- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
<TABLE id=msgUN border=0 cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD id=msgUNsubj vAlign=top>
Coffeeshop Chit Chat - That's why we can't have 1 party only</TD><TD id=msgunetc noWrap align=right>
Subscribe </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=msgtable cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="96%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msg vAlign=top><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgbfr1 width="1%"> </TD><TD><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead vAlign=top><TD class=msgF width="1%" noWrap align=right>From: </TD><TD class=msgFname width="68%" noWrap>CPL (kojakbt22) <NOBR>
</NOBR> </TD><TD class=msgDate width="30%" noWrap align=right>7:06 pm </TD></TR><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgT height=20 width="1%" noWrap align=right>To: </TD><TD class=msgTname width="68%" noWrap>ALL <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgNum noWrap align=right> (1 of 2) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgleft rowSpan=4 width="1%"> </TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>25655.1 </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgtxt>This is the reason why we cannot just have a 1 party system. With 2 parties, they will challenge each other and work towards getting votes (ie, getting approvals from voters).
In this way, both parties will work for the people. Right now in SG, we are working for PAP and Lee Family....
________________________________________________________________
Dec 11, 2009
Taiwan's DPP back in the fight
KMT's losses at local polls a warning to party not to be complacent
<!-- by line -->By Goh Sui Noi, Senior Writer
DEFEAT was written on Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou's lined, haggard and grim face on election night last Sa-turday.
'The results were not ideal...We have been sent an alarm signal, and we will thoroughly reflect on our policies,' he said late that evening at a press conference.
It was just local elections - for the commissioners and mayors of 17 counties and cities, as well as for councillors. But senior politicians from both the ruling and opposition parties had sought to raise the stakes by bringing broader national issues into the campaign.
The election results would therefore have wider implications than might have been the case.
On the surface, the ruling Kuomintang (KMT) did not do too badly. It won 12 of the 17 counties and cities at stake, just two short of the 14 it won in 2005.
Of the two seats that were lost, one was to an independent who had quit the KMT after he failed to secure his party's nomination because of ongoing court cases against him. The other was to the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which managed to secure only four seats in total, one more than in the previous polls.
However, the vote count painted a grimmer picture for the KMT. It was able to garner only 47.9per cent of the votes cast, a drop of two percentage points from 2005. On the other hand, the DPP's share of the votes spiked 7.2 percentage points to 45.3per cent, closing the gap between the two parties to just 2.6 percentage points.
It is worth noting that the voters this time made up only 40per cent of all the eligible Taiwanese voters and lived mainly in rural or backwater regions of the island. Still, the results should serve as a warning to the KMT not to be too complacent about its hold on power.
The DPP sought to turn the polls into a no-confidence vote in Mr Ma and his government for their perceived incompetence and arrogance. There was much fodder here. Taiwanese are unhappy with what they see as the government's inadequate handling of the global economic crisis. Its slow response to the devastating Typhoon Morakot that killed more than 600 people in August also caused a dip in the President's approval ratings.
More recently, a lack of consultation before the government decided to lift a ban on the import of American beef because of mad cow disease led to accusations of 'bureaucratic hubris'.
The opposition also made Mr Ma's cross-strait policy an election issue, accusing him of moving too quickly to improve ties with the mainland and doing too little to assuage worries of Taiwanese over what a proposed cross-strait economic cooperation pact would do to their livelihoods.
While it is unclear how much these issues figured in the voting, the DPP has moved quickly to play them up in the aftermath of the polls.
On Monday, DPP international affairs chief Hsiao Bi-khim attributed the KMT's poor performance to voters' dissatisfaction with Mr Ma's incompetence and arrogance, and the failure of his government to listen to the public, particularly on his policy towards China.
On Tuesday, DPP chairman Tsai Ing-wen pointed out that the government had failed to convince the people of the benefits of the cross-strait economic pact and cited a study which said 1.6 million agricultural jobs might be lost if a pact were to be signed.
With the DPP of the view that playing up the cross-strait policy had helped its election campaign, it is certain to continue to oppose the pact vehemently. This is bad news for Mr Ma, whose hand has been weakened by his party's performance at the polls.
He has said that he will not veer from his cross-strait policy. But his government must do more to explain to the people both the costs and the benefits of the economic pact - perceived by many to benefit only large corporations.
Farmers and small businessmen are especially worried about competition from Chinese farms and other cheap products. The government must tell them what it will do to mitigate the negative impact.
The DPP under the stewardship of Ms Tsai has emerged from the shadow of last year's presidential election defeat and the corruption scandal surrounding former party leader and president Chen Shui-bian.
Her moderate approach to the polls - avoiding extreme language and overplaying Taiwan's tragic history - has paid dividends. The same approach to rebuilding the party has also succeeded in pulling it together. It remains to be seen how she will build on the new momentum.
By contrast, the KMT has shown little unity in the run-up to the polls.
After the polls, there were dissenting voices, with some criticising Mr Ma for failing to admit defeat and apologise for it. It remains to be seen whether he has the will to continue with reforms to clean up and rejuvenate the ossified party.
The results of this year's local elections have also raised the stakes for the polls at the end of next year in five municipalities involving 60per cent of the population, living mainly in major urban centres.
Those would be the elections to watch for indications of how the presidential election in 2012 will go.
[email protected]
</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msgleft width="1%"> </TD><TD class=msgopt width="24%" noWrap>
Options</TD><TD class=msgrde width="50%" noWrap align=middle> 
Reply</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
In this way, both parties will work for the people. Right now in SG, we are working for PAP and Lee Family....
________________________________________________________________
Dec 11, 2009
Taiwan's DPP back in the fight
KMT's losses at local polls a warning to party not to be complacent
<!-- by line -->By Goh Sui Noi, Senior Writer
DEFEAT was written on Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou's lined, haggard and grim face on election night last Sa-turday.
'The results were not ideal...We have been sent an alarm signal, and we will thoroughly reflect on our policies,' he said late that evening at a press conference.
It was just local elections - for the commissioners and mayors of 17 counties and cities, as well as for councillors. But senior politicians from both the ruling and opposition parties had sought to raise the stakes by bringing broader national issues into the campaign.
The election results would therefore have wider implications than might have been the case.
On the surface, the ruling Kuomintang (KMT) did not do too badly. It won 12 of the 17 counties and cities at stake, just two short of the 14 it won in 2005.
Of the two seats that were lost, one was to an independent who had quit the KMT after he failed to secure his party's nomination because of ongoing court cases against him. The other was to the opposition Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which managed to secure only four seats in total, one more than in the previous polls.
However, the vote count painted a grimmer picture for the KMT. It was able to garner only 47.9per cent of the votes cast, a drop of two percentage points from 2005. On the other hand, the DPP's share of the votes spiked 7.2 percentage points to 45.3per cent, closing the gap between the two parties to just 2.6 percentage points.
It is worth noting that the voters this time made up only 40per cent of all the eligible Taiwanese voters and lived mainly in rural or backwater regions of the island. Still, the results should serve as a warning to the KMT not to be too complacent about its hold on power.
The DPP sought to turn the polls into a no-confidence vote in Mr Ma and his government for their perceived incompetence and arrogance. There was much fodder here. Taiwanese are unhappy with what they see as the government's inadequate handling of the global economic crisis. Its slow response to the devastating Typhoon Morakot that killed more than 600 people in August also caused a dip in the President's approval ratings.
More recently, a lack of consultation before the government decided to lift a ban on the import of American beef because of mad cow disease led to accusations of 'bureaucratic hubris'.
The opposition also made Mr Ma's cross-strait policy an election issue, accusing him of moving too quickly to improve ties with the mainland and doing too little to assuage worries of Taiwanese over what a proposed cross-strait economic cooperation pact would do to their livelihoods.
While it is unclear how much these issues figured in the voting, the DPP has moved quickly to play them up in the aftermath of the polls.
On Monday, DPP international affairs chief Hsiao Bi-khim attributed the KMT's poor performance to voters' dissatisfaction with Mr Ma's incompetence and arrogance, and the failure of his government to listen to the public, particularly on his policy towards China.
On Tuesday, DPP chairman Tsai Ing-wen pointed out that the government had failed to convince the people of the benefits of the cross-strait economic pact and cited a study which said 1.6 million agricultural jobs might be lost if a pact were to be signed.
With the DPP of the view that playing up the cross-strait policy had helped its election campaign, it is certain to continue to oppose the pact vehemently. This is bad news for Mr Ma, whose hand has been weakened by his party's performance at the polls.
He has said that he will not veer from his cross-strait policy. But his government must do more to explain to the people both the costs and the benefits of the economic pact - perceived by many to benefit only large corporations.
Farmers and small businessmen are especially worried about competition from Chinese farms and other cheap products. The government must tell them what it will do to mitigate the negative impact.
The DPP under the stewardship of Ms Tsai has emerged from the shadow of last year's presidential election defeat and the corruption scandal surrounding former party leader and president Chen Shui-bian.
Her moderate approach to the polls - avoiding extreme language and overplaying Taiwan's tragic history - has paid dividends. The same approach to rebuilding the party has also succeeded in pulling it together. It remains to be seen how she will build on the new momentum.
By contrast, the KMT has shown little unity in the run-up to the polls.
After the polls, there were dissenting voices, with some criticising Mr Ma for failing to admit defeat and apologise for it. It remains to be seen whether he has the will to continue with reforms to clean up and rejuvenate the ossified party.
The results of this year's local elections have also raised the stakes for the polls at the end of next year in five municipalities involving 60per cent of the population, living mainly in major urban centres.
Those would be the elections to watch for indications of how the presidential election in 2012 will go.
[email protected]
</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msgleft width="1%"> </TD><TD class=msgopt width="24%" noWrap>
