NSP to adopt “minister-specific” strategy in next elections

[Sideswipe]

They would even prefer a lawyer, doctor, banker or even an accountant without the need to know about their relevant political experiences, least their political views. This is seriously sign of a lack of political maturity. If we cannot rid of this deficiency, the plan of such a mixed team with 4 professional and a diploma holder will face an uphill task in winning.

Qualifications are important but in Singapore, the main battle is the PAP brand.

The reality is a PAP endorsed team of any qualifications will beat a Opposition teams of Doctors and Professors comfortably. Because the voters knew PAP are the ruling party, it doesn't matter which PAP MPs they voted in or looked after their municipal needs because the MPs they voted in are PAP and have the whole backing of the govt behind them. They will get the job done one way or another. As for Parliamentary issues, no difference lah, PAP control Parliament, my GRC 5 Opposition voted in also no use.

The oppositions can have a team of lawyers and CEO but they will not be able to get any liftgrading too in their wards simply because of PAP interference.

To win another new Parliamentary seat, you have to attack the PAP Brand and of course decent candidates. If the peasants don't trust the PAP brand then it will be 50-50. PAP MPs are all riding on their Party brand and nothing else.

Our one level system of govt where you select your MP mean everything - we select the person to run our constituency, elect Parliament and Govt.
It's actually a 3 in 1 elections with only 1 vote.
It's very sad when peoples vote for someone because of lift upgrading. The local issues are important but again the peasants don't understand in Singapore - there is no local autonomy. It's the govt that decide everything.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Dear Sideswipe,

You have hit on the right spot.

This is why I want to change the game rules a bit, hitting right at the PAP brand.

But I don't agree with you that even if a GRC of opposition MPs is voted in, there is no impact. The impact will be tremendous.

Goh Meng Seng

Qualifications are important but in Singapore, the main battle is the PAP brand.

The reality is a PAP endorsed team of any qualifications will beat a Opposition teams of Doctors and Professors comfortably. Because the voters knew PAP are the ruling party, it doesn't matter which PAP MPs they voted in or looked after their municipal needs because the MPs they voted in are PAP and have the whole backing of the govt behind them. They will get the job done one way or another. As for Parliamentary issues, no difference lah, PAP control Parliament, my GRC 5 Opposition voted in also no use.

The oppositions can have a team of lawyers and CEO but they will not be able to get any liftgrading too in their wards simply because of PAP interference.

To win another new Parliamentary seat, you have to attack the PAP Brand and of course decent candidates. If the peasants don't trust the PAP brand then it will be 50-50. PAP MPs are all riding on their Party brand and nothing else.

Our one level system of govt where you select your MP mean everything - we select the person to run our constituency, elect Parliament and Govt.
It's actually a 3 in 1 elections with only 1 vote.
It's very sad when peoples vote for someone because of lift upgrading. The local issues are important but again the peasants don't understand in Singapore - there is no local autonomy. It's the govt that decide everything.

 

[Sideswipe]

Dear Sideswipe,

But I don't agree with you that even if a GRC of opposition MPs is voted in, there is no impact. The impact will be tremendous.

If a GRC of opposition MPs enter Parliament, PAP could be humbler, more willing to listen to the Peasants, less unpopular policies and more pork barrel. If the peasants see that the Opposition can run a GRC well, the domino effect can led to more oppositions entering Parliament
But this is an assumption, what might happen, not what will definitely happen.

looking at how a Parliament work.
A majority of 1 form the cabinet to run the country, control Parliament, have the majority to make and pass all laws expect constitutional. You can have 49% of MPs in the house but you can't form the cabinet, you can block bills but for how long? When the bill finally came to a votes showdown, you will lose because of 1 lesser vote.

Cabinet system has no real check and balances. The real checks is alternate govt every GE.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

My view differs from yours.

PAP cannot afford to lose any of its ministers. If a GRC fell with the implications of the possibility of more GRCs might fall in future, it would mean that PAP may lose even more ministers.

Thus the logical move by PAP is to amend the constitution to proportional constitution. This may be the major impact. PAP will always act on their own fear of losing.

Goh Meng Seng

If a GRC of opposition MPs enter Parliament, PAP could be humbler, more willing to listen to the Peasants, less unpopular policies and more pork barrel. If the peasants see that the Opposition can run a GRC well, the domino effect can led to more oppositions entering Parliament
But this is an assumption, what might happen, not what will definitely happen.

looking at how a Parliament work.
A majority of 1 form the cabinet to run the country, control Parliament, have the majority to make and pass all laws expect constitutional. You can have 49% of MPs in the house but you can't form the cabinet, you can block bills but for how long? When the bill finally came to a votes showdown, you will lose because of 1 lesser vote.

Cabinet system has no real check and balances. The real checks is alternate govt every GE.

 

[jw5]

My view differs from yours.

PAP cannot afford to lose any of its ministers. If a GRC fell with the implications of the possibility of more GRCs might fall in future, it would mean that PAP may lose even more ministers.

Thus the logical move by PAP is to amend the constitution to proportional constitution. This may be the major impact. PAP will always act on their own fear of losing.

Goh Meng Seng

GMS
Of course the pap can afford to lose their ministers in the elections. This is precisely what they are telling the voters all these years, that all these guys standing for elections and slated for higher office are indispensable and cannot be voted against. Package these guys in several grcs and you get scores of pap mps being elected.
I really do not see anything special about these guys, not saying they are bad, but merely that they are not great, at least not as great as what the pre-election rhetoric and their salaries make them appear to be.

 

[normalsingaporean]

My belief differs. It is not necessary the education qualification that determines people's impression of the candidates. It is the current 'job' or 'position' that the person holds. For example, a diploma holder who is currently a country manager of a Fortunue 1000 MNC in Singapore or is working in the UN relief agency is definitely a draw.

Another point is whether the person has standing in the community. This applies especially to the Malay community as well as some portion of the Chinese dialect community. If the person is highly visible and well-known among the community, it really helps.

Lastly, nothing is more important than the tried and tested assessment of the ground work. If the person is highly active in cultivating the ground, he/she will be able to overcome the education qualification hurdle. That had been proven in our two Oppo reps time and again.

Dear GMS

My belief is that four professionals and a diploma holder is still doable as a team issue. The mix is important




Locke

 

[Sideswipe]

Lastly, nothing is more important than the tried and tested assessment of the ground work. If the person is highly active in cultivating the ground, he/she will be able to overcome the education qualification hurdle. That had been proven in our two Oppo reps time and again.

what ground work? go to HDB flats or Markets every weekend, talk to peasants for 5 minutes and hope that they vote for you.

In a plurality voting system, it is very hard to unseat a incumbent unless he is doing badly, The challenger can win if his voters base is bigger than the incumbent in the first place and you just need 40-50% of the middle ground voters to clinch victory. This is again not the case. PAP basic voters base is bigger than the Oppositions. The Opps need to get 70% of the middle ground votes to have a chance of victory when trying to unseat a PAP incumbent.

PAP have tried for 6 and 4 successive elections to unseat CST and LTK with no success despite their massive strength. Why? It is very hard to unseat a incumbent and many others reasons too.
It is X 5 harder for a opposition candidate to dethrone a PAP MP which most of them have been ruling their fiefdom for 2 or 3 elections at least.

 

[normalsingaporean]

Of course it is never easy. No incumbant will lie over the play dead. That is why every little helps and even if you do everything, it does not guarantee success.

If one is to look for short-cuts or tikam, then no chance. PAP is much smarter than that.

what ground work? go to HDB flats or Markets every weekend, talk to peasants for 5 minutes and hope that they vote for you.

In a plurality voting system, it is very hard to unseat a incumbent unless he is doing badly, The challenger can win if his voters base is bigger than the incumbent in the first place and you just need 40-50% of the middle ground voters to clinch victory. This is again not the case. PAP basic voters base is bigger than the Oppositions. The Opps need to get 70% of the middle ground votes to have a chance of victory when trying to unseat a PAP incumbent.

PAP have tried for 6 and 4 successive elections to unseat CST and LTK with no success despite their massive strength. Why? It is very hard to unseat a incumbent and many others reasons too.
It is X 5 harder for a opposition candidate to dethrone a PAP MP which most of them have been ruling their fiefdom for 2 or 3 elections at least.

 

[Robert Half]

what ground work? go to HDB flats or Markets every weekend, talk to peasants for 5 minutes and hope that they vote for you.

In a plurality voting system, it is very hard to unseat a incumbent unless he is doing badly, The challenger can win if his voters base is bigger than the incumbent in the first place and you just need 40-50% of the middle ground voters to clinch victory. This is again not the case. PAP basic voters base is bigger than the Oppositions. The Opps need to get 70% of the middle ground votes to have a chance of victory when trying to unseat a PAP incumbent.

PAP have tried for 6 and 4 successive elections to unseat CST and LTK with no success despite their massive strength. Why? It is very hard to unseat a incumbent and many others reasons too.
It is X 5 harder for a opposition candidate to dethrone a PAP MP which most of them have been ruling their fiefdom for 2 or 3 elections at least.

I would say the above is a good analysis from Sideswipe :p

GE 2010 predicted results will be ...

PAP win 82 seats

WP win 1 seat

SDA win 1 seat

7 NCMPs from opposition will invited into the Parliament

 

[IR123]

PAP have tried for 6 and 4 successive elections to unseat CST and LTK with no success despite their massive strength. Why? It is very hard to unseat a incumbent and many others reasons too.

That rationale is correct if your premise that the PAP 'have tried' is true.

I hold a different opinion.

The PAP welcome LTK and CST as oppositions.

 

[jw5]

I think we should provide some "tips for the opposition" in the lead up to the next elections. Whether they read and follow is up to them.
Why am I suggesting this?
Mainly for 2 reasons. Firstly, I'm sick and tired of the condescending and arrogant manner in which ordinary Singaporeans are being treated, compared to the elite and the foreigners. Secondly, after following news in Taiwan closely for the past year due to my interest in Ah Bian's case, I'm convinced that the future of Singapore will be much better if there was a strong opposition monitoring and scrutinizing the government. Doesn't really matter which party forms the government, but the opposition must be strong.

Ok, now for my first tip.
Unlike some other governments and political leaders in other parts of the world, our leaders are very particular about how they are viewed and perceived all over the world, very concerned about face. So don't ever verbally attack them personally, don't accuse them of anything unless you have fool-proof concrete proof. Always address the issues, address the voters, make sure you have got your facts right, understand what the singaporean voters are concerned about, never get personal, always target the main points that the people are concerned about, never the people behind the policy.

 

[Sideswipe]

I think we should provide some "tips for the opposition" in the lead up to the next elections. Whether they read and follow is up to them.
Why am I suggesting this?
Mainly for 2 reasons. Firstly, I'm sick and tired of the condescending and arrogant manner in which ordinary Singaporeans are being treated, compared to the elite and the foreigners. Secondly, after following news in Taiwan closely for the past year due to my interest in Ah Bian's case, I'm convinced that the future of Singapore will be much better if there was a strong opposition monitoring and scrutinizing the government. Doesn't really matter which party forms the government, but the opposition must be strong.

I don't believe in strong opposition. The real checks and balances is alternate govt every GE especially in a cabinet system.

Look at Ah Bian. He can "eat so much money" in a semi-presidential system with a opposition legislative that is closely monitoring him. Because he control the executive branch that is all important. During Ah Bian 8 years, he always issued executive orders to override the law which is illegal. But he don't give a damn because he owned the govt.

Ah Bian might get away with most crimes if DPP had won the presidency in 2008. Because all his moles in Foreign, Justice department are replaced due to the govt change thus the truth came to light and very slowly.

 

[kingrant]

The PAP brand is by now quite tarnished by issues like:

mas selamat, hdb prices, temasek losses, cpf, job losses, loss of control of the economy despite million dollar Cabinet, bilingualism, freak incidents which Ministerial power can't control, arrogance, arbitrary laws of PSO, flooding in of foreigners and supposed talents, etc

Opp parties shld dig out and play on these issues for a heavy public laundering when election time comes, so pple don't forget. Opp candidates shld compare the millions spent on the Ministers with the problems that they cannot/have not solved. In other words, performance to cost ratio. Also not to forget the lack of common touch with the pple, insensitive PAP - send parents to JB, hdb flats still affordable but buyers too choosy, there are no homeless or beggars in S'pore, jobs avail but s'poreans choosy, get out of my elite uncaring face, intolerant impatient hotshot MP suing constituent over minor fracas....

Even tho the brand may wear thin, it still will take a long time to replace them. Opp will do citizens much service if they can by hook or crook get into Parliament in greater numbers and force attention with their noisy presence and demand answers. Over time, those who naysay well will earn the voters' trust and eventually form a strong grouping and lobby.

 

[jw5]

I don't believe in strong opposition. The real checks and balances is alternate govt every GE especially in a cabinet system.

Look at Ah Bian. He can "eat so much money" in a semi-presidential system with a opposition legislative that is closely monitoring him. Because he control the executive branch that is all important. During Ah Bian 8 years, he always issued executive orders to override the law which is illegal. But he don't give a damn because he owned the govt.

Ah Bian might get away with most crimes if DPP had won the presidency in 2008. Because all his moles in Foreign, Justice department are replaced due to the govt change thus the truth came to light and very slowly.

Do you mean that the party that governs should change every election by law?
I don't think that works either, it will simply mean that certain politicians will try to take advantage while they are in power, or they may be complacent knowing that they will be out the next time anyway.
The best way is still to have a strong opposition hounding the ruling party for every issue that is important to the ordinary man's life, and letting the ruling politicians know that they will be out if they don't make the lives of ordinary citizens better. This is the way to put power back in the peoples' hands.