I am glad you are learning fast, though you don't know your own contradications.
Oh my. Do I need to be simpler and more straightforward with my reply to you? No wonder you can't read the ground sentiment and lost all your elections.
..........What makes a good team or result in a good result depends on a lot of factors, not just one factor like "Party Branding". In a more simpler terms, you just list out all the factors that can affect performance of any opposition party in any contest that comes with a point system. Try to give points... like ground work, candidates, opponents, PAP, policy, local ground issues etc. Then you add them up as a score card for each party, tally and compare, you will get your answers.
Actually I dun think I've said anything about "branding" at all. So why get your knickers in a twist?
All I was trying to do is to prove that you are cherry picking data to justify your fantasy.... I thought I'd already said that in my earlier post?
That is why when I say ground work, all parties get near zero... KJ may get some points ahead. Last minute coverage of blocks actually don't really add much points.. in fact, if you do not do ground work in the past but only manage to cover all blocks during elections, it just show that you are somehow as insincere as PAP. Maybe just gain a bit of points for trying good effort, nothing much.
You have to be objective in the assessment and you will see clearly what matters in certain contests and each and every contest is different. In PEBE, apparently, candidates profile, ground work and such don't really matter much. The sentiments of wanting to teach PAP a good lesson matters most and that result in heavy weightage given to perception of possibility or chances to win... this in turn, puts party branding a priority. However, having said that, it is not solely party branding that matters.... the force behind such heavy weightage given to party branding was the ANGER.
Let's assume you are all correct.
a) So KJ got points for groundwork. The rest a big fat 0. Let's give KJ extra 1%
b) You next said girl-next-door LLL is not the most credible. But you said candidate profile dun really matter much. So all no extra marks here.
c) Then you said branding maybe add some marks - I'm assuming White Scum > WP > RP, SDA
d) Lastly you threw in "ANGER". But then you cleverly added a variable called "weightage given to party branding"
Damn I think even rocket scientist got problem to figure this out
Anyway a few conclusions I could manage are:-
- big ego KJ and fatty Desmond are idiots for not understanding that equation like you do
- rear-admirer Koh is an even bigger idiot for wasting his time given the "ANGER" and that "weightage given to party branding". And to add insult to his wound, his seemingly better candidate profile is useless here.
- girl-next-door LLL must be a damn good rocket scientist since she must have figured out the answer to skip the groundwork, skip the candidate profile and go straight to "ANGER" and that "weightage given to party branding" to win by such a big margin. Smart
Anyway, no use to carry on to talk to people like you who only want to believe in what you want to believe. Good night.
You talking?
I think it's more like farting.