CNA debate just ended - share your view

Cestbon · Apr 5, 2011

From my own opinion. I rank them from best to worst performance
1. WP- Gerald >>> best
2. PAP- Tharman >> very good
3. SDP- Vincent>> good
They other 3 are average or really bad.
Josephine talk about data from gov( very funny those data are not accurate if she really do her home work ask the gorund/resident). Meaning she really never talk to average resident from all group. She state jobless only 2%(very funny)
SPP-Lina always talk my own opinion and correct her if she wrong, that should that she not confident or never really talk to the resident same as Josephine.
SDA-the malay have good heat and ideas but he cannot summary it in short and easy to understand. Talk talk talk but have little info to present.

Lucky PAP sent Tharman. If sent WKS/Yakult/Cow/ any others MPs. They sure lost in very bad outcome.
I do respect Tharman the way he speak and explaination. He know what he talk about. Same as the WP-Gerald both have proper planning and good ideas.
Winner are WP-Gerald and PAP- Tharman.

methink · Apr 6, 2011

At the end of it, there should have been a little free-for-all session.

The present format favours the PAP where time is allocated on a 50-50 basis. Opposition reps may find themselves helmstring as in Lina Chiam's case.

The PAP side seems to know before hand what Melissa is going to ask. Poor Lina was caught off-guard. Dr Vincent was really quick on his feet. Advantage with him in a real open debate.

Pappies will try to avoid this as they cannot hide and turn fast. In fact I believe the next time round, they will be found wanting again when others such as Kenneth Jeya and Dr James Gomes come on board. Vincent if he does appear again, has proven his worth.

sense · Apr 6, 2011

Based on my personal observation of how the 6 candidates performed:

1. Statistics can be real or imaginary:

Tharman: is able to cite seemingly realistic statistics, which is not surprising such he has direct access to Dept of Stats.
Josephine: is also able to cite seemingly realistic statistics, which is not surprising such she also has direct access to Dept of Stats.
SPP Lina: cited imaginary statistics a few times, unreliable candidate
WP Gerald: is able also cite a few seemingly realistic statistics, may be anecdotal (risky).
SDA Nazem: cited imaginary statistics a couple of time, should do his homework properly
SDP Vincent: too eager to be the opposition force that he actually misinterpreted stats & facts that was stated by the PAP; Vincent needs to put his doctoral level skills to actual work, ie. think, interpret, analyse and apply, instead of hear and shoot.

2. Body language & Speech:

Tharman: stable but a bit too solemn
Josephine: stable and seemingly friendly, with genuine smiles along the way
SPP Lina: too may unnecessary words such as "you know.... you know..." but notable smiles.
WP Gerald: stable but a bit too solemn; seemingly honest chap; try to relax, learn from Josephine
SDA Nazem: struggle with language and a bit too solemn, possibly due to nervousness
SDP Vincent: the only person who seat slanted - leaning too frequently on the arm of the chair; lots of "aaa, aaa, aaa, ..." from start of the hour till the end – disappointing.

[1] If I am Opp bias, this would be my ranking (from best to worse):

1. WP Gerald :smile:

(pls smile at times, it would help)
2. Josephine
3. Tharman
4. Nazem
5. Lina; Vincent :(

Many who are pro opposition have rated Vincent first. But, not me. Yes, while Vincent did managed to deliver a few blows at the PAP, a few of such blows are either based on his confusion/recklessness (eg. the 40% GST portion...), or he wanted to appear clever (eg. by trying to suggest some people, eg. CSJ are not co-authors). Well, the definition of author as "one that originates or creates" (Merriam-Webster dictionary)... many of CSJ lunatic acts certainly makes is an interesting co-author in the story of Singapore. For me, the nail in the coffin for Vincent would be his body language; I don't trust this fellow and I wouldn't be surprise if he does something stupid/reckless in the future.

As for Lina, am afraid that she does not have what it takes to be a politician, if she wants her party to survive, she should honourably give chance to those who are more competent within her party. While the political 'succession' works for some families, from father to son; as such it would have been a lovely Singapore story (yes, she and her husband are also co-authors) from husband to wife, but Lina is simply not up to it, sad but true.

As for Nazeem, while his English is not as good as the other candidates, in terms of competency, he is above Lina. In terms of sincerity to help his people, he is above Vincent, which is why am rating him above Lina & Vincent. Nazeem, the qualifications of the PAP candidates may all outshine you, but you seems to have the heart to serve the people, which is also as important. Just be mindful not to oppose for the sake of it (like Vincent).

[2] If I am PAP bias, this would be my ranking (from best to worse):

1. Josephine
2. Tharman
3. WP Gerald
4. Nazem
5. Lina; Vincent :(

Cheers,
Sense & Sensibility.

CNA debate just ended - share your view

Cestbon

Alfrescian (Inf)

methink

Alfrescian

sense

Alfrescian

Similar threads