Let the opposition do it then
-
Originally posted by novelltie:
er... angel7030... sorry to break the news to you but MM Lee loves dogs... to be very honest with you, i mean frankly and i do not mean jokingly my grandpa used to deliver beef for the two dogs he kept during the early 80s'.
my grandpa used to work as a shop assistant that sells beef and he was always asked by the boss to deliver the beef everyday.
i dun mean the real dog lah, i mean those human who likes to act like a dog!!!!! walau, how come so stupid one leh -
Originally posted by reyes:
well, ppl like steve chia are good candidates but what had we do to support him. he dare to question and fight for the ppl. in the end he got tired and got out.
if we need opposition PM, it has to start by giving them the chance to serve. can a PM candidate pop out of nowwhere and u demand him to have the credentials?
we first have to start support good candidates like slyvia or jeya son la. judge him only when they start to serve. if they are not in parliament to voice out, how can we say they are not doing anything right?
I believe LKY had visited some of them. Let see how it goes. -
Originally posted by novelltie:
er... angel7030... sorry to break the news to you but MM Lee loves dogs... to be very honest with you, i mean frankly and i do not mean jokingly my grandpa used to deliver beef for the two dogs he kept during the early 80s'.
my grandpa used to work as a shop assistant that sells beef and he was always asked by the boss to deliver the beef everyday.
okie...so u saying ur grandpa used to deliver beef to MM Lee'dogs...and u willing to be a good doggy and eat the beef...omg..pathetic -
Originally posted by reyes:
well, ppl like steve chia are good candidates but what had we do to support him. he dare to question and fight for the ppl. in the end he got tired and got out.
if we need opposition PM, it has to start by giving them the chance to serve. can a PM candidate pop out of nowwhere and u demand him to have the credentials?
we first have to start support good candidates like slyvia or jeya son la. judge him only when they start to serve. if they are not in parliament to voice out, how can we say they are not doing anything right?
they do not need to be in parliament to serve the people...
all they need to do is to actually serve the people.. listen to their problems, give voice to them by taking the current MPs to task, asking the necessary questions, getting together people from their party to help out in places like the old folks corners, counselling for the wayward youth...
the simple grassroots movements which is not to be mistaken for the BS which is done by the PA or the MIW...
from there, you earn the trust of the people..
from there, the people will see that you are earnest in serving them..
from there, you start...
it is not easy.. but nothing worth doing is usually easy...
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
they do not need to be in parliament to serve the people...
all they need to do is to actually serve the people.. listen to their problems, give voice to them by taking the current MPs to task, asking the necessary questions, getting together people from their party to help out in places like the old folks corners, counselling for the wayward youth...
the simple grassroots movements which is not to be mistaken for the BS which is done by the PA or the MIW...
from there, you earn the trust of the people..
from there, the people will see that you are earnest in serving them..
from there, you start...
it is not easy.. but nothing worth doing is usually easy...
beside all the above criterias and characters, an opposition candidate who wants to champion himself/herself,must also be
1. willing to face defamation charges
2. willing to go bankrupt
3. willing to live in jail condition
4. Thick skin
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
sori, LKY hates dogDon't worry he likes prostitutes like you very much
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
i dun mean the real dog lah, i mean those human who likes to act like a dog!!!!! walau, how come so stupid one lehhe is not stupid lah. You are the 1 that is stupid and so he have to act stupid also when he is talking to u
-
We need opposition MP with real legitimatie issues, as opposed to an opposition MP that tries to please everyone in order to gain votes.
If you are going to oppose the PAP on every single thing because they are the PAP, then you don't deserve to be elected.
-
Originally posted by ray245:
We need opposition MP with real legitimatie issues, as opposed to an opposition MP that tries to please everyone in order to gain votes.
If you are going to oppose the PAP on every single thing because they are the PAP, then you don't deserve to be elected.
As opposition, behave like one, be a gentleman or lady, argue on what is suppose to argue, fight on what is suppose to be unfair, win or loose is not the matter, the public understand that opposition are underdogs, a win for them will be something very special. Therefore the public is not looking at opposition fighting or argueing to win, but we look for the caring part, he/she should at least make an effort to say something that make reasonable news that delight the public sentiment. Swearing and cursing only make matter worst for opposition to operate here. -
Originally posted by the Bear:
unfortunately, andyboy forgot the basic tenants of what he barks about: a mandate from the people...
(and i'm not talking about the PM's Man Date which is his husband.. kinda apt seeing the PM's husband runs the show there
)thing is, the people seem to trust the opposition less than the MIW..
now andyboy, if you walk your talk, the first thing to do is to earn the trust of the people.. and the way to earn the trust of the people is by doing the right things... and not barking and bleating the same tired BS which most of the opposition idiots do..
it is hard.. and it'll take time... but isn't that how trust is built?
"thing is, the people seem to trust the opposition less than the MIW.. "
In the last Election 2006, out of a population of 3.5 Million Singaporeans, only 2,147,840 are on the Electoral Roll as registered voters.
From this 2,147,840 voters, only 1,123,273 had the opportunity to cast their votes while the remaining 1,024,567 Singaporeans were sitting at home without the opportunity to vote.
From the 1,123,273 that cast their votes, the PAP managed only to obtain 748,130 votes - which is only 34.83% of the registered voters of 2,147,840 Singaporeans; while the Alternative Parties managed 375,143 votes that came to about 17.47% of the registered voters.
With the other 1,024,567 Singaporeans not participating - can anyone be as certain as you that Singaporeans "trust the oppostion less than the MIW" ?
With only 17.47% of the total votes, the Alternative Parties were able to get two candidates into Parliament, and considering that even the LHL had a shock when 45% of the AMK GRC had cast their votes to the young new faces offered by WP.
This seems to be a far cry from the dramatic claim that do not reflect the reality on the ground, which has so many impediments purposefully placed to block the Alternative Parties from a successful outreach to the Singaporean electorate.
The Drama Queen of this Speaker's Corner needs a reality check with its purposeful myopic line taken to attack the Alternative Parties.
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
$*&#^ lah...if you have already forgotten, CSJ stuck one in CST to take over the SDP...
now.. think.. CST was grooming CSJ for leadership of the SDP... CSJ could not wait and then threw CST out of the very party which he founded... and then with that masterstroke of stupidity, he destroyed the whole opposition movement and lost all credibility with the people who witnessed the whole sordid and shameless backstabbing...
we, the people who give a damn, the people who witnessed the treachery and deceit, can never ever bring ourselves to trust CSJ ever again...
hell! open your eyes! the people in the SDP don't even trust CSJ anymore with people like Ling "Don't Talk Cock!" How Doong and his other cronies who helped him oust CST quietly abandoning him...
so, CSJ to take over CST's mantle?
tell it to the marines...
The infamous ‘Drama Queen’(*1) never fail to seize the opportunity to plant another lie to injure CSJ or the SDP despite the consistent facts that has been placed in public.
Did CSJ stuck one behind CST's back ?
Was CST grooming CSJ for leadership of the SDP, or was it the Chairman of the SDP - Ling Howe Doong - insisting on new blood to be groomed in view of the lacklustre performance of CSJ in Parliament ?
Did CSJ throw CST out of the SDP ?
Was it not a fact that CSJ was absent at all the proceedings in the SDP and meetings conducted by its Executive Council - in which the Executive and General Membership felt that CST was wrong to chastise CSJ in his hunger strike to protest the PAP instigated false charges of cheating the NUS ?
A few clicks in google could have provided clear answers(*2) and even Widipedia remain clear on record of events in the SDP(*3) will show up the falsehood that the ‘Drama Queen’(*1) persist in dragging CSJ and SDP into the slimy road that only the ‘Drama Queen’(*1) prefer to walk.
[QUOTE]
What really happened between Chiam and Chee in the 1990s
(information taken from SDP’s website, with my own personal remarks added in using purple colour)
In 1984, Mr Chiam See Tong was elected in Potong Pasir, a seat he has held till today. That same year, the Singapore Democratic Party (which Chiam was a member of at that time) launched its newsletter Demokrat.
In 1986, a few of the Party’s leaders, including Mr Soon Kia Seng (Assistant Secretary-General) and Mr Peter Lim Ah Yong (Treasurer), resigned their posts with Mr Soon accusing some of his colleagues as not sincerely believing in democracy: “This is not a party I once knew. I am willing to serve a cause but I don’t want to serve individuals.”
Subsequently, the SDP contested the Marine Parade by-elections in December 1992 called for by then-prime minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong, in his own GRC. Dr Chee Soon Juan joined the SDP as part of the contesting team with Mr Low Yong Nguan, Mr Ashleigh Seow (Mr Francis Seow’s son) and Mr Mohd Shariff.
Following the election in 1993, Dr Chee was sacked by the National University of Singapore where he was a Lecturer. Dr Chee went on a hunger strike as a mark of protest. He was subsequently sued by his department head, Dr S Vasoo, faculty dean, Dr Ernest Chew, and secretary, Ms Janice Chen, when he disputed his sacking.
Mr Chiam first supported Dr Chee’s action but later changed his mind and called for the Party to censure his the assistant secretary-general (Dr Chee was elected to the post in February 1993).
None of the Central Executive Committee (CEC) members supported Mr Chiam’s motion whereupon the Party leader tended his resignation, citing that he had lost the confidence of his colleagues.
This is in stark contrast to the repeated lies and falsehoods perpetrated by the mainstream press that it was Dr Chee who forced Chiam out of the SDP.
A few of the CEC members, including Dr Chee, tried to persuade Mr Chiam to remain as secretary-general. However, Mr Chiam stated that he would do so only if he could be granted the power to appoint and dismiss the Party’s cadre members. He also wanted the removal of Mr Wong Hong Toy as vice-chairman.
Under the Party’s constitution, a simple majority of the CEC was needed to appoint cadre members, not any one individual leader. The CEC did not have the constitutional power to accede to Mr Chiam’s demands.
A few weeks later, Mr Chiam gave a speech at the Singapore Press Club attacking the Party’s leadership in a vicious manner. Ironically, it was he who previously forbade leaders from criticising the party after they left it by making them sign oaths.
It was only after his speech at the Singapore Press Club, which is always looking for an opportunity to run down the opposition, that the CEC voted to expel Mr Chiam.
The Press Club had extended a similar invitation to Dr Chee to counter Mr Chiam. Knowing that the PAP-controlled media had every intention to fan the flames, Dr Chee declined the invitation. But when he subsequently informed the organizers that he would speak but on the Party’s alternative policy ideas instead of the altercation with Mr Chiam, the Press Club withdrew the invitation.
Mr Chiam sued the CEC for wrongful dismissal and won. His actions dealt a severe financial blow to the SDP.
Despite all this, Dr Chee approached Mr Chiam a few months later to invite him to join an SDP delegation that was going to visit the Australian Parliament in Canberra. Mr Chiam declined.
The PAP has seized on this matter and deliberately portrayed the falsehood that Dr Chee ousted Mr Chiam from the SDP. In actual fact, it was Chiam who brought it upon himself by deliberately attacking his own party in public and playing directly into the hands of the PAP.
Mr Chiam remained with the Party until the 1997 general elections when he resigned to form another party.
[UNQUOTE]
The continued role of The Bear in its consistent and persistent negative attacks towards the Opposition or Alternative Political Parties reveal the depth of the drama that it is prepared to sink into as a ‘Drama Queen’(*1) in this Speaker's Corner.
Could The Bear be a non-partisan political commentator, or is it kept and bred by the PAP as a fifth columnist to undermine confidence towards the Alternative Parties, and subtlely change the views of participants in this forum ?
It is not surprising for the PAP to adopt the Communist ways of planting fifth columnist in open society to undermine any opposition and to open opportunities for the PAP.
The infamous ‘Drama Queen’(*1) never fail in its efforts to deride the SDP and now it is claiming that even the Chairman of SDP has quietly distance himself from CSJ.
Does anyone know how old Ling Howe Doong was when he decided to relinquish the post as Chairman of the SDP ?
If Ling Howe Doong's stepping down from the SDP can be seen as distancing himself from CSJ, should Singaporeans see the resignation of the Old Guards from the PAP as similarly distancing themselves from the unpopular LHL too ?
If only CST had been able to groom new blood in his SDA today, perhaps there will be no such reports surfacing that Potong Pasir resident expressed ‘disappointment at Chiam’s performance(*3) - dated 5 March 2009.
Should we see the CEC and the General Membership at SDA soon throw CST out of their party soon - this time without any help from CSJ ?
Who will the ‘Drama Queen’(*1) pick for the drama in stabbing CST again ?
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
they do not need to be in parliament to serve the people...
all they need to do is to actually serve the people.. listen to their problems, give voice to them by taking the current MPs to task, asking the necessary questions, getting together people from their party to help out in places like the old folks corners, counselling for the wayward youth...
the simple grassroots movements which is not to be mistaken for the BS which is done by the PA or the MIW...
from there, you earn the trust of the people..
from there, the people will see that you are earnest in serving them..
from there, you start...
it is not easy.. but nothing worth doing is usually easy...
"its is not easy.. but nothing worth doing is usually easy..."
Can we trust the words of a ‘Drama Queen’(*1) when all the efforts of the Alternative Parties are derided by the self-serving dramas created by one who yearn for controversial attention ?
The SDP's struggle is to rebuild the foundation of Singapore Politics that have been hijacked by the PAP in their methods used to bastardised the Singapore Constitution - by removing Singaporean's Basic Rights as enshrined in the Constitution.
Singaporeans have been lulled to sleep, de-politicized, made politically apathetic, minds dulled with full stomachs over the last 52 years to the point that they do not even stir when their basic rights have been removed.
With the Law on illegal assembly of 5 changed, it is now unlawful even to conduct a public protest as a single person.
Has the PAP become so desperately vulnerable as reflected in its actions ?
CSJ and the SDP have done a great job in exposing the flaws of the PAP that pushed LKY and the PAP into a corner to force them to show Singaporeans their true dark colors that are hidden behind the blinding white.
-
they do not need to be in parliament to serve the people...
all they need to do is to actually serve the people.. listen to their problems, give voice to them by taking the current MPs to task, asking the necessary questions, getting together people from their party to help out in places like the old folks corners, counselling for the wayward youth...
the simple grassroots movements which is not to be mistaken for the BS which is done by the PA or the MIW...
from there, you earn the trust of the people..
from there, the people will see that you are earnest in serving them..
from there, you start...
it is not easy.. but nothing worth doing is usually easy...
if they are not in parliament how are they going to question minister? what u stated above need funding to perform. where do they get the money from?
what u said is base on idealistic scenerio but not base on a more practical terms.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
As opposition, behave like one, be a gentleman or lady, argue on what is suppose to argue, fight on what is suppose to be unfair, win or loose is not the matter, the public understand that opposition are underdogs, a win for them will be something very special. Therefore the public is not looking at opposition fighting or argueing to win, but we look for the caring part, he/she should at least make an effort to say something that make reasonable news that delight the public sentiment. Swearing and cursing only make matter worst for opposition to operate here.So the opposition should not fight to win seats, and should expects seats to be handed to them as a free gift?
Are you seriously saying we are voting people in based on how kind they look as opposed to the actual public policies enacted by them?
If this is the mentality the opposition parties supporters have, Singapore is fucked.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
The infamous ‘Drama Queen’(*1) never fail to seize the opportunity to plant another lie to injure CSJ or the SDP despite the consistent facts that has been placed in public.
Did CSJ stuck one behind CST's back ?
Was CST grooming CSJ for leadership of the SDP, or was it the Chairman of the SDP - Ling Howe Doong - insisting on new blood to be groomed in view of the lacklustre performance of CSJ in Parliament ?
Did CSJ throw CST out of the SDP ?
Was it not a fact that CSJ was absent at all the proceedings in the SDP and meetings conducted by its Executive Council - in which the Executive and General Membership felt that CST was wrong to chastise CSJ in his hunger strike to protest the PAP instigated false charges of cheating the NUS ?
A few clicks in google could have provided clear answers(*2) and even Widipedia remain clear on record of events in the SDP(*3) will show up the falsehood that the ‘Drama Queen’(*1) persist in dragging CSJ and SDP into the slimy road that only the ‘Drama Queen’(*1) prefer to walk.
[QUOTE]
What really happened between Chiam and Chee in the 1990s
(information taken from SDP’s website, with my own personal remarks added in using purple colour)
In 1984, Mr Chiam See Tong was elected in Potong Pasir, a seat he has held till today. That same year, the Singapore Democratic Party (which Chiam was a member of at that time) launched its newsletter Demokrat.
In 1986, a few of the Party’s leaders, including Mr Soon Kia Seng (Assistant Secretary-General) and Mr Peter Lim Ah Yong (Treasurer), resigned their posts with Mr Soon accusing some of his colleagues as not sincerely believing in democracy: “This is not a party I once knew. I am willing to serve a cause but I don’t want to serve individuals.”
Subsequently, the SDP contested the Marine Parade by-elections in December 1992 called for by then-prime minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong, in his own GRC. Dr Chee Soon Juan joined the SDP as part of the contesting team with Mr Low Yong Nguan, Mr Ashleigh Seow (Mr Francis Seow’s son) and Mr Mohd Shariff.
Following the election in 1993, Dr Chee was sacked by the National University of Singapore where he was a Lecturer. Dr Chee went on a hunger strike as a mark of protest. He was subsequently sued by his department head, Dr S Vasoo, faculty dean, Dr Ernest Chew, and secretary, Ms Janice Chen, when he disputed his sacking.
Mr Chiam first supported Dr Chee’s action but later changed his mind and called for the Party to censure his the assistant secretary-general (Dr Chee was elected to the post in February 1993).
None of the Central Executive Committee (CEC) members supported Mr Chiam’s motion whereupon the Party leader tended his resignation, citing that he had lost the confidence of his colleagues.
This is in stark contrast to the repeated lies and falsehoods perpetrated by the mainstream press that it was Dr Chee who forced Chiam out of the SDP.
A few of the CEC members, including Dr Chee, tried to persuade Mr Chiam to remain as secretary-general. However, Mr Chiam stated that he would do so only if he could be granted the power to appoint and dismiss the Party’s cadre members. He also wanted the removal of Mr Wong Hong Toy as vice-chairman.
Under the Party’s constitution, a simple majority of the CEC was needed to appoint cadre members, not any one individual leader. The CEC did not have the constitutional power to accede to Mr Chiam’s demands.
A few weeks later, Mr Chiam gave a speech at the Singapore Press Club attacking the Party’s leadership in a vicious manner. Ironically, it was he who previously forbade leaders from criticising the party after they left it by making them sign oaths.
It was only after his speech at the Singapore Press Club, which is always looking for an opportunity to run down the opposition, that the CEC voted to expel Mr Chiam.
The Press Club had extended a similar invitation to Dr Chee to counter Mr Chiam. Knowing that the PAP-controlled media had every intention to fan the flames, Dr Chee declined the invitation. But when he subsequently informed the organizers that he would speak but on the Party’s alternative policy ideas instead of the altercation with Mr Chiam, the Press Club withdrew the invitation.
Mr Chiam sued the CEC for wrongful dismissal and won. His actions dealt a severe financial blow to the SDP.
Despite all this, Dr Chee approached Mr Chiam a few months later to invite him to join an SDP delegation that was going to visit the Australian Parliament in Canberra. Mr Chiam declined.
The PAP has seized on this matter and deliberately portrayed the falsehood that Dr Chee ousted Mr Chiam from the SDP. In actual fact, it was Chiam who brought it upon himself by deliberately attacking his own party in public and playing directly into the hands of the PAP.
Mr Chiam remained with the Party until the 1997 general elections when he resigned to form another party.
[UNQUOTE]
The continued role of The Bear in its consistent and persistent negative attacks towards the Opposition or Alternative Political Parties reveal the depth of the drama that it is prepared to sink into as a ‘Drama Queen’(*1) in this Speaker's Corner.
Could The Bear be a non-partisan political commentator, or is it kept and bred by the PAP as a fifth columnist to undermine confidence towards the Alternative Parties, and subtlely change the views of participants in this forum ?
It is not surprising for the PAP to adopt the Communist ways of planting fifth columnist in open society to undermine any opposition and to open opportunities for the PAP.
The infamous ‘Drama Queen’(*1) never fail in its efforts to deride the SDP and now it is claiming that even the Chairman of SDP has quietly distance himself from CSJ.
Does anyone know how old Ling Howe Doong was when he decided to relinquish the post as Chairman of the SDP ?
If Ling Howe Doong's stepping down from the SDP can be seen as distancing himself from CSJ, should Singaporeans see the resignation of the Old Guards from the PAP as similarly distancing themselves from the unpopular LHL too ?
If only CST had been able to groom new blood in his SDA today, perhaps there will be no such reports surfacing that Potong Pasir resident expressed ‘disappointment at Chiam’s performance(*3) - dated 5 March 2009.
Should we see the CEC and the General Membership at SDA soon throw CST out of their party soon - this time without any help from CSJ ?
Who will the ‘Drama Queen’(*1) pick for the drama in stabbing CST again ?
That is a good one...Really appreciate that you bother to share this with all of us here. If Chee really forced Chiam out of SDP, then Chiam would have already formed his own party outside again.But why is that after so many years after leaving SDP, Chiam do not have a decent party yet again? Don't he need a successor? Is there a shortage of people willing to join opposition? Did Chiam ever try to form a decent party again?
I respect and pity Chiam that he really worked very hard for people in Potong Pasir and Singapore. No wish to put him down in anyway. History has shown that only a extraordinary person like Chiam can battle PAP for more than 25 years victorious.
Unfortunately, in politics, only the decisive and cruel often survive and emerge victorious. History is written by winners, not losers.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
"thing is, the people seem to trust the opposition less than the MIW.. "
In the last Election 2006, out of a population of 3.5 Million Singaporeans, only 2,147,840 are on the Electoral Roll as registered voters.
From this 2,147,840 voters, only 1,123,273 had the opportunity to cast their votes while the remaining 1,024,567 Singaporeans were sitting at home without the opportunity to vote.
From the 1,123,273 that cast their votes, the PAP managed only to obtain 748,130 votes - which is only 34.83% of the registered voters of 2,147,840 Singaporeans; while the Alternative Parties managed 375,143 votes that came to about 17.47% of the registered voters.
With the other 1,024,567 Singaporeans not participating - can anyone be as certain as you that Singaporeans "trust the oppostion less than the MIW" ?
With only 17.47% of the total votes, the Alternative Parties were able to get two candidates into Parliament, and considering that even the LHL had a shock when 45% of the AMK GRC had cast their votes to the young new faces offered by WP.
This seems to be a far cry from the dramatic claim that do not reflect the reality on the ground, which has so many impediments purposefully placed to block the Alternative Parties from a successful outreach to the Singaporean electorate.
The Drama Queen of this Speaker's Corner needs a reality check with its purposeful myopic line taken to attack the Alternative Parties.
-
Originally posted by Pentaxdude90:
Another farking drama queer!Got no bola to take your own stance.
-
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
The Opposition is not a single entity...
But the public keeps thinking that it is a single entity given that they always band together and howl that government is unjust. -
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/449624/1/.html
On one hand, they say the government does not interfere with decisions regarding TH, on the other hand the report says that the cabinet "considered very carefully and debated on before arriving at a decision".
So are they independent or not independent or it depends on certain situations?
-
Originally posted by reyes:
if they are not in parliament how are they going to question minister? what u stated above need funding to perform. where do they get the money from?
what u said is base on idealistic scenerio but not base on a more practical terms.
so.. you want it now but you don't want to work for it?ain't gonna happen..
i said it isn't easy.. things worth doing usually aren't..
as for atobe, i don't know what planet you were from... you go and find out what really happened.. you go ask CST what really happened.. because a whole generation who were there, hoping for a change when the surge of the opposition was abruptly brought to a screeching, stinking halt by CSJ, will never forget it...
ask yourself.. why the hell is CST out there now, away from a party which he created?
if you are unable to see further or deeper than that, i suggest you start looking properly...
your enemy's enemy may be your worst enemy...
-
Originally posted by charlize:
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporebusinessnews/view/449624/1/.html
On one hand, they say the government does not interfere with decisions regarding TH, on the other hand the report says that the cabinet "considered very carefully and debated on before arriving at a decision".
So are they independent or not independent or it depends on certain situations?
Oh come on, the CEO of Temasek Holdings eats everyday at the breakfast/dinner table with LKY you're telling me the government has no influence at all ? -
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
Oh come on, the CEO of Temasek Holdings eats everyday at the breakfast/dinner table with LKY you're telling me the government has no influence at all ?uhh.... it was sarcasm...
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
"thing is, the people seem to trust the opposition less than the MIW.. "
In the last Election 2006, out of a population of 3.5 Million Singaporeans, only 2,147,840 are on the Electoral Roll as registered voters.
From this 2,147,840 voters, only 1,123,273 had the opportunity to cast their votes while the remaining 1,024,567 Singaporeans were sitting at home without the opportunity to vote.
From the 1,123,273 that cast their votes, the PAP managed only to obtain 748,130 votes - which is only 34.83% of the registered voters of 2,147,840 Singaporeans; while the Alternative Parties managed 375,143 votes that came to about 17.47% of the registered voters.
With the other 1,024,567 Singaporeans not participating - can anyone be as certain as you that Singaporeans "trust the oppostion less than the MIW" ?
With only 17.47% of the total votes, the Alternative Parties were able to get two candidates into Parliament, and considering that even the LHL had a shock when 45% of the AMK GRC had cast their votes to the young new faces offered by WP.
This seems to be a far cry from the dramatic claim that do not reflect the reality on the ground, which has so many impediments purposefully placed to block the Alternative Parties from a successful outreach to the Singaporean electorate.
The Drama Queen of this Speaker's Corner needs a reality check with its purposeful myopic line taken to attack the Alternative Parties.
Consider that if the opposition had popular support, they would be in parliament already
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
uhh.... it was sarcasm...
No, I was genuinely interested to know the truth.
-
Originally posted by the Bear:
uhh.... it was sarcasm...
Referring to the channelnewsasia article!