More anti-SDP than anti-WP posts in this present SBF

[Avantas]

LKY is very smart. He needs Chiam and Low in Parliament in order to masquerade Singapore as a sham democracy.

Their records speak for themselves. After 17 years in Parliament, what has Wayang Low achieve ? Now, he didn't even bother to put up a wayang, just shut up and act blur. How spineless can he be ?

PAP knows Singaporeans clamor for an opposition. Instead of obliterating all of them which will create a backlash, the state media skilfully promote LOW as a "credible alternative" while demonizing Chee as a "radical".

Singaporeans like Locke, who are naturally dumb, fall for the ruse. Chee was ostracised to the fringes of the political mainstream while LOW is elevated to the pedestral of a "credible", "agreeable" and "moderate" opposition leader when all he does is to offer some token "opposition".

I hope one day Singaporeans will wake up and vote LOW out of Parliament.

To a certain extent, Chiam & LTK are tolerated to co-exist with PAP as both serve PAP's objective to showcase to the public what type of opposition is permissible and will be allowed in S'pore.

GE91 marked for the first time where PAP's share of total votes fell to the lowest point of 61%. A historic four oppositions were elected on Chaim's by-election strategy of contesting for less than half of the total parliamentary seats up for grab. This new political development made the PAP leadership worried.

In 1992, Chee came onto the political stage through the Marine Parade GRC by-election. During the campaign, Chee challenged Teo Chee Hean not to hide under the skirts of Goh Chok Tong in a GRC and called for a public debate. Chee's style from the start was not to the liking of LKY.

From 1993 to 1997, Chee criticised various govt policies such as the public transport system, healthcare system etc and has led SDP to produce and publish its own detailed reports on public transport and healthcare etc. Under pressure, PAP scrambled to instruct LTA to produce a blue print on public transport titled "World Class Public Transport For The 21st Century". SDP's healthcare report was later found to contain a typo error and a Select Parliamentary Committee was convened to conduct an inquiry. Chee and his SDP leadership were found guilty and a hefty fine was slapped down on all responsible.

Of the many letters Chee sent to the 154th, there were two which I considered have deeply offended LKY. In one letter, Chee wrote that PAP is not equal to S'pore. In the other, Chee wrote at the end of the letter that "No one is indispensable in S'pore".

Through SDP battles and skirmishes with PAP, Chee has demonstrated his intelligence and intellectual abilities to take on anyone in LKY's group of younger ministers. All these then led to LKY taking on Chee and SDP personally, determined to squash Chee & SDP and sent them to political oblivion for good.

It is in this political context that Ling and Cheo contested GE97 with the constant pounding from the 154th up to the nomination day to GE97, with their little short-comings blown all out of proportions for ridiculed and public entertainment, and both were consistently portrayed as incompetent.

On the other hand, Chiam and LTK were propped up and positively portrayed in the media, to the extent of LKY heaping praises on Chiam's and LTK's performances in parliament so as to put Ling and Cheo in the worst light possible.

In a way, Chiam and LTK are very fortunate as their political styles and existence suit PAP's ulterior motives.

 

[Avantas]

Dear Locke,

Who gives you the right to speak for SDP ? Are you its member ?

Of course the PAP is always "FAIR" in your eyes.

Why not you join the PAP instead of WP ? Or are you are mole sent by PAP to infiltrate into the opposition ?

 

[chinkangkor]

1. Firstly the collapse in the level of support between in 1997 between Cheo and Ling was generic and across the board and signified a drastic lost of the middle ground. Interestingly enough if one adds the number of votes gained by the SPP together with SDP's Ling and compare that with the total gained by Cheo, one would find very little electoral discrepancy. The SPP candidate lost his deposit and that in itself lost chiam credibility and also illustrated in my view the importance of the middle ground versus the die die vote opposition ground.

There was a big swing of votes against opposition in GE97 except for Cheng San GRC which Tang/JBJ contested and Hougang.

My take is that the HDB upgrading played a major role in the vote swing as many people were in the gripped of high property fever. PAP did not know then how would the voters react to its dangling of HDB upgrading carrots and therefore did not take any chances with Ling and Cheo, not that LKY ever takes any chances in his political opponents.

On hindsight, the HDB upgrading programmes were hugely popular with voters and this alone would have done Ling and Cheo in, without resorting to any gerrymandering, which I believe would tip the balances in PAP's favour as the two constituencies which Ling and Cheo won in GE91 had very slim majorities.

 

[kakowi]

Even hindsight is not 2020. So....don't you think it is better to forget the arguments and just look at the results.

LTK, CST are in Parliament. CSJ is not.

In the coming elections in about two years time, will CSJ be elected?

PAP can only do so much (a lot). But PAP cannot vote for themselves. Neither can LTK, CST, CSJ. So it is the Voters who voted for them.

If CSJ reach out to the voters the same way that LTK and CST did, will it make a difference?

So far people say, it is the PAP's fault. That is not empowering. What is empowering is to say "It is my fault that I did not succeed." Only then can I do the things that will get me the results I want.

 

[mustpaycashhhh]

LKY is very smart. He needs Chiam and Low in Parliament in order to masquerade Singapore as a sham democracy.

Their records speak for themselves. After 17 years in Parliament, what has Wayang Low achieve ? Now, he didn't even bother to put up a wayang, just shut up and act blur. How spineless can he be ?

PAP knows Singaporeans clamor for an opposition. Instead of obliterating all of them which will create a backlash, the state media skilfully promote LOW as a "credible alternative" while demonizing Chee as a "radical".

Singaporeans like Locke, who are naturally dumb, fall for the ruse. Chee was ostracised to the fringes of the political mainstream while LOW is elevated to the pedestral of a "credible", "agreeable" and "moderate" opposition leader when all he does is to offer some token "opposition".

I hope one day Singaporeans will wake up and vote LOW out of Parliament.

I oredi say u r STUPID, shameless LIAR,FRAUD, WORD TWISTER & SNAKE.

If Ah Low, Ah Chiam kana vote into parleemen, u say oh it's because LKY want them in parleemen to make "sham democracy". If pipa give some not so nice comment about Dr Chee u say pipa demonize him call him a radical. If Ah Low never shout and scream at PAP u say Ah Low is spineless. Waah everything must suit only you lah? U can write engrish not bad but your point show tat u simply got very LOW I.Q. Why u never realise tat whoever go into parleemen is because of CITIZENS OF SINKAPOR vote during general election? Who point the gun at million of Sinkapor Citizen to force them to vote who? Ya it's true, newspaper is bias, radio & tv is bias, but WHOLE OF SINKAPOR IS BIAS. Too bad for Low IQ Avantas, MOST OF SINKAPOR is BIAS AGAINST DR CHEE. Can u understand simple engrish? Dr Chee got 2 choice -- make his style more suit for Sinkapor Citizen to vote for him, or go and demonstrate everyday in Orchard Rd. He already chose the second choice. The Citizen of Sinkapor already chose their answer!! If Sinkapor Citizen want to vote Ah Low into parleemen for 17 years, what u complain about? U buy wrong horse u can blame the other people who win first prize? Blame your own lousy horse! Tat why I say u bloody LOW IQ!

U got no brain lah you. Low IQ want to argue with pipa. Some more u r LIAR, WORD TWISTER, LOSER shameless SNAKE hide here hide there want to take photo behave like a KIASI PUSSY.

 

[cass888]

To a certain extent, Chiam & LTK are tolerated to co-exist with PAP as both serve PAP's objective to showcase to the public what type of opposition is permissible and will be allowed in S'pore.

Doesn't explain JBJ's enhanced majority in 84. Ling and Cheo are the only two who dropped their majorities after their first term.

JBJ 84% > JBJ 81%
CST 88% > CST 84%
LTK 97% > LTK91%

Conversely
LHD 91% << LHD 97%
CCC 91% << CCC 97%

If they were any good, the gerrymandering would only have reduced their majority. Or at best, the one who beat them would have won by a small (alright, even up to 60%) margin. But both were trounced, in part because of their performance (PAP didn't ask LHD to say "Don't Talk Cock" into a microphone) but I suspect more so because even the opposition supporters saw LHD and CCC as being privy to to sack Chiam See Tong incident. More so for Ling who dropped to only 21% of the vote (I am very sure that the 30% did not come from electorial boundaries alone).

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Chin

To be fair the results from GE 1991 to 1997 indicated to me that the SDP and the SPP lost support from a substantial portion of the electorate due to both in fighting and PAP pressure. No amount of 'PAP support" can explain the decrease for the SDP and SPP and the increase for the WP under then JBJ. Chiam never quite recovered from that fall in electoral support and neither has the SDP. They both suffered politically with Chee more than Chiam




Locke

 

[chinkangkor]

To be fair the results from GE 1991 to 1997 indicated to me that the SDP and the SPP lost support from a substantial portion of the electorate due to both in fighting and PAP pressure. No amount of 'PAP support" can explain the decrease for the SDP and SPP and the increase for the WP under then JBJ. Chiam never quite recovered from that fall in electoral support and neither has the SDP. They both suffered politically with Chee more than Chiam

The contest in Cheng San GRC under JBJ.

Cheng San GRC was a politically quiet, tranquil place until Tang Liang Hong emerged on nomination day with JBJ to contest against then Education Minister Lee Yock Suan. In this GRC, there was a large segment of chinese educated population.

Tang Liang Hong was a well known, respected leader in the chinese community who had had lunches with PAP ministers on many occasions before he joined WP in 1997. Prior to this, Tang had spoken and commented privately on many occasions issues on the marginalisation of the chinese education in our society and the seemingly domination of English educated, christian ministers in the cabinet etc.

After the nomination day in GE97, PAP's fire power was immediately directed against Tang, who was labelled as an anti-christian, anti-english educated chinese chauvinist. Those issues on which Tang had raised in private were splashed across 154th in a bid to provide proofs and evidence that Tang was an anti-christian, anti-english educated chinese chauvinist.

Due to Tang's credible and good standing in the chinese community, he managed to ramp up support for his campaign. JBJ pulled in his weight as a well known, vocal and credible opposition leader. The issues raised were emotionally explosive and the political contest was bitterly fought by both sides with libel suits flying, two police reports made, political heavy weights prime minister, deputy prime ministers and LKY all jumping into the fray. A direct line to the prime minister office with Cheng San was even promised to voters.

All along, PAP never knew where JBJ would be contesting and that Tang was joining WP until nomination day and there was definitely no chance for PAP to gerrymandering. Had PAP known before hand, there would have been more tampering with Cheng San GRC.

On the other hand, where Chee, Ling and Cheo were contesting had been known to PAP before hand. Chee had challenged Mathias Yao to a one to one fight and the stage was set in Macpherson. Ling and Cheo would be defending their seats. Gerrymandering could be carried out extensively in these three wards and I believe it was done to the maximium possible to maximise PAP's chances. On hindsight, PAP need not have to as its HDB upgrading carrots were popular enough to cause a huge swing of votes in its favour.

The political environment in which Cheng San GRC was in during GE97 was entirely different from that faced by SDP. The marginalisation of the chinese educated in the society was a highly emotional issue by which the HDB upgrading carrots held less sway in the chinese educated segment.

JBJ & Tang managed 45.18% of the total votes. If PAP had not defamed Tang as an anti-christian, anti-english educated chinese chauvinist, JBJ and Tang could have won Cheng San GRC. Faced with compliant judges, Tang knew he would have stood no chance of winning had he sued. A complaint judiciary was used to great advantage to PAP in this hotly contested GRC.

 

[chinkangkor]

2. Chin, JBJ was loved enough by the people such that Anson repeatedly voted him in and he was only gotten rid of through legal suits. Who was to blame for the debacle for the SDP ? Its always easier to blame the PAP, but we should remember that JBJ survived many things including all the guns of the PAP and the SDP did not and that in itself is food for thought. JBJ won and built his majority despite the PAP throwing everything and the kitchen sink, the SDP did not and crumbled, I believe its better to learn from what JBJ did right then complain about PAP unfairness seeing as that unfairness is a given for the opposition in Singapore

JBJ was the first opposition to have broken PAP's monopoly in parliament. He had the chance to build up his standing by speaking out for the working class in Anson. In publicly televised parliamentary proceedings, JBJ scored many political points for his fiery debate with then prime minister Lee Kuan Yew. The more legal suits he got himself embroiled in, the more sympathies and support he got from the people.

Some of the tactics LKY used to discredit JBJ did not work well. I would say that the art to smear political opponents was experimented on JBJ and has been perfected on Chee.

No doubt the fallout with Chiam was a deadly blow to Chee and SDP. No doubt PAP took full advantage of this through its mouthpiece 154th. But should opposition not exercise its right to challenge PAP's total rule? Why should all opposition be resigned to the tilted political field without putting up a fight to try to change it?

It is this attitude of resignation held by S'poreans which does not bode well for a knowledge base, innovative economy, which requires a more questioning, inquiring mind rather than to conform blindly by faith.

 

[kakowi]

...It is this attitude of resignation held by S'poreans which does not bode well for a knowledge base, innovative economy, which requires a more questioning, inquiring mind rather than to conform blindly by faith.

There had been so much analysis.

Are the analysis meant to:

(1) prevent future mistakes or
(2) to justify current course of action?

​

I am concerned that it is to explain the failure of the past and justify the efforts of the present in the hope that they will be vindicated in the future.

And in two years' time, if they fail even more miserably, then it is the voters not having the courage of their convictions and inquiring minds. Voters therefore become a convenient scapegoat to the lack of foresight in the opposition.


Look, time is short. Even if today you decide that you need to change your strategy, two years is a very short time to show the voters that you have changed. Some will dig up the past as though it is the present. The media will not feature you 5 days a week. And you have to change the mindset forge over 10? years.

And after you manage to convince the voters to give you the benefit of the doubt, you still have to educate them on why you should be voted in.

All these in two short years!

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Chin

The opposition should challenge and yes the ground is an unlevel and an unfair one. For me the inspiration from both Anwar and JBJ is that one can win despite the odds if one is politically astute. Resigned or just practical ? Frankly the art remains in as Anwar proved , getting jailed and still remaining a political threat at the polls however unfair the playing field. I am all for the level playing field, heck every dog and his uncle are for a level playing field but should one refuse to acknowledge the possibility of winning in some way without a level playing field or should one be inspired by examples which say "frak" the level playing field and lets just beat the unfairness and win. Frankly the only road to a level playing field in my view is an ability to win despite the odds, the only alternative is mass street protest in the tens of thousands and that is as remote as me striking TOTO this weekend.

I thought you acknowledged that gerrymandering could not have played a part with regards to CCC and LHD ? Anyways the Macpherson debacle marked the start of my disappointment with Dr Chee. Why would anyone for that matter fight with a PAP candidate on prepared ground ? JBJ was smart enough to pop up in unknown places to give the PAP a fright. Chengsan and Eunos come to mind. Either a. you are dumb enough to fight on the PAP ground or b you really believed that he could have an upset to vindicate himself and his style. For whatever reason the image of his disappointment after the results were announced and him being carried out still resonate as an image in my mind.

Finally your points on Cheng San and the chinese educated ground were correct. But if I flip it around I would say that the WP did not have exclusive copyright to be the ones making that argument, all other parties could have coordinated a campaign around that them and exploited that same ground. That would be true because I believe that chinese educated ground exploited by TLH does not exist only in Chengsan. As to why it was not well I would put it down to another missed chance for opposition unity.


Locke

 

[chinkangkor]

I thought you acknowledged that gerrymandering could not have played a part with regards to CCC and LHD ? Anyways the Macpherson debacle marked the start of my disappointment with Dr Chee. Why would anyone for that matter fight with a PAP candidate on prepared ground ? JBJ was smart enough to pop up in unknown places to give the PAP a fright. Chengsan and Eunos come to mind. Either a. you are dumb enough to fight on the PAP ground or b you really believed that he could have an upset to vindicate himself and his style. For whatever reason the image of his disappointment after the results were announced and him being carried out still resonate as an image in my mind.

I believe gerrymandering was extensively employed in GE97 but acknowledged that it was not the decisive factor in the outcome of the GE97 election results generally.

If PAP had not dangled the HDB upgrading carrots, then gerrymandering might have been the tipping point in PAP's favour.

GE97 was the first time where electoral boundaries were so extensively redrawn that on the ground, it confused even the public. Nobody expected PAP to go to such length to thwart off challenges from the opposition. I guess Chee didn't expect it either. Generally, I agree to your point that it was unwise to fight your opponent in his territory.

There were a chain of letters to the press between Chee and Mathias Yao from which the challenge to 1 to 1 fight was culminated. I wonder you still remember this?

 

[cleareyes]

Cheo & Ling lost honourably to the dirty under-hand tactics of PAP, including the use of gerrymandering and direct threats issued by none other than the fearsome LKY.

all the talks about gerrymandering and direct threats issued by PAP, i see these as nothig but lame excues.

Ling and Cheo had 5 yrs to build up a foundation in the wards they had won but instead nothing was done. had they had solid foundation on a the ground, no amount of gerrymandering and direct threats issued by anyone would have removed them as the voters would still want them back.

they had their chance, they blow it and they can only blame themselves.

 

[leetahbar]

all the talks about gerrymandering and direct threats issued by PAP, i see these as nothig but lame excues.

Ling and Cheo had 5 yrs to build up a foundation in the wards they had won but instead nothing was done. had they had solid foundation on a the ground, no amount of gerrymandering and direct threats issued by anyone would have removed them as the voters would still want them back.

they had their chance, they blow it and they can only blame themselves.

blaming is the style of the opp especially preached by SDP. it's always others' faults but not theirs. their votes already telling them IT IS THEIR FAULTS and they are still in denial until today.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Chin

Yes I remember that but I see it more as Yap entrapping Dr Chee. I would hope that we can agree on two distinct types of gerrymandering. That of existing PAP enclaves in order to prevent opposition in roads where Marine Parade GRC extends all the way to S Gardens and that of already opposition held areas where piecemeal nibbling holds swat.



Locke

 

[chinkangkor]

The opposition should challenge and yes the ground is an unlevel and an unfair one. For me the inspiration from both Anwar and JBJ is that one can win despite the odds if one is politically astute. Resigned or just practical ? Frankly the art remains in as Anwar proved , getting jailed and still remaining a political threat at the polls however unfair the playing field. I am all for the level playing field, heck every dog and his uncle are for a level playing field but should one refuse to acknowledge the possibility of winning in some way without a level playing field or should one be inspired by examples which say "frak" the level playing field and lets just beat the unfairness and win. Frankly the only road to a level playing field in my view is an ability to win despite the odds, the only alternative is mass street protest in the tens of thousands and that is as remote as me striking TOTO this weekend.

To make political progress, we need the bulk of the opposition participating in the mainstream politics while a small group operating at the political fringe pushing and demanding for change. Any political gains made will benefit the whole of opposition.

The limitations of political activities and a tilted political field will restrict the growth of opposition when able men and women are deter from participating in the political process. The loss is not just confined to the opposition. The loss is to Singapore.

 

[kakowi]

There is only one problem with that analysis. The political party nibbling at the fringe is concentrated at the left. Today's opposition don't need that as they are already concentrated at the left. (I can't decide if WP is centre-left or centre-right - what is your opinion?) Thus they end up fighting in each other's territory.

In other words, the voters supporting SDP would have supported WP anyway. But the reverse will not be true.

Your statement will be correct if there is an extreme right-wing opposition political party today.

 

[kakowi]

Interestingly as I was writing this, I came to realize that there are no opposition party today that take a decidedly pro-business stand. That Singapore be made for the function of conducting business. And be fanatical about it.

If so, they would have captured the business segment and obtained for themselves a ready source of support.

Luckily for the PAP, there are no opposition party that is more pro-business than they are.

 

[chinkangkor]

Finally your points on Cheng San and the chinese educated ground were correct. But if I flip it around I would say that the WP did not have exclusive copyright to be the ones making that argument, all other parties could have coordinated a campaign around that them and exploited that same ground. That would be true because I believe that chinese educated ground exploited by TLH does not exist only in Chengsan. As to why it was not well I would put it down to another missed chance for opposition unity.

Tang Liang Hong is no ordinary man. He has gone through the tumultuous political period in the 1950s and 1960s as an active student leader. As a chinese educated, he has profound knowledge of the chinese ground and is a rare breed from a bygone era.

Before Tang joined WP in 1997, he had been in the inner circle of the political and social elites. That he managed to turn the table on PAP and made use of PAP to raise issues related to the chinese language and the marginalisation of the chinese educated speaks volume of his shrewdness in making full use of his previous social and political connections to his full advantage. Those are out of bound topics, particularly to opposition.

Tang is a talented man but also one who decided to leave the comfort of PAP co-option to join opposition which is rare, especially with LKY still around. He is hardly a political novice but a veteran well verse in politics.

No other opposition can raise the topics of chinese language and the marginalisation of the chinese educated without getting into troubles with the law.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Chin

And errr I thought there were no out of bounds topics for the opposition especially the SDP. The truth still remains that even though TLH was a better messenger for that particular deep set grievance, the grievance could have been exploited by anyone



Locke