- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 38,563
- Points
- 113
Steffy, I think you are the only one touting this Shadow Cabinet thing. Can't recall reading anyone else saying this?
Because that's the way for proper accountability in a parliament.
Steffy, I think you are the only one touting this Shadow Cabinet thing. Can't recall reading anyone else saying this?
Precisely, pruss own GRC in CCK, Jurong, Tampines & MParade and SMC in Pioneer, Whampoa, Mountbatten & Radin MAS dun wanna do walk about, wanna keh khiang goto other oppo ward.
Now we should all understand why some parties do not win seats. Wrong priority.
Your days as sponsored opposition big wig is over. PAP is going to change tactic, so better for you to move on and find another way to make a living.
Of course. That is why WP has never said that. They know they will sound silly if they said that.
Punggol East is a good example. Not once did WP not welcome RP and SDA into the picture.
U guys & gals do realize MCF plays into Sylvia's playbook, r8?
MCF will force oppo voters to vote tactically, pulling all e votes away fm e perceived weaker oppo like NSP, SDP, SPP, DPP, SDA, RP & etc to WP.
This itself will negate any MCF vote dilution effect for WP.
MCF will oso swing voters fm voting PAP as fence sitting voters fear WP may lose badly.
These 2 voting behaviour were evident in PE BE'13 & explain why LLL, who got e lowest votes in WP of just 41% during GE2011, could reverse e 11% swing against her by Palmer & swing another 11% against KPK.
In fact, if I am LTK, I will provoke & taunt fr MCF by sending rookies to all wards to get other oppo to retaliate w same recourse in e ward I covet.
Don't think MCF quite have that effect. PE BE 2013 was a surprise for everybody. It was not planned. MCF does have the effect of amplifying differences in support for different parties. A relative strong party can suffer major vote loss when it encounters an even stronger party. But to totally marginalize a weaker opponent to the extent of not drawing away your own votes can only work with the weakest parties. The stronger parties have some substantial hardcore support which cannot be so easily pulled away. But I agree the size of these hard-core elements, WP's and PAP's included, are significantly smaller than what the on-line debates seem to suggest. The best strategy among opposition parties is still for the top two to three parties to avoid one another in an election. The presence of the smaller parties is irrelevant.
There's no top 3 party in Spore.
Just look at state / conditionNSP & SDP is in...
Don't think MCF quite have that effect. PE BE 2013 was a surprise for everybody. It was not planned. MCF does have the effect of amplifying differences in support for different parties. A relative strong party can suffer major vote loss when it encounters an even stronger party. But to totally marginalize a weaker opponent to the extent of not drawing away your own votes can only work with the weakest parties. The stronger parties have some substantial hardcore support which cannot be so easily pulled away.
A party will become irrelevant when they pull just one to two percent of the votes. But when they start getting 5 percent or more, it becomes significant. Even in the condition that both parties you mentioned are in, depending on the candidates they field in a particular ward, the pulling power is still there, no doubt with the gap multiplying effect I have mentioned in my earlier post.
Provided that they are prepared to write off their deposits as part of the election expenses which will become norm for the third parties.
A phenomenon that will happen is that those with deeper pockets have the choice of not running under WP.