SDP under Chee: From a well-respected opposition party to a pariah shunned by all

[cleareyes]

Jacys/darkcloud/gobuster/Wisely/cleareyes:

Your acting skills is getting from bad to worse. Wisely is not supposed to be vulgar. You should use Darkcloud instead.

LOL !!!

You are of one person usingf multiple clones, ur inconsistency had been showing, but i m sure you wont admit to that.

I have no relations with anyone here but myself and if so many is against you, have you ever wonder how far you could push through in ypour miserable lonely and hopeless life?

remember, the life of a loser is not how he loses, but how he cannot accept losing and make others lose in his place.

 

[methink]

A gangster in parliament?
U are inviting a 'free-for-all' like the Taiwanese?
Surely u must be joking!

Dun we oredi have one in our pariahment? Remember the chief gangster LKY?

Everyone real scare of this chief gangster!

 

[Himerus]

maybe like what a lot of people are saying,he is a mole planted by PAP.
out to destroy the party that was quite respectable under Chiam.

 

[Perspective]

maybe like what a lot of people are saying,he is a mole planted by PAP.
out to destroy the party that was quite respectable under Chiam.

I do not believe "planting" someone like Dr Chee fits into the PAP's scheme of things no matter how you look at it.

Personally, I hold the opinion that since after the 1997 or 2001 GE, vote share and electoral support are no longer in the scheme of things of CSJ (not necessarily the other party veterans though). The key is in the types of activities.

 

[yellow_people]

What have you done for the opposition ? You have no right to criticize WP or LTK. They have sacrificed more than you can ever imagine.
Locke

Its true that I have not done as much as the opposition. But I do not go around and make empty promises like that demagogue tongued LTK to canvass votes during rallies with no intention of making good on them. Plus you have still to highlight WP's contributions since 2006 GE. I don't expect that you will as the WP has long lost its honor and self respect.

But I can say with some assurance that LTK has not made an iota of sacrifice. If anything his alluding to CSJ as a mad dog and his comments of Singaporeans not wanted a western styled democracy is a setback to the democratic progress of this country.

And then we have Sylvia Low's comments"

Workers' Party chairman Sylvia Lim, a speaker at the symposium, distanced
herself from (CJS) him when she said Singaporeans are quite capable of deciding for themselves the kind of country they want and did not need foreigners to 'canvass our agenda for us'.

'Singapore is not perfect, and we don't pretend that it is. But neither
should we make it out to be worse than it really is,' she said, in what
seemed a rebuke to Chee.

All Singaporeans will be doing in voting in the WP will be to transfer themselves from one master to another. LTK does not believe in the founding principles of the worker's party. Since when has he uttered about the rights of citizens or freedom of speech? He is more for the style of the communist politburo, that the leaders will dictate what is best for the people.

 

[yellow_people]

Dear Avantas

Excerpt below from Yellow_People so is he one of ur clones seeing as you like jumping to his defense.

You should learn to deal with the message and not the messenger. Why take cheap shots?

 

[yellow_people]

Heard LTK earns more than S$30K a month, lives in a bungaLOW and owns a few cars. If you were him, will you have any "courage" or "conviction" ??

I don't hold LTK's fortune against him. CSJ and JBJ were all from the upper middle class who had bright futures. The only difference between them and LTK is that they were willing to make that sacrifice upon entering politics.

LTK and his WP baru are the type of opposition that the PAP love. They "fight" on bended knee.

 

[yellow_people]

Mr Lockeliberal aka Marcus Yap:

The same Marcus Yap below? These tongue-bangers are not to be trusted.

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2008/05/political-suicide-or-political-maturity/

"According to member Mr Marcus Yap, Yaw “was an unapologetic blithering idiot.” Yap was also of the view that Yaw’s political future was “dead as a coffin nail”.

"As for whether he felt that what Yaw did was right, in revealing who he voted for to the public or that he voted for the PAP candidate, Yap says, “He was an idiot confusing his personal private views with the views of a politician.”

 

[Perspective]

Its true that I have not done as much as the opposition.

I do not think it matters. Anyone is free to criticise the opposition even if he or she has not done as much as them.

But I do not go around and make empty promises like that demagogue tongued LTK to canvass votes during rallies with no intention of making good on them.

First of all, I observe an additional "_" in the handle but again, it doesn't matter. Lockeliberal should also not be seen as speaking on behalf of the WP as much as you should not be seen speaking for any party. I find it welcoming to discuss the points rather than the capacities.

Onto the point: I do not recall LTK making any promises, if you do not mind pointing out. Only the PAP has made many promises that they have broken.

Plus you have still to highlight WP's contributions since 2006 GE. I don't expect that you will as the WP has long lost its honor and self respect.

As far as I recall, which I had pointed out in the above post to you, I recall they have raised every important issue I can remember. They may have missed out some for what I think is worth.

I also understand that they have helped many poor and needy people, which was how they kept onto Hougang, as well as Anson back then. Hence, all of it did not start from GE 2006; rather it started earlier and the momentum kept constant.

But I can say with some assurance that LTK has not made an iota of sacrifice.

I beg to differ though. I believe there is no conclusive evidence that LTK became wealthier from his political office. In my view, the MP allowance is probably spent on the constituency for without that, he would not have kept his seat. I do not think the people of Potong Pasir and Hougang could put up with a standard of opposition wards that pale very badly compared to PAP wards and the gaps must have somehow been closed by these MPs using funds.

How much he has put in fares in comparison to CSJ is another matter. I can't see any limits if one were to compare the merits of two opposition leaders based on "sacrifice" alone. This is because I hold the view that CSJ definitely sacrificed less than Lim Chin Siong or Chia Thye Poh but it does not make him a neophyte compared to the two. Nor is CSJ as "brave" as suicide bombers in some countries who had died for their cause, be it a good or wrong cause.

If anything his alluding to CSJ as a mad dog and his comments of Singaporeans not wanted a western styled democracy is a setback to the democratic progress of this country.
And then we have Sylvia Low's comments"
Workers' Party chairman Sylvia Lim, a speaker at the symposium, distanced
herself from (CJS) him when she said Singaporeans are quite capable of deciding for themselves the kind of country they want and did not need foreigners to 'canvass our agenda for us'.
'Singapore is not perfect, and we don't pretend that it is. But neither
should we make it out to be worse than it really is,' she said, in what
seemed a rebuke to Chee.

I am not sure about alluding everything said by LTK and SL as insinuations against CSJ. For one, I believe CSJ certainly does not want foreigners to run this country, so how could it be reference to him?

In any case, I think isn't too far-fetched for opposition leaders to be critical of one another. CSJ has also said things that if one pulls a string could be perceived as a sting on other opposition leaders but heading what is called the SDP with a "Democratic" it in, I see it as part of the democratic process and I think he understands it too. It does not mean anyone has to be tagged with "agree with the PAP more".

Finally, I hope I may be excused for removal of some "generalising" statements.

 

[scroobal]

I do not think it matters. Anyone is free to criticise the opposition even if he or she has not done as much as them.

Don't know why you bother in the first place to engage this guy in the first place. If you read from the start, his stand is simple and shallow - remove WP/LTK. Other than that, he has no clue about politics, lines of reasoning or the alternative position.

The people of Hougang and Potong Pasir have elected opposition candidates to deny PAP seats in these wards. It obvious that they are not going to get any material benefit from LTK or Chiam. After 3 or more GEs the answer must be obvious.

No opposition parties with all the hurdles, obstacles, defamatory laws and tax audits strewn across their parth can be expected to perform well or attract people of calibre.

The constant gerrymandering, pork barrel politics, high nomination fees for candidates standing for elections, stringent proscribing laws on politicals activities tells you that the PAP does not want to concede even one single seat.

This is a chap that will cut off his nose to spite his face. One way to make progress is to ask him why he thinks that PAP is better at having Hougang than WP. Then ask him why the DNA of Hougang and PP electrorates are so different that they have repeatedly picked opposition candidates over many GEs. And lastly was it fluke on these many occasions as one pundit puts it.

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Yellow

In case you are wondering, that clone is a shit stirrer and has nothing to do with me lockeliberal with the underscore is a differing person , so please take note.



Locke

 

[lockeliberal]

Dear Yellow

My apologies as I seem to have my own fan club in the same manner that LV has fakes.
:_))). I hope you will address the points I raised in my previous post about whether it is advisable for the opposition to claim something they are manifestly incapable of.





Locke

 

[Perspective]

Don't know why you bother in the first place to engage this guy in the first place. If you read from the start, his stand is simple and shallow - remove WP/LTK. Other than that, he has no clue about politics, lines of reasoning or the alternative position.

The people of Hougang and Potong Pasir have elected opposition candidates to deny PAP seats in these wards. It obvious that they are not going to get any material benefit from LTK or Chiam. After 3 or more GEs the answer must be obvious.

No opposition parties with all the hurdles, obstacles, defamatory laws and tax audits strewn across their parth can be expected to perform well or attract people of calibre.

The constant gerrymandering, pork barrel politics, high nomination fees for candidates standing for elections, stringent proscribing laws on politicals activities tells you that the PAP does not want to concede even one single seat.

This is a chap that will cut off his nose to spite his face. One way to make progress is to ask him why he thinks that PAP is better at having Hougang than WP. Then ask him why the DNA of Hougang and PP electrorates are so different that they have repeatedly picked opposition candidates over many GEs. And lastly was it fluke on these many occasions as one pundit puts it.

It was to enter a discussion as such with an open mind, as well as to have my long-standing beliefs challenged.

I believe in the SDP's case, they need to win over more pro-opposition supporters who are not with them. As much as I sense the author views them with disdain, I hope the SDP does not take the same position. Ultimately, unless it wants to stick to a small pool, it needs even to win over the pro-PAP someday.

At this point of time, I do not see the expressed positions helpful to their cause if their supporters adopt it. Personally, for me, it hasn't shaken my beliefs.

I think the position is that he would rather want pure PAP dominance, which makes the SDP's work of discrediting it easier, rather than having very few opposition MPs. I am not putting words in his mouth but rather, this is based on my understanding of what has been expressed this far.

Seriously, I am not convinced at this point. Singapore has been equally blasted for having weak opposition representation in Parliament, be it zero or 2 seats. I believe that until Singapore has at least 2 GRCs gone to the opposition, it will continue to be seen as a one-party dominant state.

In my view, this position is intended to be more SDP-centric, since it is one of the major parties without a seat. The SDP leader is often compared to and painted as paled in comparison to the opposition leaders in Parliament. I am unsure of how the position will change if the party wins its first seat.

In a way, it is true that 2 opposition MPs or even a GRC (5 or 6) of opposition cannot vote down the PAP. The magic number is 29 seats. However, to get to 29 requires the opposition to start from 1 or 2. The problem right now is that the voters do not seem to want to increase this number.

 

[kakowi]

... The problem right now is that the voters do not seem to want to increase this number.

(1) In my opinion, it is more accurate to phrase it as "for some reason, the number of opposition MPs do not increase".

This leaves it open as to whether the fault lies in the voters, the opposition MPs themselves or the PAP's actions.

I guess the attention is focused upon LTK (WP) because it is the only viable major party in singapore.

As that leader, if he is not effective in organizing a strategy to combat the PAP's dominance, then there is no effective opposition at all.
​

(2) I want to concentrate on one aspect here in my post:

"Is it beneficial for the PAP to keep LTK on as an opposition MP?"​

(3) It is best to appeal to facts:

2006: Voters: 23,759; LTK 62.7%; PAP 37.3%; spoilt votes 1.2%
2001: Voters: 23,320; LTK 55.0%; PAP 45.0%; spoilt votes 1.3%
1997: Voters: 24,423; LTK 58.0%; PAP 42.0%; spoilt votes 1.3%
1991: Voters: 21,476; LTK 52.8%; PAP 47.2%; spoilt votes 2.2%

You can see that the number of voters is fairly constant from 1997-2006. The PAP, if it so wishes, may be able to influence the composition of an electoral population. In LTK's case, the PAP kept it constant.

The percentage of spoilt votes is secondary evidence that the PAP wants the voters' composition to be constant during that period.

The 1997 and 2001 elections shows that the PAP increases their voting percentages. It is only another 5% points before they claim their seat. Yet in 2006, the PAP percentage dropped!

Either LTK generate more approval from the voters or the PAP deliberately decide not to risk getting the extra 5% points by putting in a lesser candidate.

They want LTK to win.

​

(4) Such a hypothesis will not go down well with WP supporters and a delight to anti-WP supporters. But there is only one effective but subjective way to answer that question. And that is to answer for yourself:

"How much of a thorn is LTK in the PAP's flesh?"​

​

(5) Regardless of the answer, my stand is and always: the difference can only come about if the opposition view each other in the sense of a brotherhood (or sisterhood) and support each other....actively

For that to happen, they need to address each other's grievances privately and present to the public a coherent voice.​

Until they do that, there will always be a question mark as to whether their overall failure in the General Elections are due to the voters or the PAP or themselves.[/SIZE]​

 

[Perspective]

(1) In my opinion, it is more accurate to phrase it as "for some reason, the number of opposition MPs do not increase".
This leaves it open as to whether the fault lies in the voters, the opposition MPs themselves or the PAP's actions.

Your correction is accepted but I think it would be helpful if the people realises they are collectively the biggest "force". Never mind the politicians. The Taiwanese understands it. This is why a comedy programme was started called "Quan Min Zui Da Dang" where politicians and celebrities are lampooned.

I guess the attention is focused upon LTK (WP) because it is the only viable major party in singapore.
As that leader, if he is not effective in organizing a strategy to combat the PAP's dominance, then there is no effective opposition at all.

I do not think LTK is the only opposition leader. There are several opposition leaders in Singapore at the moment and anyone of them can do better if they were indeed better. To me, one seat plus a few more members in his party makes nothing.

(2) I want to concentrate on one aspect here in my post: "Is it beneficial for the PAP to keep LTK on as an opposition MP?"

Personally, I do not care about the one or 2 opposition seats. I am more interested to know if LTK and the rest of the opposition leadership is only interested in the present status or otherwise.

As far as I see it, the WP and the SDA each fielded 20 candidates while the SDP placed 7. None were interested in just seeing 2 candidates fielded only in PP and HG. This means all 6 opposition parties (4 in SDA) are trying.

You can see that the number of voters is fairly constant from 1997-2006. The PAP, if it so wishes, can change the composition of an electoral population. In LTK's case, the PAP kept it constant.
The percentage of spoilt votes is secondary evidence that the PAP wants the voters' composition to be constant during that period.

I am not sure how the PAP can control the level of votes (although this is not opposed to trying to garner support). If the PAP could decide the result at a snap of the fingers, no one who supports the opposition should even be talking about elections at all.

"How much of a thorn is LTK in the PAP's flesh?"

I do not know how anyone could answer such a question logically, even if you were to replace "LTK" with another name. In the first place, I can safely say that the PAP has no "flesh". It is all iron and it depends on chipping off the iron.

Regardless of the answer, my stand is and always: the difference can only come about if the opposition view each other in the sense of a brotherhood (or sisterhood) and support each other....actively
For that to happen, they need to address each other's grievances privately and present to the public a coherent voice.
Until they do that, there will always be a question mark as to whether their overall failure in the General Elections are due to the voters or the PAP or themselves.

Ideally, yes. However, if you ask me, that is water under the bridge. In my view, the foremost criteria for a strong opposition to emerge is the people's support and doing something about the support. And no, I do not think opposition unity automatically means 10,000 will sign up as party members the next day.

By the way, what happened to your blog?

 

[leetahbar]

if everyone in sdp could listen quietly to someone, then no one in their party would have to face their present miseries n predicament.

 

[kakowi]

It's nice to receive a witty response

Three points of view:

(1) control of votes?

a friend of mine told me that there are ways of gauging political support whilst keeping votes secret

my own guess is that if the PAP really wants to win back that estate, they could have thrown in their full weight as in Cheng San - with promises of Punggol 81, MRT, heavy political weights coming in and 'professional evaluations';

another guess would be the demographic composition; 1% translate to 230 votes and 5% will be 1050, approximately 4 HDB blocks. For example, there are about 4 to 5 blocks of executive flats just across Upper Serangoon Road and Hougang Central which they can co-opt into the estate and let go of more flats within that estate to get the voting population to 1991 levels; there are also a number of HUDC flats which can be co-opted. although unlike executive flats i am not that sure of the support from the HUDC side. Nonetheless a promise to help them increase their flat value will go a long way

another effort at dilution could be in the area of encouraging non-chinese into the estate by giving incentives and using racial harmony as a reason; or by encouraging newly minted citizens to stay there

the PAP does not appear to do any of these; in fact some of the Cheng San flats appear to be allocated to Aljunid GRC
​

(2) thorn in the flesh?

This is an important aspect. Even if the PAP actually has a hide of iron, there are empirical evidence to believe that the PAP 'feared' some opposition leaders more than others.

Against such leaders, very strong and successful efforts had been made.
​

(3) other opposition leaders?

Doubtless there are, given that there are myraid parties here.

Somehow in my mind, i had always viewed the WP as a highly viable party (perhaps because of JBJ) and especially today, given that SDP is unlikely to be viable.

Nonetheless, there are indeed potential leaders in TKL, GMS, Ejay (i hope that there will be less character assassination of him) and others i missed out due to ignorance.
​

 

[Perspective]

my own guess is that if the PAP really wants to win back that estate, they could have thrown in their full weight as in Cheng San - with promises of Punggol 81, MRT, heavy political weights coming in and 'professional evaluations';

$100 million was dangled as a carrot for voters of Hougang and Potong Pasir in the 2006 GE. I believe many people do not realise how large the sum is for two mere single wards of 15,000 voters each. Based on Punggol 21 as a gauge where about $950 million was allocated, this carrot is estimatedly about half-per-voter of what was offered to Punggol 21 (Punggol GRC has about 170,000 voters).

Many probably think that throwing in a cabinet minister automatically means victory. Personally, I do not think it is necessarily the case. Conversely, a minister is usually weaker on the ground because he is usually an upper-class technocrat. That is one of the reasons why the PAP came up with the GRC in the first place.

another guess would be the demographic composition; 1% translate to 230 votes and 5% will be 1050, approximately 4 HDB blocks. For example, there are about 4 to 5 blocks of executive flats just across Upper Serangoon Road and Hougang Central which they can co-opt into the estate and let go of more flats within that estate to get the voting population to 1991 levels; there are also a number of HUDC flats which can be co-opted. although unlike executive flats i am not that sure of the support from the HUDC side. Nonetheless a promise to help them increase their flat value will go a long way
another effort at dilution could be in the area of encouraging non-chinese into the estate by giving incentives and using racial harmony as a reason; or by encouraging newly minted citizens to stay there the PAP does not appear to do any of these; in fact some of the Cheng San flats appear to be allocated to Aljunid GRC

Many may not know that the boundaries of Potong Pasir and Hougang have actually shifted and are not the exact same since they were demarcated in 1984 and 1991 respectively. The recent block clearance in Hougang was also perceived to be for the purpose of diminishing support for the WP leader.

At the same time, the PAP needs to pay attention to the possibility of other PAP wards being be lost if they have too much portions carved into opposition wards.

thorn in the flesh? This is an important aspect. Even if the PAP actually has a hide of iron, there are empirical evidence to believe that the PAP 'feared' some opposition leaders more than others. Against such leaders, very strong and successful efforts had been made.

I am pretty sure there will be differences between every opposition personality in terms of the PAP's perception. However, the "empirical evidence" does not suggest the magnitude of difference because different opposition personalities and parties use different strategies and are tackled by the PAP in different ways.

The state apparatus is employed on some opposition leaders but this may not reflect the effects at the polls. According to some, the PAP shows "deference" to others but this runs a real risk for the PAP when the parties these leaders lead give the PAP a more aggressive run for their money by losing by a mere narrow margin (which is important for wards like AMK where the PM is not expected to lose) or winning. Unlike what the PAP said, Aljunied GRC saw the fastest lift upgrades despite the narrow margins it gave the PAP election after election.

Who is the single man the PAP fears more? For now, I do not have an answer, not even a guess, to that question. It could have been not even any of the opposition leaders but within themselves, such as Toh Chin Chye or Ong Teng Cheong.

 

[guavatree]

if everyone in sdp could listen quietly to someone, then no one in their party would have to face their present miseries n predicament

pondan PAP dog

whatever ... it is no concern of yours!

 

[kakowi]

Thanks for your points Perspective...they are very enlightening