Its all about the middle classes, in particular the sandwich squeezed middle classes. The poor appear to be taken care of over to some extent at least and the rich upper classes know where their bread is buttered, so the main target should be the middle classes.
-
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.
An Election STRATEGY that could TOPPLE this government.
- Thread starter Nice-Gook
- Start date
110% yes! But looking at the weak lame way LTK and SL treated YSL unfortunately I think he shall be put forward once again.
Ha ha! Been away for awhile but I note things in this political cowboy town have not changed
Cheers
Jesus!!! where the hell have you been. Kept calling Whitley if you had checked in but they kept saying that they only have morons at the moment and no one with modicum of intelligence had stepped in recently.
Yes, the cowboy has not change his tone.
Revolutions were started by those who have nothing to lose but their chains.
Thus ruling parties everywhere are concerned about the poor.
So when you say that the main target should be the middle classes, i feel that it should range from the very poor to the middle class.
That is why activists are normally from the left. Politicians in the middle. Lobbyists from the right
It is also a window of opportunity.
But opportunities are of no use until they are used.
Say what you will about the PAP government but I personally feel that they have not neglected the poor in a relative sense. No doubt more could be done for this group, that is always the case, but PAP policy is clear and consistent: self reliance is key, followed by family, community and finally the government.
The group that appears to be missing out from the PAP government's largesse to a large extent has and continues to be the lower middles classes who are just above the poor criteria to enjoy government benefits. To me, this particular group is ripe for the picking in a political sense particularly now with the recession.
The group that appears to be missing out from the PAP government's largesse to a large extent has and continues to be the lower middles classes who are just above the poor criteria to enjoy government benefits. To me, this particular group is ripe for the picking in a political sense particularly now with the recession.
Maybe you misunderstand me. The PAP has not, had not neglected the poor.
All their schemes - the HDB flats, CPF Minimum Sum, GST offset, etc, etc - are focused on ensuring a reduction of urban poverty as one of the objectives.
Even when they raised the fares of public transport, they have a proviso that there will be some form of 'charity' to the truly needy.
This group is the most crucial to a nation's stability and the PAP has always regarded itself as the Government, arguably so because they are the Government for the past 50 years.
But this group is struggling to make ends meet. They are affected by the inflation rate and the rising cost of living. The PAP policies did an admirable job in containing the dissatisfaction by giving outlets for their steam. But there is still dissatisfaction.
Comparatively, the truly wealthy, the upper middle class and even some of the middle class itself do not have much of a dissatisfaction about the PAP. You may hear them speak of a better world now in Temasek. They may even speak bad about the PAP. But on reflection, they know that their world in the hands of the PAP is a far better world than in the hands of any of the opposition parties.
So that leaves the lower middle class. It is evident that this group is rich for the picking.
Thus you have this especial range to play with - the very poor to the lower middle class.
Having said that, yet again, it boils down to the question: "what's your value to them?"
How do you convince them?
As I was writing it, i believe that this range of very poor to lower middle class is 'ripe' only because of the oppositions' strategy of capitalizing on dissatisfaction.
Focusing on the dissatisfactions and not on their value as a means of getting votes.
(The one plausible exception to this is the WP - who tried to show their value - which resulted in the minds of the mainstream citizens as a possible opposition - who i suspect still equate WP = JBJ)
A true opposition(s) can capture parts of any of the segments because the wealthy, the rich and the comfortable are rational thinkers. But the criteria for their votes is far more demanding than a play on dissatisfaction.
Focusing on the dissatisfactions and not on their value as a means of getting votes.
(The one plausible exception to this is the WP - who tried to show their value - which resulted in the minds of the mainstream citizens as a possible opposition - who i suspect still equate WP = JBJ)
A true opposition(s) can capture parts of any of the segments because the wealthy, the rich and the comfortable are rational thinkers. But the criteria for their votes is far more demanding than a play on dissatisfaction.
The by election or oppositions for checks and balances strategy has failed. we had a recession in 2001, PAP still won 75% of votes. What can the oppositions do that will win them seats. Increase their nationwide votes percentages is pointless if it doesn't result in winning seats.
Who the fuck are those people sleeping on void decks? Who the are the old and bent over citizens collecting cardboard and scraps for a living?
Oh I forgot! The GE is around the corner. All masks are off!
You have a point.
But consider this:
with the GRCs
electoral boundaries
gst offset
short campaigning period
threats of lawsuits
the PAP is still sufficiently riled that:electoral boundaries
gst offset
short campaigning period
threats of lawsuits
they cautioned netizens
they let Ho Ching resign
they emphasized on the possibility of more bad years
So, if it is a walkover for the PAP, why are they trying so hard?they let Ho Ching resign
they emphasized on the possibility of more bad years
I can only think of two: increase their percentage, prevent seats to the oppositions
So the oppositions do stand a chance
Singgies in general are a pragmatic practical more so now after almost 50 years of PAP rule. So I guess the underlying ideology should be practical pragmatism with compassion, empathy and humility.
Are those sleeping on void decks there by choice? Is it because they do not want to live by rules imposed by government agencies? Those collecting cardboards and scraps, are they doing this because they have too much pride to ask for public assistance or more public assistance?
speaking for myself, i will settle for an effective approach to politics by the opposition parties
What is this?
Please lah learn to walk before wanting to run. Get a GRC first can or not?
Exactly, without even any opposition party winning even a GRC, talking about toppling the government?
Whatever the opposition parties, their leaders and supporters feel is effective.
There is no point in detailing out your own impressions of an effective strategy as every political party feels theirs is the best.
For us to tell the opposition parties what to do is equivalent to LTK and CST telling the PAP what to do.
So let's measure effectiveness by results.
You bring in a GRC or more seats - you are effective.
Otherwise, you are not.
Topple ... Not so easy lah...
Push them to the limit...54% majority.. 1 GRC and 3 single consituency possible lah...
I am a tiny drop in the ocean. I will vote for opposition to support my belief that a 54% majority for the PAP will make singapore a mpre real place to live..
I am a tiny drop .. .. BUT every drop make an ocean...
Push them to the limit...54% majority.. 1 GRC and 3 single consituency possible lah...
I am a tiny drop in the ocean. I will vote for opposition to support my belief that a 54% majority for the PAP will make singapore a mpre real place to live..
I am a tiny drop .. .. BUT every drop make an ocean...
agree with your points.
By laws of averages and probability, 1 GRC should fall if PAP nationwide votes drop to 54%.
Mathematically, The opposition can be thrashed with just 20% votes in all constituencies but win 1 GRC with 50.1% - this is 5 MPs up from 2. PAP can increase their votes to 70% again but lose 1 GRC = 5 MPs into the house. You wonder how PAP will react if they increase their votes again but lose 1 GRC.
If PAP nationwide votes got lower, It will get harder to effectively gerrymandering elections districts next GE, the less gerrymandering, a opposition victory in a ward will increase.
Similar threads
