On voting for opposition

[char_jig_kar]

Thats was well expressed and poignant. One would have thought hindsight on Barisan and 18 years of no opposition would have helped.

put it this way.

though PAP had extensively tweaked the system, seriously in favor of them PAP, u find no qualm for the Opposition to carry on participating in the GE?

 

[scroobal]

put it this way.

though PAP had extensively tweaked the system, seriously in favor of them PAP, u find no qualm for the Opposition to carry on participating in the GE?

You have in the post prior to this expressed that you are unable to seek the link. This is exactly what the PAP realised very early in the game that not many people are smart enough to figure it out.

No point losing sleep over it and suggest that you do what you are comfortable with. Like Barisan, people will credit you with passion and like Barisan outwitting itself, yours is very much similar.

 

[char_jig_kar]

You have in the post prior to this expressed that you are unable to seek the link. This is exactly what the PAP realised very early in the game that not many people are smart enough to figure it out.

No point losing sleep over it and suggest that you do what you are comfortable with. Like Barisan, people will credit you with passion and like Barisan outwitting itself, yours is very much similar.

i had pointed out to him, voting YSL would not push the PAP go liberalize the system. there's no motivation for PAP to do liberalize the system just because some PAP apologist get voted into the parliament. u wanna help him out with that?

 

[scroobal]

i had pointed out to him, voting YSL would not push the PAP go liberalize the system. there's no motivation for PAP to do liberalize the system just because some PAP apologist get voted into the parliament. u wanna help him out with that?

Similar argument used by Barisan.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Scroobal

Chap is from the black and white camp or the We must vote the PAP out of power for real change and real reform school of politics. Some of us understand shades of grey such that we can see that change or some change can happen even if the PAP does not lose power but loses a GRC. some of us have stopped fantasizing about removing the PAP from power and seeing signs in the Merlion being hit by lightning, some of us just believe that change will come but it will come one grc at a time, one walk about at a time, one handshake at a time, one sold opposition news letter at a time, others just want the edifice to collapse by ranting and raving and indulging in pointless rhetoric


Locke

 

[leetahbar]

Dear Scroobal

Chap is from the black and white camp or the We must vote the PAP out of power for real change and real reform school of politics. Some of us understand shades of grey such that we can see that change or some change can happen even if the PAP does not lose power but loses a GRC. some of us have stopped fantasizing about removing the PAP from power and seeing signs in the Merlion being hit by lightning, some of us just believe that change will come but it will come one grc at a time, one walk about at a time, one handshake at a time, one sold opposition news letter at a time, others just want the edifice to collapse by ranting and raving and indulging in pointless rhetoric


Locke

locke,

just simply yell:

OUT WITH CHEEISM....DEATH TO THE CHEENIES!!:p

 

[DrPanacea]

Good point, choice is not an option at this stage. Reducing the PAP monopoly is the first and only priority.

Totally agree with you. We now need MORE opposition MPs in Parliament to reduce the PAP monopoly. We do not have the luxury of choice at this point in time. First step is to get the opposition numbers in. I have made up my mind to vote any monkey in as long as it doesn't belong to PAP, if I get a chance to vote again. As for the fence sitter, if you want to see change it is time to to do so.

 

[char_jig_kar]

Dear Scroobal

Chap is from the black and white camp or the We must vote the PAP out of power for real change and real reform school of politics. Some of us understand shades of grey such that we can see that change or some change can happen even if the PAP does not lose power but loses a GRC. some of us have stopped fantasizing about removing the PAP from power and seeing signs in the Merlion being hit by lightning, some of us just believe that change will come but it will come one grc at a time, one walk about at a time, one handshake at a time, one sold opposition news letter at a time, others just want the edifice to collapse by ranting and raving and indulging in pointless rhetoric


Locke

it is not pointless. if the GE is set up in a way, seriously tilted in favor to the PAP, then simply just boycott the GE. thats not pointless rhetoric. thats common sense. no?

in real life, would u carry on participate in a chess game, forking out 100 dollar in a game, whereby your opponent took out your knights, bishops, the queen, and 5 pawns before the game start?? and end of the game, he took your 100 dollars if u lose? would u play? so why is it different for the GE then?? please tell.

 

[Sideswipe]

Totally agree with you. We now need MORE opposition MPs in Parliament to reduce the PAP monopoly. We do not have the luxury of choice at this point in time. First step is to get the opposition numbers in. I have made up my mind to vote any monkey in as long as it doesn't belong to PAP, if I get a chance to vote again. As for the fence sitter, if you want to see change it is time to to do so.

Exactly, any oppositions in parliament is better than nothing. This included Chee Soon Juan, YSL, Steve Chia - peoples with flaws but their intentions are clear - to check and examine the PAP govt.

Don't count on the NMPs, they shouldn't be in parliament in the first place. Those NMP should fight elections and enter parliament through the peasants mandate. You want to speak for the peasants then go and get your mandate through the ballot boxes. ( There's still 9 SMC left )

I respect those 3,4 times opposition candidates losers more than the NCMPs. They fought in every election, lose but come back to win the peasants votes again. I hope their perseverance pay off one day.

There might be PAP MPs who are critical of govt polices, doing what a opposition should do but when the Party whip is enforced, he will only vote by party decision.

Everyone favorite president Ong Teng Cheong. I think he probably voted in support for that farce of a GRC election act in the 1980s

 

[cleareyes]

it is not pointless. if the GE is set up in a way, seriously tilted in favor to the PAP, then simply just boycott the GE. thats not pointless rhetoric. thats common sense. no?

in real life, would u carry on participate in a chess game, forking out 100 dollar in a game, whereby your opponent took out your knights, bishops, the queen, and 5 pawns before the game start?? and end of the game, he took your 100 dollars if u lose? would u play? so why is it different for the GE then?? please tell.

Politics is not a simple chess game, its a game of whwre once you played, either you stick to it or you get out and never get back in again.

So you want the opposition to boycott the coming GE, then after that;
is there changes in anything?
will the opposition gain anything?
will PAP lose power after the boycott?

you put up an example of a chess game that shows unreasonable character, yet politics in reality has its reasons and only those who are defeatist would come up with such negative thoughts. Yet your thoughts favour PAP more and more.

It makes me wonder, were you send by PAP to plant such negative thinking?

 

[cleareyes]

Exactly, any oppositions in parliament is better than nothing. This included Chee Soon Juan, YSL, Steve Chia - peoples with flaws but their intentions are clear - to check and examine the PAP govt.

what we need now are numbers and its only through numbers that we could gather strength as well as make changes. Flaws culd be altered and changed later through various of ways but with no numbers, there is no change for us to even talk about.

 

[jw5]

Totally agree with you. We now need MORE opposition MPs in Parliament to reduce the PAP monopoly. We do not have the luxury of choice at this point in time. First step is to get the opposition numbers in. I have made up my mind to vote any monkey in as long as it doesn't belong to PAP, if I get a chance to vote again. As for the fence sitter, if you want to see change it is time to to do so.

The purpose for wanting more opposition mps is for the government to be more accountable and transparent.
The same reasoning would apply if the pap became the opposition.

 

[char_jig_kar]

Politics is not a simple chess game, its a game of whwre once you played, either you stick to it or you get out and never get back in again.

So you want the opposition to boycott the coming GE, then after that;
is there changes in anything?
will the opposition gain anything?
will PAP lose power after the boycott?

you put up an example of a chess game that shows unreasonable character, yet politics in reality has its reasons and only those who are defeatist would come up with such negative thoughts. Yet your thoughts favour PAP more and more.

It makes me wonder, were you send by PAP to plant such negative thinking?

no need for your lengthy hollow rhetoric message.

the system had been tweaked seriously in favor of the PAP for the GE. do u agree with that? if u agree, then why do u still support the Opposition to go participate in the GE??

 

[yellow_people]

Totally agree with you. We now need MORE opposition MPs in Parliament to reduce the PAP monopoly. We do not have the luxury of choice at this point in time. First step is to get the opposition numbers in. I have made up my mind to vote any monkey in as long as it doesn't belong to PAP, if I get a chance to vote again. As for the fence sitter, if you want to see change it is time to to do so.

This is how we ended up with the PAP in the first place. Vote for anything that remotely smacks opposition - as long as it stood on its hind legs and wore a big sign around its neck that says "opposition".

In 1955, PAP was an opposition party and LKY was an opposition leader in the Legislative Assembly.

Here are some of his famous quotes back then from 1955 to 1959. Sound familiar?

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Lee_Kuan_Yew

* "But we either believe in democracy or we not. If we do, then, we must say categorically, without qualification, that no restraint from the any democratic processes, other than by the ordinary law of the land, should be allowed... If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought, and no excuse, whether of security, should allow a government to be deterred from doing what it knows to be right, and what it must know to be right... " - Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates, April 27, 1955

 

[Hakka Tiow]

no need for your lengthy hollow rhetoric message. the system had been tweaked seriously in favor of the PAP for the GE. do u agree with that? if u agree, then why do u still support the Opposition to go participate in the GE??

The echoes are deafening!