Tan Jee Say and Tan Kin Lian
Tan Kin Lian tried too hard to be popular. He also made pledges that people know can’t be fulfilled. Having spoken out for some investors who lost their money doesn’t make him Voice of the People. That he wants to be Voice of the People makes him appear egoistic.
Tan Jee Say is confrontational. His supporters and team-mates re-in-forced that impression. He should have told his supporters to behave themselves. At his rally he should also have told the speakers to tone down the rhetoric and not to spread untrue rumours about another candidate. Most of the people at his rally were his supporters and there was no need to appeal to them. He only needed to persuade those who had not decided and had come to see whether they should vote for him. I guess they went away with a negative impression.
If either of them had dropped out of the contest, I think Tan Cheng Bock would have won.
Tan Cheng Bock and Tony Tan
Now, don't assume that supporters of Tony Tan are against Tan Cheng Bock and vice versa. I think many of them support both but it is just a matter of their order of preference.
If one of the Tans dropped out of the contest, I think the other Tan would have obtained at least 60% of the votes.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Friday, August 19, 2011
MPs are the voice of the people
The MPs are the voice of the people. The president is elected only for its role and entrusted with the tasks as stated in the constitution.
Tan Kin Lian and Tan Jee Say talk as if they have the right to tell the Government how to run the Country. They behave as if they know more about law than the Law Minister or the experts in constitutional laws.
The two of them who have never even been an MP before think they know more about the governing of a country than the ministers or MPs.
The President should also be a good and able diplomat, enhancing our image abroad. He should not be quarrelsome and confrontational.
If either of them were to be president, I think he would only bring disrepute to himself. Even people who had supported him would be disillusioned when they realized they had been fooled by empty promises in the campaign. Even foreign leaders would not respect him.
This is what I think:
Tan Jee Say has a personal agenda – to further the opposition’s cause, particularly the SDP.
Tan Kin Lian still feels sore about having to leave INCOME. He didn’t want to join an opposition party as an ordinary member to contest the general elections in May because he considered that below his status. An ordinary MP also gets little attention from the media.
Contesting in the presidential election under the slogan ‘Voice of the People’ boosts his egoism - the people give feedback to him instead of the MPs. He is more powerful than all the MPs combined.
Tan Kin Lian and Tan Jee Say talk as if they have the right to tell the Government how to run the Country. They behave as if they know more about law than the Law Minister or the experts in constitutional laws.
The two of them who have never even been an MP before think they know more about the governing of a country than the ministers or MPs.
The President should also be a good and able diplomat, enhancing our image abroad. He should not be quarrelsome and confrontational.
If either of them were to be president, I think he would only bring disrepute to himself. Even people who had supported him would be disillusioned when they realized they had been fooled by empty promises in the campaign. Even foreign leaders would not respect him.
This is what I think:
Tan Jee Say has a personal agenda – to further the opposition’s cause, particularly the SDP.
Tan Kin Lian still feels sore about having to leave INCOME. He didn’t want to join an opposition party as an ordinary member to contest the general elections in May because he considered that below his status. An ordinary MP also gets little attention from the media.
Contesting in the presidential election under the slogan ‘Voice of the People’ boosts his egoism - the people give feedback to him instead of the MPs. He is more powerful than all the MPs combined.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Sunday, May 29, 2011
The neutral voters
According to political analysts, of all the voters, 25% are pro-PAP and 25% pro-Opposition. To these two groups, the candidates and policies matter very little.
The remaining 50% belong to the neutral group. Probably they base their decisions on the qualities of the candidates, the policies, their trust of the parties and their desire for more opposition MPs.
The results: PAP 60% and Oppositions 40%. If we exclude the 25% of the partisan voters from both sides, the ratio is 35 to 15. That means the PAP got 70% of votes from the neutral voters while the oppositions got 30%.
This shows most people have trust in the PAP and its candidates and accept most of its policies. So there is no need for the PAP to feel too badly about the drop of 6% in votes from the previous election.
There is also no need for it to go out of the way to try to please those who didn’t vote for the PAP.
Actually, with the huge amount misinformation, rhetoric and noise made by the pro-opposition group and the PAP still got 60%, it is a very good mandate indeed.
The remaining 50% belong to the neutral group. Probably they base their decisions on the qualities of the candidates, the policies, their trust of the parties and their desire for more opposition MPs.
The results: PAP 60% and Oppositions 40%. If we exclude the 25% of the partisan voters from both sides, the ratio is 35 to 15. That means the PAP got 70% of votes from the neutral voters while the oppositions got 30%.
This shows most people have trust in the PAP and its candidates and accept most of its policies. So there is no need for the PAP to feel too badly about the drop of 6% in votes from the previous election.
There is also no need for it to go out of the way to try to please those who didn’t vote for the PAP.
Actually, with the huge amount misinformation, rhetoric and noise made by the pro-opposition group and the PAP still got 60%, it is a very good mandate indeed.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
Congratulations to Tin Pei Ling
Three cheers to Pei Ling for her courage, determination and conviction.
If Nicole Seah were to be subjected to the same criticisms and unkindness as Pei Ling had, probably she would have broken down, cried and stepped down from her contest.
If Nicole Seah were to be subjected to the same criticisms and unkindness as Pei Ling had, probably she would have broken down, cried and stepped down from her contest.
Sunday, May 1, 2011
First World Parliament
A First World Parliament is a wishy-washy thing. Not everyone, including WP’s supporters, agree with the conception espoused by Mr Low.
The voters in Aljunied has only to consider two outcomes:
1. Singapore loses a very good foreign minister who creates goodwill and makes friends for Singapore all over the world. Aljunied residents also forgo the plans the PAP team has promised them.
2. Parliament loses the leader of the opposition, Mr Low who has been MP for Hougang for a very long time.
Would they want the Best Driver or a Driver without licence?
The SDP said they have no gay agenda. But it is a real concern. If there is a gay MP, the gay community will ask him to bring up the issue again in Parliament.
The NSP makes use of its star attraction, a young woman candidate, in Marine Parade to attract crowds, especially male Singaporeans. It gives the impression that their other males candidates, one of whom was a former MP, are rather impotent. It might gain some supporters but it also alienates others. It is somewhat like drink stalls using young beer hostesses to attract male drinkers.
The voters in Aljunied has only to consider two outcomes:
1. Singapore loses a very good foreign minister who creates goodwill and makes friends for Singapore all over the world. Aljunied residents also forgo the plans the PAP team has promised them.
2. Parliament loses the leader of the opposition, Mr Low who has been MP for Hougang for a very long time.
Would they want the Best Driver or a Driver without licence?
The SDP said they have no gay agenda. But it is a real concern. If there is a gay MP, the gay community will ask him to bring up the issue again in Parliament.
The NSP makes use of its star attraction, a young woman candidate, in Marine Parade to attract crowds, especially male Singaporeans. It gives the impression that their other males candidates, one of whom was a former MP, are rather impotent. It might gain some supporters but it also alienates others. It is somewhat like drink stalls using young beer hostesses to attract male drinkers.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Low vs Chee vs Tin
Low Thia Kiang is a good opposition, passionate and diligent, but he is not very smart. Look at his insurance analogy. Maybe now he realizes it is not a good one. Why not just say: We want to form the government in the long run. Support us. Give us the opportunity.
I think he gave little thought to his manifesto too. His price-of-new flats suggestion would definitely lower the prices of existing flats. Now the WP has to feebly defend it.
Mr Low doesn’t have the courage to go out of his Hougang comfort zone. If he had done that five years ago, probably the WP would have got a GRC already.
Chee Soon Juan was the ‘star catch’ of Chiam See Tong who was later ousted from the party he founded by his star-catch. Chee has been called a liar and a cheat. But he didn’t do anything about it. Why? Because he champions America-style democracy. You can defame anyone and you won’t be sued. Maybe he also approves gay marriage and allowing people in Singapore owning guns.
He also disapproves of certain laws. Instead of trying to convince people, get himself into parliament to try to change these laws, he intentionally broke the laws.
Mr Chee has not changed. He and his party still want to bring down our system, only that they don’t want to shout about it during the election period.
If there were a three-corner fight between Low, Chee and Tin Pei Ling, I would support Pei Ling, the courageous young woman who stands up for Singapore.
I think he gave little thought to his manifesto too. His price-of-new flats suggestion would definitely lower the prices of existing flats. Now the WP has to feebly defend it.
Mr Low doesn’t have the courage to go out of his Hougang comfort zone. If he had done that five years ago, probably the WP would have got a GRC already.
Chee Soon Juan was the ‘star catch’ of Chiam See Tong who was later ousted from the party he founded by his star-catch. Chee has been called a liar and a cheat. But he didn’t do anything about it. Why? Because he champions America-style democracy. You can defame anyone and you won’t be sued. Maybe he also approves gay marriage and allowing people in Singapore owning guns.
He also disapproves of certain laws. Instead of trying to convince people, get himself into parliament to try to change these laws, he intentionally broke the laws.
Mr Chee has not changed. He and his party still want to bring down our system, only that they don’t want to shout about it during the election period.
If there were a three-corner fight between Low, Chee and Tin Pei Ling, I would support Pei Ling, the courageous young woman who stands up for Singapore.
Monday, April 11, 2011
Investment, not Insurance
Mr Low said that voting for the WP is like buying insurance so that the WP could form the government if the PAP fails. How could it be?
Do we buy insurance from a company that has no means to deliver, merely hoping that it might be able to do so in future. Isn't it foolish?
We should invest in a good strong company with proven track records.
Do we buy insurance from a company that has no means to deliver, merely hoping that it might be able to do so in future. Isn't it foolish?
We should invest in a good strong company with proven track records.
Monday, April 4, 2011
GRCs for the Opposition
The oppositions could get two GRCs but probably that is as far as they could go. There will not be a two-party system. For a small Country, we have too many opposition parties.
No single opposition party will have enough able and committed people to form a government. Even the PAP finds it hard to get these people. And with their avoid-three-corner-fight agreement, it makes things worse. People in some constituencies who wish to vote for the better opposition party could not do so because it has given in to weaker parties.
To have a strong opposition, the smaller opposition parties should merge with the bigger and established parties. Instead of that, we saw opposition members switching parties or breaking away to form new parties.
It seems that these parties cannot even agree on what is good for Singapore. Or perhaps the party chiefs do not want to give up their leader title. For example, if the RP joins the WP, then the RP chief would be,at best, No.3 in the WP.
No single opposition party will have enough able and committed people to form a government. Even the PAP finds it hard to get these people. And with their avoid-three-corner-fight agreement, it makes things worse. People in some constituencies who wish to vote for the better opposition party could not do so because it has given in to weaker parties.
To have a strong opposition, the smaller opposition parties should merge with the bigger and established parties. Instead of that, we saw opposition members switching parties or breaking away to form new parties.
It seems that these parties cannot even agree on what is good for Singapore. Or perhaps the party chiefs do not want to give up their leader title. For example, if the RP joins the WP, then the RP chief would be,at best, No.3 in the WP.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Need for strong leadership
The world is in quite a messy state. Our Earth is sick, the weather is playing havoc and natural disasters are getting worse. Then there are the threat of terrorism, currency disputes and chaos and disorder in several parts of the world. All this and together with rapid changes in our society, many Singaporeans have a sense of unease.
In such uncertain time it is all the more important to have a stable government and strong political leadership. The government can do little in some cases but in many matters, whether it is financial or law-and-order, a strong effective government can give its people a sense of well-being and security.
Generally we have an efficient civil service and a trusted judiciary. Some of us think that things will be as usual whoever runs the Country. I do not believe this to be so. Without strong political leadership, services and standards will decline, and probably corruption would rear its ugly head again.
You see violent and bloody demonstrations in some countries. The demonstrators do not care about their fellow countrymen who do not want the violence. This is not about democracy or human rights. It is anarchy and selfishness. Some want to change a bad government.
In Singapore, we don’t need violence to change the government. We use our vote.
Stability is needed for peace, investments and jobs. Vote for good governance and a strong government.
In such uncertain time it is all the more important to have a stable government and strong political leadership. The government can do little in some cases but in many matters, whether it is financial or law-and-order, a strong effective government can give its people a sense of well-being and security.
Generally we have an efficient civil service and a trusted judiciary. Some of us think that things will be as usual whoever runs the Country. I do not believe this to be so. Without strong political leadership, services and standards will decline, and probably corruption would rear its ugly head again.
You see violent and bloody demonstrations in some countries. The demonstrators do not care about their fellow countrymen who do not want the violence. This is not about democracy or human rights. It is anarchy and selfishness. Some want to change a bad government.
In Singapore, we don’t need violence to change the government. We use our vote.
Stability is needed for peace, investments and jobs. Vote for good governance and a strong government.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)