Swiss standard? Still a long way, smell no smoke hor!
Last edited:
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
EDMW forum thread reaches 63 pages - "Project 2016: Vote out Lee Hsien Loong"
- Thread starter Force 136
- Start date
Swiss standard? Still a long way, smell no smoke hor!
Scholarships for Foreigners, NS for Sinkies. :oIo::kma:
For the MIWs and their family members and close friends, they have been at swiss standard for a long time already.
Remember that when you cast your vote. (whether you yourself are at Swiss standard or not shouldn't matter, unless you are a grateful gongkia)
Support! Die Hard! 
PAP Sucks! :oIo::kma:
Source: Boycott Straits Times & Zaobao
The latest round of fare hike (mind you, that's just part 1) is a good reminder of the vicious cycle that we Singaporeans have found ourselves caught in for the last 50 years.
The PAP takes millions from us and then pretends to be generous by doling out some pocket change to the poor while at the same time raise fares across the board and privatize public goods for huge profits.
All this are of course supported by the lies churned out by the Mainstream Media controlled by PAP lapdogs chiefly Warren Fernandez and Walter Fernandez.
How long more do we want this state of avarice to continue?
Note: Zuraidah Ibrahim is the sister of Yaacob Ibrahim
The political naiveté of ST’s Zuraidah Ibrahim
We noted with interest a recent op-ed piece published by Straits Times Deputy Editor Zuraidah Ibrahim. It was titled “Gloves off in PAP-WP punch-ups”, and Zuraidah was basically trying to forecast what is to come in the lead-up to the 2015/2016 General Elections. In her words, parties are now in pre-2015/2016 positioning. She highlighted the possibility of skirmishes between People’s Action Party (PAP) and Workers’ Party (WP), e.g. the AIM issue and the hawker centre cleaning saga, as part of the positioning towards the next election.
This is not the first political commentary we have read, we have seen good ones, but we have also seen ones that belong to the ranks of imbeciles or political noobs, and unfortunately, Zuraidah’s article happened to fall into the latter category.
Zuraidah started her article with writing about how WP was accused of being dishonest when their Members of Parliament insisted no one in the town council had demanded extra charges for cleaning of high areas of the hawker centres. Low Thia Khiang backed his MPs and did not say anything about the topic further as he was satisfied with the investigations and explanations. She also referred to a debate in May in which WP did not go through a tender process when it appointed its managing agents, who happened to have close ties to the party. She used both sagas to make a point that WP had been less than forthcoming.
Incredibly, Zuraidah made a point about Low calculating that “the reservoir of goodwill his party enjoys as an underdog is deep enough to sustain it through such attacks, even if PAP’s accusations are on target.” This line betrays an understanding of how politics work in Singapore. Look, town council politics is not a totally new thing altogether in the arena of Singapore politics. If many of you may recall, Chiam See Tong had to respond Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong’s attacks that the Potong Pasir town council had $790,000 of its $7.9 million sinking fund at its disposal, which is enough money for lift upgrading programme in 4 blocks. Of course, Chiam countered that the government’s quotations were always double the prices he would pay. Then, there were also the threats in yesteryears about how rubbish will pile up high and no buses will service opposition wards. Therefore, attacks would come in many guises, from deficient processes in running the town council to lack of funds to be used in development programmes, all of which are targeted to cast aspersions on the opposition’s ability to run the town councils.
Secondly, it is interesting how Zuraidah chose to cast the topic in the light of the reservoir of good will that WP enjoys, when it is more of the issue of the public’s goodwill, support or put bluntly, patience with the PAP. The point is that we are now living in the era when it is for the PAP to lose, rather than inroads made by the opposition.
You see, in terms of capturing the hearts of voters – there are three kinds of voters. The proverbial I-will-vote-any-donkey-that-contests-against-the-PAP types, the middle ground types, and the “I-will-always-support-PAP” type. The opposition has become cleverer in recent years. It used to be more of personality politics during the yesteryears, with charismatic opposition candidates with big personalities pulling crowd in with rousing and awe-inspiring speeches. The earlier years have seen the emergence of such opposition personalities but that did not gain the opposition as a whole any inroads at the polls. The usual PAP modus-operandi is to always question the character and integrity of such opposition candidates.
From the later decade of 2000 onwards, the opposition adopted a different tact – centring their electoral debates on major policies that affect the lives of ordinary Singaporeans, and that is going to be the key to unlocking the obstacle that has always hampered the opposition. Through serendipity or tactical re-positioning, the opposition figured that it is going to be the middle ground voters who would be the determining factor of whether they make inroads. The way to appeal to such voters is to address major policies.
If you follow the fortunes of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), you can see how following the policy debate road has benefitted the party. SDP has taken on more of a democratic activist outfit in the past, organising and taking part in freedom protests. The party, at least sees itself as one which provided an activist platform. However, during the 2011 General Elections, the party adopted the policy platform. It was significant when after Vivian Balakrishnan hinted that the party could be pushing the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender agenda when Chee Soon Juan, of all people, came out to exhort Vivian to “stick to policy debates”. The improvement made by SDP was quite vast. During the 2006 General Elections when it took on a more activist approach, it only garnered votes in the low 20s percentages in the wards it contested in. During the 2011 General Elections, however, it garnered above 30% of the votes in wards it contested in, a significant improvement from its performance in 2006.
Hence, it is not so much about much goodwill that WP will lose, but it is the middle ground voters who will be the deciding factor. Skirmishes over hawker centre cleaning or tender processes aren’t going to have much bearing on such voters, but policy debates concerning national security, employment, CPF, housing, costs of living and healthcare are going to affect their decision on who to vote.
Again, Zuraidah shows her naiveté in her commentary on the upcoming battle for East Coast GRC in 2016. She wrote something along the lines of WP spreading Aljunied karma by dispatching one or two of its Aljunied GRC MPs into battle. She suggested that PAP will try to nip the problem of these one or two upcoming MPs in the bud before they could lead a team in East Coast. Firstly, she conveniently forgot that Gerald Giam was made Non-constituency MP (NCMP), and Giam was meant to follow the route treaded by Sylvia Lim, serve as NCMP before eventually getting elected. Secondly, there is still some time before the next election, and anything can happen. Chen Show Mao was a star catch who was unveiled quite late, and WP’s next star catch could very well end up contesting East Coast. Thirdly, and most importantly, Zuraidah failed to consider a most essential factor, PAP’s strength in East Coast. The highest ranking minister at East Coast is Lim Swee Say. Problem is that Lim is no heavyweight, in fact, he is a lesser light in comparison with George Yeo. Lim is in fact a nomad, in comparison with his ministerial colleagues. Lim was in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC and during General Elections 2011, he was moved to East Coast GRC. Such a move for a candidate is hardly indicative of his ability to anchor a GRC, yet he is the highest ranking cabinet member in East Coast GRC. Lately, he made the news for taking more toothpicks than needed from Din Tai Fung restaurant, which is considered an inconsiderate behaviour. More of such gaffes are going to hurt his team at East Coast. Seet Ai Mee lost her seat when the world thought she was being aloof for washing her hands after shaking hands with market sellers when it turned out she wanted to be considerate as she had her muslim residents in mind after shaking the hands of pork sellers. That being said, it is easier to take down Lim Swee Say than George Yeo.
Zuraidah’s political naiveté was most apparent when she suggested PAP should keep “WP busy and on the defensive”. She wrote that ”WP already has its hands full trying to run a ginormous town council covering seven wards with no slackening of standards, while attempting to make an impact on national policymaking. Every disruption that the PAP can cause within the WP means less time for Mr Low and comrades to work the ground in neighbouring group representation constituencies and plot their next big push into PAP territory.“ Either she did not do any investigative journalism or she really believes that WP is about its MPs who are visible in parliament. We wonder whether Zuraidah has ever heard of this term “backroom staff”. We have one member in our editorial team who has ever been invited by a WP member to be part of the policy making “backroom staff” team in WP a long time ago. If she bothered following Png Eng Huat’s rally, it was basically what that chap did – helping to draft speeches in parliament. Obviously, WP’s backroom staff will assist with policy making-related matters or working the ground. DUH. We hope she did not assume WP is a party that comprises only 9 members – the number of its current MPs in parliament.
The fact is we are well and truly into the era when it is for the PAP to lose. Zuraidah pointed to how PAP held that integrity cannot be negotiated when it allowed its MP Michael Palmer to resign, in a bid to argue how much the PAP values integrity. However, that is only part of the whole story. We have two by-elections and in terms of the final outcome, WP is the happy of the two parties. In fact, the Punggol East by-election results confirm to us that we are into the era where it is really up to the PAP to lose.
One has to note how the public treats the PAP and opposition for the same transgression. Yaw Shin Leong at Hougang and Michael Palmer at Punggol East were guilty of similar transgressions. It appears that the public seemed to be more forgiving of the same transgressions if it was the opposition, or was it? WP defended Hougang in a by-election that yielded nearly similar percentages gained by Yaw during 2011 General Elections. The result in Punggol East by-election was very significant. Firstly, it was a four-way fight and historically, more than three-way fights have always benefitted the PAP. However, PAP has no advantage in this election, with WP’s Lee Li Lian garnering a comfortable 54.5% of votes compared with PAP’s Koh Poh Koon’s 43.7%. This result puts into perspective PAP’s current status – it is well and truly on the defensive. The Punggol East by election result was significant since the ward has always been a PAP-base, and it provides a sobering appraisal of the assessment of PAP’s performance in running the country. Obviously, the middle ground voters have a say in the final outcome in Punggol East, and the assessment of PAP does not look that rosy.
What Zuraidah does not realise is the finer details of what determines the electoral results and in this respect who wins at the polls are the middle-ground voters. For the PAP, it is about not fucking up in major issues – healthcare, costs of living, jobs, healthcare, housing, CPF. For the opposition, it is about offering viable and attractive alternatives in these areas. Disrupting opposition in parliament isn’t going to have much bearing on the middle ground voters. This is why it is really an eighth wonder of the world that someone like Zuraidah who wrote such commentaries can rise to become Straits Times deputy editor. It is also why none of us ever submitted articles to ST forum page – we don’t have much regard for the political IQs of its editors, even those on top of the hierarchy there.
The political naiveté of ST’s Zuraidah Ibrahim
We noted with interest a recent op-ed piece published by Straits Times Deputy Editor Zuraidah Ibrahim. It was titled “Gloves off in PAP-WP punch-ups”, and Zuraidah was basically trying to forecast what is to come in the lead-up to the 2015/2016 General Elections. In her words, parties are now in pre-2015/2016 positioning. She highlighted the possibility of skirmishes between People’s Action Party (PAP) and Workers’ Party (WP), e.g. the AIM issue and the hawker centre cleaning saga, as part of the positioning towards the next election.
This is not the first political commentary we have read, we have seen good ones, but we have also seen ones that belong to the ranks of imbeciles or political noobs, and unfortunately, Zuraidah’s article happened to fall into the latter category.
Zuraidah started her article with writing about how WP was accused of being dishonest when their Members of Parliament insisted no one in the town council had demanded extra charges for cleaning of high areas of the hawker centres. Low Thia Khiang backed his MPs and did not say anything about the topic further as he was satisfied with the investigations and explanations. She also referred to a debate in May in which WP did not go through a tender process when it appointed its managing agents, who happened to have close ties to the party. She used both sagas to make a point that WP had been less than forthcoming.
Incredibly, Zuraidah made a point about Low calculating that “the reservoir of goodwill his party enjoys as an underdog is deep enough to sustain it through such attacks, even if PAP’s accusations are on target.” This line betrays an understanding of how politics work in Singapore. Look, town council politics is not a totally new thing altogether in the arena of Singapore politics. If many of you may recall, Chiam See Tong had to respond Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong’s attacks that the Potong Pasir town council had $790,000 of its $7.9 million sinking fund at its disposal, which is enough money for lift upgrading programme in 4 blocks. Of course, Chiam countered that the government’s quotations were always double the prices he would pay. Then, there were also the threats in yesteryears about how rubbish will pile up high and no buses will service opposition wards. Therefore, attacks would come in many guises, from deficient processes in running the town council to lack of funds to be used in development programmes, all of which are targeted to cast aspersions on the opposition’s ability to run the town councils.
Secondly, it is interesting how Zuraidah chose to cast the topic in the light of the reservoir of good will that WP enjoys, when it is more of the issue of the public’s goodwill, support or put bluntly, patience with the PAP. The point is that we are now living in the era when it is for the PAP to lose, rather than inroads made by the opposition.
You see, in terms of capturing the hearts of voters – there are three kinds of voters. The proverbial I-will-vote-any-donkey-that-contests-against-the-PAP types, the middle ground types, and the “I-will-always-support-PAP” type. The opposition has become cleverer in recent years. It used to be more of personality politics during the yesteryears, with charismatic opposition candidates with big personalities pulling crowd in with rousing and awe-inspiring speeches. The earlier years have seen the emergence of such opposition personalities but that did not gain the opposition as a whole any inroads at the polls. The usual PAP modus-operandi is to always question the character and integrity of such opposition candidates.
From the later decade of 2000 onwards, the opposition adopted a different tact – centring their electoral debates on major policies that affect the lives of ordinary Singaporeans, and that is going to be the key to unlocking the obstacle that has always hampered the opposition. Through serendipity or tactical re-positioning, the opposition figured that it is going to be the middle ground voters who would be the determining factor of whether they make inroads. The way to appeal to such voters is to address major policies.
If you follow the fortunes of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), you can see how following the policy debate road has benefitted the party. SDP has taken on more of a democratic activist outfit in the past, organising and taking part in freedom protests. The party, at least sees itself as one which provided an activist platform. However, during the 2011 General Elections, the party adopted the policy platform. It was significant when after Vivian Balakrishnan hinted that the party could be pushing the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender agenda when Chee Soon Juan, of all people, came out to exhort Vivian to “stick to policy debates”. The improvement made by SDP was quite vast. During the 2006 General Elections when it took on a more activist approach, it only garnered votes in the low 20s percentages in the wards it contested in. During the 2011 General Elections, however, it garnered above 30% of the votes in wards it contested in, a significant improvement from its performance in 2006.
Hence, it is not so much about much goodwill that WP will lose, but it is the middle ground voters who will be the deciding factor. Skirmishes over hawker centre cleaning or tender processes aren’t going to have much bearing on such voters, but policy debates concerning national security, employment, CPF, housing, costs of living and healthcare are going to affect their decision on who to vote.
Again, Zuraidah shows her naiveté in her commentary on the upcoming battle for East Coast GRC in 2016. She wrote something along the lines of WP spreading Aljunied karma by dispatching one or two of its Aljunied GRC MPs into battle. She suggested that PAP will try to nip the problem of these one or two upcoming MPs in the bud before they could lead a team in East Coast. Firstly, she conveniently forgot that Gerald Giam was made Non-constituency MP (NCMP), and Giam was meant to follow the route treaded by Sylvia Lim, serve as NCMP before eventually getting elected. Secondly, there is still some time before the next election, and anything can happen. Chen Show Mao was a star catch who was unveiled quite late, and WP’s next star catch could very well end up contesting East Coast. Thirdly, and most importantly, Zuraidah failed to consider a most essential factor, PAP’s strength in East Coast. The highest ranking minister at East Coast is Lim Swee Say. Problem is that Lim is no heavyweight, in fact, he is a lesser light in comparison with George Yeo. Lim is in fact a nomad, in comparison with his ministerial colleagues. Lim was in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC and during General Elections 2011, he was moved to East Coast GRC. Such a move for a candidate is hardly indicative of his ability to anchor a GRC, yet he is the highest ranking cabinet member in East Coast GRC. Lately, he made the news for taking more toothpicks than needed from Din Tai Fung restaurant, which is considered an inconsiderate behaviour. More of such gaffes are going to hurt his team at East Coast. Seet Ai Mee lost her seat when the world thought she was being aloof for washing her hands after shaking hands with market sellers when it turned out she wanted to be considerate as she had her muslim residents in mind after shaking the hands of pork sellers. That being said, it is easier to take down Lim Swee Say than George Yeo.
Zuraidah’s political naiveté was most apparent when she suggested PAP should keep “WP busy and on the defensive”. She wrote that ”WP already has its hands full trying to run a ginormous town council covering seven wards with no slackening of standards, while attempting to make an impact on national policymaking. Every disruption that the PAP can cause within the WP means less time for Mr Low and comrades to work the ground in neighbouring group representation constituencies and plot their next big push into PAP territory.“ Either she did not do any investigative journalism or she really believes that WP is about its MPs who are visible in parliament. We wonder whether Zuraidah has ever heard of this term “backroom staff”. We have one member in our editorial team who has ever been invited by a WP member to be part of the policy making “backroom staff” team in WP a long time ago. If she bothered following Png Eng Huat’s rally, it was basically what that chap did – helping to draft speeches in parliament. Obviously, WP’s backroom staff will assist with policy making-related matters or working the ground. DUH. We hope she did not assume WP is a party that comprises only 9 members – the number of its current MPs in parliament.
The fact is we are well and truly into the era when it is for the PAP to lose. Zuraidah pointed to how PAP held that integrity cannot be negotiated when it allowed its MP Michael Palmer to resign, in a bid to argue how much the PAP values integrity. However, that is only part of the whole story. We have two by-elections and in terms of the final outcome, WP is the happy of the two parties. In fact, the Punggol East by-election results confirm to us that we are into the era where it is really up to the PAP to lose.
One has to note how the public treats the PAP and opposition for the same transgression. Yaw Shin Leong at Hougang and Michael Palmer at Punggol East were guilty of similar transgressions. It appears that the public seemed to be more forgiving of the same transgressions if it was the opposition, or was it? WP defended Hougang in a by-election that yielded nearly similar percentages gained by Yaw during 2011 General Elections. The result in Punggol East by-election was very significant. Firstly, it was a four-way fight and historically, more than three-way fights have always benefitted the PAP. However, PAP has no advantage in this election, with WP’s Lee Li Lian garnering a comfortable 54.5% of votes compared with PAP’s Koh Poh Koon’s 43.7%. This result puts into perspective PAP’s current status – it is well and truly on the defensive. The Punggol East by election result was significant since the ward has always been a PAP-base, and it provides a sobering appraisal of the assessment of PAP’s performance in running the country. Obviously, the middle ground voters have a say in the final outcome in Punggol East, and the assessment of PAP does not look that rosy.
What Zuraidah does not realise is the finer details of what determines the electoral results and in this respect who wins at the polls are the middle-ground voters. For the PAP, it is about not fucking up in major issues – healthcare, costs of living, jobs, healthcare, housing, CPF. For the opposition, it is about offering viable and attractive alternatives in these areas. Disrupting opposition in parliament isn’t going to have much bearing on the middle ground voters. This is why it is really an eighth wonder of the world that someone like Zuraidah who wrote such commentaries can rise to become Straits Times deputy editor. It is also why none of us ever submitted articles to ST forum page – we don’t have much regard for the political IQs of its editors, even those on top of the hierarchy there.
Only in Singapore: the sister helps the brother to fix the opposition through writing bullshit on the newspaper.
These people are a disease to Singapore. They must be eradicated.
Only in Singapore: the sister helps the brother to fix the opposition through writing bullshit on the newspaper.
LOL. This reminds me of another ugly person.
Only in Singapore: the sister helps the brother to fix the opposition through writing bullshit on the newspaper.
These people are a disease to Singapore. They must be eradicated.
Before social media, really don't know alot of these people are all connected, thought that Spore is truly meritocratic society!
Page 67 now in EDMW.
meritocratic = will be regarded with merit if you spread the myth of the exceptional family. LOL...........................
Fuck PAP! :oIo:
Don't underestimated the power of technology, let the hard truth begin.
Similar threads
