012
2016
42
56
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE:UNITED STATES ELECTIONS PROJECT
DATASHARE×
White women Democrats Republicans
2012 42 56
2016 43 53
HOW WHITE WOMEN VOTEDDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/Qz636HaYzp9bSnTJw/thumbnail.png
How frequently voters attend religious services
ClintonTrump
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
Percentage of respondents
Percentage of respondents
Weekly or more
Monthly
Few times a year
Never
40
56
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE:EDISON
DATASHARE×
Religious frequency Clinton Trump
Weekly or more 40 56
Monthly 46 49
Few times a year 48 47
Never 62 31
HOW FREQUENTLY VOTERS ATTEND RELIGIOUS SERVICESDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/t86FmwBisXRjXTa45/thumbnail.png
The more often people attend a religious service, the more likely they were to support Mr. Trump. Those who attend once a week or more voted 56 per cent for Mr. Trump, compared with 40 per cent for Ms. Clinton. Those who never attend a service voted Democrat 62 per cent of the time, compared with 31 per cent for Mr. Trump. White evangelicals voted for Mr. Trump at a higher rate, 81 per cent, than they did for Mitt Romney, John McCain or George W. Bush.
Voter education
ClintonTrump
0
20
40
60
Percentage of respondents
Percentage of respondents
High school or less
Some college
College graduate
Postgraduate
Postgraduate
58
37
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE:EDISON
DATASHARE×
Education Clinton Trump
High school or less 45 51
Some college 43 52
College graduate 49 45
Postgraduate 58 37
VOTER EDUCATIONDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/hF5beFgvwK4Ecxmmi/thumbnail.png
The vote laid bare a sharp divide on education. Ms. Clinton fared better among the more highly educated, winning among college graduates and holding a substantial lead among those who had done postgraduate study. Those with high school or less, as well as those with some college, preferred Mr. Trump by healthy margins. According to Pew Research, Mr. Trump’s margin among whites without a college degree, 67 per cent to 28 per cent, is the largest since the election of 1980.
Age of the electorate
ClintonTrump
0
20
40
60
Percentage of respondents
Percentage of respondents
18-24
25-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65 and older
56
35
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE:EDISON
DATASHARE×
Age Clinton Trump
18-24 56 35
25-29 53 39
30-39 51 40
40-49 46 50
50-64 44 53
65 and older 45 53
AGE OF THE ELECTORATEDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/foiqEdHC6L7RZ9Rnr/thumbnail.png
Ms. Clinton fared best among young people, but could not match the excitement generated in previous campaigns by Mr. Obama, or perhaps even her primary challenger Bernie Sanders. At 55 per cent among 18-29-year-olds, she trailed Mr. Obama’s 2008 numbers by more than 10 percentage points. Voters from 45 up were solidly for Mr. Trump, but at rates comparable to the results for Mr. Romney in 2012.

Household income of voters
Percentage of respondents
ClintonTrump
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
$250K or more
$200K-$249,999
$100K-$199,999
$50K-$99,999
$30K-$49,999
Under $30K
46
48
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE: EDISON
DATASHARE×
Income Clinton Trump
Under $30K 53 41
$30K-$49,999 51 42
$50K-$99,999 46 50
$100K-$199,999 47 48
$200K-$249,999 48 49
$250K or more 46 48
HOUSEHOLD INCOME OF VOTERSDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/r4wBGDfT3sufztvnD/thumbnail.png
One of the popular explanations for Mr. Trump’s victory was that it represented a revolt of the economically marginalized. But exit-poll data show that Ms. Clinton had a healthy lead among lower-income voters. Those who earn less than $30,000 – about 17 per cent of voters – opted for Ms. Clinton by a margin of 53 per cent to 41 per cent over Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump, meanwhile, led at all levels of income above $50,000 a year. His margin was largest at the middle-income level, $50,000 to $100,000.

Ohio's unionized voters
ClintonTrump
0
20
40
60
80
100
Percentage of respondents
Percentage of respondents
Unionized
43
52
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE:EDISON
DATASHARE×
Union household? Clinton Trump
Unionized 43 52
OHIO'S UNIONIZED VOTERSDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/cDGBKbPSgPh5SaqQd/thumbnail.png
In the crucial state of Ohio, Mr. Trump won thanks in part to a very strong showing among union members, some of whom may have responded to his tough talk on tearing up trade agreements. Those who described themselves as belonging to union households in Ohio, about 23 per cent of voters according to exit polling, opted 52 per cent to 43 per cent for Mr. Trump, a sharp repudiation for their traditional allies in the Democratic party

Pennsylvania's rural-urban divide
ClintonTrump
0
20
40
60
80
Percentage of respondents
Percentage of respondents
Urban area
Suburban area
Rural area
70
26
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE:EDISON
DATASHARE×
Area type Clinton Trump
Urban area 70 26
Suburban area 44 52
Rural area 26 71
PENNSYLVANIA'S RURAL-URBAN DIVIDEDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/knK3bQrspaJdXZMgN/thumbnail.png
The divide between urban and rural was a big part of the national result, and in the battleground state of Pennsylvania. In cities larger than 50,000 people, Ms. Clinton won 59 per cent of the vote, while her share declined to 45 per cent in suburbs, and 34 per cent in smaller or rural communities. In Pennsylvania, support levels for Ms. Clinton and Mr. Trump were mirror images, as Ms. Clinton had 70 per cent in urban areas, with large tallies in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. But Ms. Clinton was so roundly defeated in rural areas, where Mr. Trump had 71 per cent support, and in suburban districts, that she could not win the state.

PENNSYLVANIA
Electoral votes
gained by winner
18
Erie
Allentown
Harrisburg
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Florida's aging voters
ClintonTrump
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Percentage of respondents
Percentage of respondents
18-24
25-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65 and older
40-49
47
49
THE GLOBE AND MAIL » SOURCE:EDISON
DATASHARE×
Age Clinton Trump
18-24 67 24
25-29 45 48
30-39 57 37
40-49 47 49
50-64 43 56
65 and older 40 58
FLORIDA'S AGING VOTERSDOWNLOAD CSV×
Share this chart:
Facebook
Twitter
Email
https://s3.amazonaws.com/chartprod/9Mbie6i6sseJDsXfu/thumbnail.png
Well known as an attractive place to retire, Florida’s age profile tilted the race toward Mr. Trump. More than one in five voters are over 65, according to exit polling, a group that voted 57 per cent to 40 per cent in favour of Mr. Trump. The youngest group, the 18-24 age bracket, were overwhelmingly Democrat, with 63 per cent opting for Ms. Clinton to 27 per cent for Mr. Trump, but they make up just 10 per cent of electors.
 

nayr69sg

Super Moderator
Staff member
SuperMod
Thank you for the link Charlie99.

A few observations from the data. Trump got more of the Christian vote. The ones who went to church weekly gave Trump their vote more than the ones who did not.

Seems to be that the higher the education level the more likely one was to vote against Trump. The centres of higher learning are also where the media comes from. So the rhetoric and values taught in schools tend to mirror the left.

It is already happening in Alberta. The education minister has forced every school to come up with programs to accept and promote LGBTQ. Even in Catholic schools.

Personally, I have nothing against the LGBTQ community. They can do what they want. But to go beyond that and force their values and views on those of us who by religion or choice do not want to practice their ways is going too far. It is the other spectrum of intolerance.
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
Trump won only 48% of the popular vote, although he won by majority electoral votes.

The winner is not decided by the percentage of popular vote or else , Hillary Clinton would have won. He is not the most popular President. He is a lucky President.

That is not how the democracy system works in many parts of the world. If there was proportionate representation, then Hilary would win. And there would be 30% opposition seats in the zikapore parliament.
 

Papsmearer

Alfrescian (InfP) - Comp
Generous Asset
There is a Chinese saying 乱世造英雄.
Majority of the Americans are well aware and saw through what kind of 乱世 their country as a whole picture is facing.
Hence among the 2 worst candidates, Trump (in my opinion) with the experience and brain of a business man
will at least be focusing more on growing the economy and provide jobs for the Americans instead of going to war, interfere and intervene other countries business.

On the other hand, sad to say that Sillyporeans don't even bother to see and make themselves aware of the entire picture of what kind of 乱世 Sillypore is facing.
We only care about our own benefits and are extremely self centered. We don't care about the suffering of others and not even united as a whole.
Hence this is the downfall of Sillyporeans.

Lee wei Ling has already said to be careful of who u vote for. She has already said that in this day and age of social media, there is really no excuse for going online to get a different viewpoint and a contrasting opinion and hence get a better picture. If Americans swallowed all the shit on CNN and the pro Hilary media in the 18 months leading up to the election, then 90% would have voted for Hilary. Fortunately, they have a brain and there are alternatives to CNN and what not. In a country where the media is tightly controlled by the PAP, its even more imperative for the sinkie voter to seek the other viewpoint. The fact they do no is just plain laziness and stupidity.
 
Top