SPH tells oppositions - cant do better again go bang wall and die la

[tonychat]

with fcukin cheebye saboteurs like desmond, sinkektong, gohmengseng in the opposition making trouble time adn again...veri difficult for oppo to do better.....hard core supporters will still vote for oppo...but neutral voters will be turn off by all the bickering and antics of fuckin idiots like desmond, sinkektong and goh meng seng.....:oIo:

fuck the whole country and nuke it lah. What is the use of a smally puny island which is populated by a bunch of coward , ball licking sinkie worthless losers?

Nuke it and make the world a better place. That place is not worth staying anyway.

 

[Zombie]

It's the same around the world, whether you have quality opposition or not. If no gain, it is the voters, not the opposition.

you don't vote for opposition ------ they'll say your fault

you vote for opposition, they mismanage and say HDB price collapses ----- they'll say don't blame them because PAP created the problems

some oppositions just want to have the cake and eat it too..

 

[Perspective]

you don't vote for opposition ------ they'll say your fault

you vote for opposition, they mismanage and say HDB price collapses ----- they'll say don't blame them because PAP created the problems

some oppositions just want to have the cake and eat it too..

What they say is not important. PAP says alot of stupid things as well. How about saying that when economy is good it's their credit, when economy bad it is USA fault? Isn't that the same?

In this forum, I never nitpicked on some quotes by ministers like many do, because I believe when you speak off the cuff you tend to make gaffes more often than not. Even opposition members say the darnest things.

The question is - DO YOU WANT A BALANCE OF POWER? If you don't, fine, it's your choice, but then do ask yourself, why do I need elections for seats in Parliament when I want to occupy these seats with only one party? Might as well appoint them and save the money on elections.

 

[123456787654321]

The question is - DO YOU WANT A BALANCE OF POWER? If you don't, fine, it's your choice, but then do ask yourself, why do I need elections for seats in Parliament when I want to occupy these seats with only one party? Might as well appoint them and save the money on elections.

They have to make it appear that the people are given a choice and that they are constantly in power by the people's choice, not by mandate. So with every victory they have an unassailable track record to show off. Of course that does not stop them from making other choices as unpalatable as possible.

As for the people, I think they do not want a balance of power, and probably would forego elections if they could, but they still want a "choice" in the matter. It may sound illogical, but then people are illogical. It's very similar to something I learnt in customer service. I once worked in a store that specialised in a very specific range of products, but still there were complaints that there were no other choices. So the management decided to stock these other choices. Since they weren't in the specialised range, they were of course very inferior, which naturally lead to another round of complaints. I asked my boss about this, and he told me it was alright, the whole thing was just to give the customers an illusion of choice, because they will end up buying what the store normally stocked anyway. And it turned out to be true. Nothing was ever done about any complaints on the other products, and sales continued stronger than ever because of the illusion of choice given. As far the people of Singapore are concerned in my opinion, they want that illusion of choice, nothing more.

 

[Zombie]

What they say is not important..................
The question is - DO YOU WANT A BALANCE OF POWER?...........

i think most voters here choose leadership over balance of power

 

[Watchman]

i think most voters here choose leadership over balance of power

Order over chaos . Doesn't matter which Order ?

 

[aurvandil]

They have to make it appear that the people are given a choice and that they are constantly in power by the people's choice, not by mandate. So with every victory they have an unassailable track record to show off. Of course that does not stop them from making other choices as unpalatable as possible.

Instead of such a convoluted theory, here is a simpler hypothesis for why the PAP has been wining elections.

For the longest time, the PAP has been winning elections because the PAP <gasp> actually did a good job of running Singapore. Up till 1990s, I would say that they delivered on many of their promises and improved the lives of many Singaporeans.

Things began to go awry in the 1990s. People in power enjoyed being in power. There were huge pay packets and self interest rather than the interest of Singaporeans began to creep into governance. As a result of this, the PAP began to pursue bad policies which would result in many of the "unsolvable" problems of today (e.g. FT, housing, healthcare, transport).

In spite of the growing problems, the PAP continued to win elections handsomely because of the the legacy of the goodwill from their earlier sucesses. Like all things however, this goodwill is finite and gets used up with each sucessive policy failure.

I have great faith in Singaporeans. Despite what the PAP might think or say, Singaporeans are not stupid. And in spite the propaganda of the msm and the efforts of the IB, sooner or later a majority will realise that the PAP is running Singapore badly and vote accordingly.

 

[Zombie]

Order over chaos . Doesn't matter which Order ?

that is another way of putting it...

 

[cooleo]

It's true. Opposition should go fuck themselves if they fuck it up this round

 

[123456787654321]

Instead of such a convoluted theory, here is a simpler hypothesis for why the PAP has been wining elections.

It is a convoluted theory to you because you have perhaps forgotten to read my answer in context with what Perspective was writing. Since he is writing about the present, so too was my answer addressing the present. Thank you for the history lesson nonetheless.

I have great faith in Singaporeans. Despite what the PAP might think or say, Singaporeans are not stupid. And in spite the propaganda of the msm and the efforts of the IB, sooner or later a majority will realise that the PAP is running Singapore badly and vote accordingly.

And I'm sure your faith in Singaporeans will be rewarded, many times over. In the meantime, whilst waiting for the Great Awakening which of course like you I'm very sure will happen one fine day, naturally my faith has to be spent attending to more immediate matters.

 

[Sideswipe]

Instead of such a convoluted theory, here is a simpler hypothesis for why the PAP has been wining elections.

For the longest time, the PAP has been winning elections because the PAP <gasp> actually did a good job of running Singapore. Up till 1990s, I would say that they delivered on many of their promises and improved the lives of many Singaporeans.

I have great faith in Singaporeans. Despite what the PAP might think or say, Singaporeans are not stupid. And in spite the propaganda of the msm and the efforts of the IB, sooner or later a majority will realise that the PAP is running Singapore badly and vote accordingly.

Why are we letting PAP winning 95% of parliament for successive elections when it's good to have more oppositions for any even if limited check and balances in parliament.

Only 5 constituencies have been won by the oppositions for 30 years and PAP won back 2 of those the next GE after their defeat. Only WP has scored 45% higher in a GRC and just thrice. The margin of defeat are too big - 30%+ in almost all seats for the last 3 elections.

shocking and pessimistic statistics for the oppositions.