Chitchat Presidential Election 2017

[flatearther]

hahaha, are u a clone of parrardee? forgot to change your nick?

No, I am not a clone of parrardee.
But you are certainly a clone of TracyTan866:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?236562-Three-Reasons-SG-Can-t-Compete&p=2525136#post2525136

I would love ckmpd to step out to ruin sinkieland, but too bad she's a chicken shit.

She is most probably:
sammyboy.com/member.php?9902-TracyTan866
and I have a feeling that she's a staunch supporter (or even a member) of one of the opposition parties, and there is a good chance that some people who know her in real life also know that she used to post here as TracyTan866 until a week before the GE2015 Polling Day.

During that one week before GE2015 Polling Day, she was probably very busy helping out at the opposition parties' rallies, which was probably why she stopped posting on 4 September 2015.

And after the opposition parties not only lost again, but even lost at least 100,000 GE2011 opposition voters to the PAP, she probably also lost too much face to resume posting again, especially after she initiated a bet with Leongsam:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?207675-SG-s-Next-GE-Result-Prediction-Leongsam-vs-TracyTan866

Leongsam has accepted TracyTan866's challenge to predict the % of PAP votes at the next GE.

Leongsam predicts: PAP's votes - 65% to 70%
TracyTan866 predicts: PAP's votes - 58% to 63%.

The person who gets the prediction right is the winner. If no correct prediction, the one closer to the actual vote attained by pap is the winner

The loser will quit chatting on SBF forever.

Who do you think will be the winner?

Even her last post was also in the above thread:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?207675-SG-s-Next-GE-Result-Prediction-Leongsam-vs-TracyTan866&p=2282725#post2282725

 

[ckmpd]

I already said:

right?

ok...i take your challenge if there is a non pap challenger to do battle with pap candidate at PE 2017

PAP candidate wins 69.9% you win
PAP candidate gets <69.9% i win.

Is that ok?

 

[ginfreely]

What a silly challenge

I dont fall for unfair challenges. PAP has gerrymandered and abused the election system to such a shameful way that it's an unequal fight

Why dont you challenge me that you will commit suicide if WP beats PAP to form the govt at the next election and taunt me to suicide if pap wins?

Hahahah yes mudlanders apparently love to taunt suicide but will never HONOUR it one lah. One just did yesterday. That's their low life trick.

 

[parrardee]

All it takes is for the non pap candidate to defeat the pap candidate at the next PE. LHL is so worried that he has to change the Constitution to avoid an almost certain defeat. What a coward LHL is.

But I am still certain that the pap candidate will be defeated at the next PE

What a silly challenge

I dont fall for unfair challenges. PAP has gerrymandered and abused the election system to such a shameful way that it's an unequal fight

Why dont you challenge me that you will commit suicide if WP beats PAP to form the govt at the next election and taunt me to suicide if pap wins?

One the one hand you say you are certain which means very very sure that the non PAP candidate will win, then you call my challenge silly and unfair meaning you are therefore not certain of the win.
Make up your mind Miss otherwise too many of such posts will make you look indecisive and make you lose credibility even among your one brain cell supporters.
Or maybe you have the snake qualities, twisting and turning as and when.

 

[parrardee]

But I am still certain that the pap candidate will be defeated at the next PE

So are you certain or not ?

 

[flatearther]

ok...i take your challenge if there is a non pap challenger to do battle with pap candidate at PE 2017

PAP candidate wins 69.9% you win
PAP candidate wins <69.9% i win.

Is that ok?

Yes, just like if it's a one-on-one straight fight between LKY/LHL and LTK/CSJ, the candidate that LKY/LHL supports will most probably win at least 60% of the valid votes, as I've explained before:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?235838-This-Is-Terrible-and-Horrible&p=2515882#post2515882

I dare say that at both GE2011 and GE2015, at least roughly 45% of the valid votes were from women, and at least another roughly 15% from male civil/public servants (including regulars in the SAF and Police), male employees of GLCs, and old men in their 60s and 70s.

And for GE2015, the remaining 10% came from new citizens, ignorant/delusional/cowardly/greedy male Sinkie first-time voters in their 20s, and finally at least 100,000 (at least 4% of the eligible voters) male voters who voted for some opposition party at GE2011 but flipped and voted for the PAP at GE2015. :*:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?216301-VALID-Opposition-votes-for-GE2011-was-803-482-but-654-289-(ex-TP-GRC)-for-GE2015

By the way, just as some people consider WP to be PAP's "Team B", Tan Cheng Bock was also Tony Tan's "clone" (just in case Tony Tan lost five years ago), in my opinion.

 

[ckmpd]

Yes, just like if it's a one-on-one straight fight between LKY/LHL and LTK/CSJ, the candidate that LKY/LHL supports will most probably win at least 60% of the valid votes, as I've explained before:
sammyboy.com/showthread.php?235838-This-Is-Terrible-and-Horrible&p=2515882#post2515882

By the way, just as some people consider WP to be PAP's "Team B", Tan Cheng Bock was also Tony Tan's "clone" (just in case Tony Tan lost five years ago), in my opinion.

let us be precise. dont muddle. Are you saying at least 60% or do you agree the bet is 69.9% and above? there is quite a difference between the two

 

[ckmpd]

One the one hand you say you are certain which means very very sure that the non PAP candidate will win, then you call my challenge silly and unfair meaning you are therefore not certain of the win.
Make up your mind Miss otherwise too many of such posts will make you look indecisive and make you lose credibility even among your one brain cell supporters.
Or maybe you have the snake qualities, twisting and turning as and when.

your point is silly...I have clearly made my point

 

[flatearther]

PAP candidate wins <69.9% i win.

Is that ok?

Actually, since you said:

But I am still certain that the pap candidate will be defeated at the next PE

so if it's a one-on-one straight fight between the "PAP" and the "non-PAP" candidate, I will only allow you to win if the "non-PAP" candidate wins at least 51% of the valid votes.

 

[flatearther]

let us be precise. dont muddle. Are you saying at least 60% or do you agree the bet is 69.9% and above? there is quite a difference between the two

okay, at least 60%.

 

[ckmpd]

okay, at least 60%.

"Same result as last year's GE 2015, i.e. PAP wins roughly 70% of the valid votes,"

what happened to the cocksure figure you made? You chicken out within a few hours?

 

[flatearther]

"Same result as last year's GE 2015, i.e. PAP wins roughly 70% of the valid votes,"

what happened to the cocksure figure you made? You chicken out within a few hours?

And what happened to the rest of my post that you deliberately refused to quote:

PAP wins roughly 70% of the valid votes, or at least 60%.

By the way, "70%", even "100%", is also equal to at least "60%".

And I will certainly not let you win if the "non-PAP" candidate wins only 31%:

PAP candidate wins <69.9% i win.

Is that ok?

so if it's a one-on-one straight fight between the "PAP" and the "non-PAP" candidate, I will only allow you to win if the "non-PAP" candidate wins at least 51% of the valid votes, since you said:

But I am still certain that the pap candidate will be defeated at the next PE

 

[ckmpd]

And what happened to the rest of my post that you deliberately refused to quote:

By the way, "70%", even "100%", is also equal to at least "60%".

And I will certainly not let you win if the "non-PAP" candidate wins only 31%:

so if it's a one-on-one straight fight between the "PAP" and the "non-PAP" candidate, I will only allow you to win if the non-"PAP" candidate wins at least 51% of the valid votes, since you said:

just admit you chicken out... it is clear

 

[parrardee]

All it takes is for the non pap candidate to defeat the pap candidate at the next PE. LHL is so worried that he has to change the Constitution to avoid an almost certain defeat. What a coward LHL is.

But I am still certain that the pap candidate will be defeated at the next PE

just admit you chicken out... it is clear

Chicken? You must be a chick then Miss.

 

[flatearther]

just admit you chicken out... it is clear

Just admit that you are a typical immature, stubborn, bitchy, feminist, hypocritical, vain, middle-aged Chinese Sinkie woman, who initially said:

If there is a non pap vs pap at the PE 2017, let us take a bet by naming the winner and winning margin. That is a mature challenge

and after you said:

PAP candidate wins <69.9% i win.

Is that ok?

and I refused to accept, and said:

I will certainly not let you win if the "non-PAP" candidate wins only 31%:

so if it's a one-on-one straight fight between the "PAP" and the "non-PAP" candidate, I will only allow you to win if the "non-PAP" candidate wins at least 51% of the valid votes, since you said:

But I am still certain that the pap candidate will be defeated at the next PE

it is you who are now showing signs of "chickening out".

I'll tell you what, if you dare to say that the "non-PAP" candidate will win at least 51% in a one-on-one straight fight with the "PAP" candidate, I will also dare to say that the "PAP" candidate will win at least 70%, not just "at least 60%". Deal?
This is similar to what parrardee said:

If the PAP candidate is beaten, even by the slightest of margins I will quit this forum. You dare do the same thing?

to which you replied by accusing him:

Let me show you how immature you are. I want to show you what maturity is.

followed by repeating his "immature" challenge yourself:

If there is a non pap vs pap at the PE 2017, let us take a bet by naming the winner and winning margin. That is a mature challenge

when parrardee had already said "If the PAP candidate is beaten, even by the slightest of margins...", meaning the "non-PAP" candidate winning at least 51% (or even 50.1%) of the valid votes.

I'm not pro-PAP, nor do I agree with everything parrardee (or any other pro-PAP Sinkie) says, but I am aware of the political climate in Singapore, whereas you're not.

 

[zeebjii]

Same result as last year's GE 2015, i.e. PAP wins roughly 70% of the valid votes, or at least 60%.

LOLOLOL. PE is not GE. In the only 2 contested elections decades apart, PAP stalwart and future "People's President" Ong Teng Cheong couldn't get 60% against a very reluctant candidate, Tony Tan not even 40%. But you don't have to worry you will be wrong. There will only be one candidate and no election.

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

If ckmpd is a clone of TracyTan866, I will chop