My 2nd and last part of this topic will focus on the disagreement between Mr Goh and myself on the paper qualifications issue [Link].
Is the qualifications of the candidates in any elections important? Absolutely! Note the differences between the importance of qualifications and criterias FOR qualifications. E.g., in the just past Presidental Elections, qualifying criterias were imposed on any candidates wanting to contest and I do not agree with the ruling party on this point. It is for the general public to decide who they think is qualified and not a 3-man PEC!
Nonetheless, qualifications of any candidates are still important. Put it simple. The present PAP MPs and Ministers are known to us for a very long time. Whenever they decided to renew and shuffle their ranks, there will be annoucement and interviews in the media. We (the general public) get to read about the biography on them, see them answering questions on TV, appearing in pre-elections campaign walks, etc. In other words, the general public is being educated on the new candidates!
What's new on the opposition front? Nothing precisely. Let us moved slightly back into history in the election year 2001. I remembered clearly reading on nomination day the names of Abdul Rahim Bin Osman and Tang Liang Hong for the 1st time!!! The names of Huang Seow Kwang and Tan Bin Seng are known to me before I do follow elections since young (1984). The same cannot be true for the ignorant general public whom I already declared that we ordinary Singaporean are apathetic towards politics. Only the last candidate - J B Jeyaretnam is known to many people, if not all.
Teach me, how are we, the general public, supposed to know who are these don't-know-from-where people who suddenly pop-out from the shadow into the limelight! We know nuts (not peanuts) about these "new" candidates at all! That is a sad fact that the opposition parties always think they must be tatical about their "secret" weapons and launches them only during the elections!
Without being given enough time to understand these new candidates, what can we, the general public, do to evaluate? Of course, we start to look at their CV, just like any company employing new staff! We do not know them so we have to look at CV! What is important inside the CV? Other than the job history, the paper qualifications are equally as important! It is that important that the opposition parties never realise it and keep insisting that the general public judge them based on what they ARE GOING TO DO! No way, the general public will only evalute you on WHAT YOU HAVE DONE BEFORE!
I have attended rallies of the opposition parties before (WP for Cheng San GRC in 1997). The turnout was good. Let put it as an optimistic figure of 10K per rally in Yio Chu Kang and Hougang stadiums. If I remembered correctly, there were 3 rallies in total. And to be optimistic again, we assume that no one attended more than 1 rally - this gives a total audience of 30K! How big is the electoral voters in Cheng San GRC? Nearly 93K in voter size! How much did the rallies captured? Only less than 30% (in the super optimistic estimation). How much do the rest of the voters know about the candidates? Nothing except those reported in the local media!
This come back to a comment made by Mr Goh Meng Seng in his reply to my comment in his blog (link see above). I am going to quote a whole paragraph on what he wrote again:
"As a responsible voter, each and everyone of us should exercise judgement carefully based on "KNOWING" the candidates, instead of being fed by the mass media's proporgandus materials."
If you read what Mr Goh has written, he EXPECTS the general public to become more pro-active and take the initiative to go and understand the new candidates that suddenly appeared from nowwhere. It becomes our fault if we failed to do so (to listen to these new candidates on rallies) and stay at home and read the mass media propaganda and "biased" views on these new opposition candidates and regard these new candidates as described (even though it may not be true)! I called this "theory of expectations" ABSURD!
Let me use another analogy to compare the various parties. Imagine there are 5 shops, 1 big (B1) and 4 small (S1, S2, S3 and S4), in a building selling massage equipment, all selling different brands with different focus.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Big1 way of doing business:-
(The PAP is as big as you want them to be)
- open for business every working day
(Everyday they are working, not just during elections)
- sell all ranges of high-end massage equipment
(Offers candidates from different industry but they belongs to the elites)
- offer customers a complete solution
(They control everything - Parliament, union, CDC, PA, etc)
- all the equipment work in sync when combined
(All the organs of the party complements each other)
- advertise in the media on what their massage equipment can do
(Prepare the public for new type of candidates)
- advertise before season changes on new equipment coming soon
(Introduce the new candidates to the public before election year)
- renew some of the outdated equipment every season changes
(Withdraw some old MPS every election year)
- come up with new patents every so often
(Generates ideas that becomes laws - some good, some notorious)
- some of the patents are modified
(You decide for yourself, I make no comment)
- sue the other shops for claiming the big1's massage equipment can do damage
(Just look at the who's who of Singaporean in Australia)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Small1 way of doing business:-
(SDA is one of the biggest opposition)
- open for business frequently
(Only few are actively in the news)
- sell some mid- to low-ranges of massage equipment
(Unable to offer highly-educated candidates yet)
- cannot offer customers a complete solution
(Unable to form alternative)
- all the equipment are from different supplier, so they don't sync
(All members belong to other component parties - you sure that are of 1 mind?)
- no advertisment, but customers know their 1 and only 1 best, popular but old equipment
(Who else do you know of other than Mr Chiam ST and maybe Mr Steve Chia?)
- sometimes advertise before season changes on new equipment coming soon
(Mr Steve Chia was introduced before the elections)
- sometimes add new equipment every season changes but never withdraw any
(No renewal plan that I know of)
- come up with good new ideas at times but no patent
(Mr Chiam ST has some very good idea like common market with Malaysia)
- some of the ideas become patented by the big1
(Search yourself for an answer; no comment from me)
- sue 1 of the small shop for damage to reputation
(Mr Chiam ST sued SDP's members before)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Small2 way of doing business:-
(WP is also another big opposition party)
- open for business frequently
(Only few are actively in the news)
- sell all ranges of massage equipment with low-, mid- to high-end
(Offer from ppl with certs to ppl with PhD but none is elite)
- cannot offer customers a complete solution
(Unable to form alternative)
- all the equipment work in sync when combined
(Party has been around for a very long time - matured)
- no advertisment, but customers know their 1 and only 1 best, popular but old equipment
(Who else do you know of other than Mr Low TK and maybe Dr Poh?)
- never advertise, but expect customers to come and know their new equipment
(New candidate appeared from don't know where in every elections - e.g. TLH, James Gomez)
- sometimes add new equipment every season changes and throw out old equipment to the dustbin waiting for other to pick up and use
(Ask JB Jeyaratnam about it)
- always like to look at other peopl patent and offer modifications [Mistake! Wasn't meant for this small2!]
(Have not seen much originality yet) [Mistake! Wasn't meant for this small2!]
- offer ideas more for the lower-end models
(Ideas do not cater to all levels of society)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I saved my breath for S3 (SDP) and S4 (DPP). They are just not worth mentioning.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
K.S:
I suppose that you are urging the oppo to market themselves better to the public. I too believe that oppo shd grab any chance, or even create chances to appear more regularly on the media (in a good way of course). Perhaps they can start by writing regularly to the Press on some national issues and hopefully they get published. Maybe as time progress even setup interviews for the lesser known candidates.
From what I read, I believe that 'Today' and the chinese papers are less pro-govt than ST. Perhaps the oppo focus their efforts on them.
Dear anonymous,
Correct! Too often we always hear the opposition complaining about unfair this and unfair that. They get reported! Why don't they save the valuable media space-slot and time-slot for more useful articles like discussion on current affairs, etc. "Complaint Kings/Queens" are not viewd positively by us, isn't it? Likewise, the same goes for the opposition parties.
The papers are not the only media. The internet is too vast, but it is also unrestrictive, so use it wisely! Be creative. I understand that the SDP has started a podcast which get the MDA excited (read as very worried). This is a good example of using the internet wisely.
First, get the medium of broadcast. Next, brush up the content.
K.S:
Ha. U have to credit SDP for that. It even spark off a debate on their econ policies on the net, which is good publicity although some might disagree with SDP. The interview that CSJ gave to 'The Pilot n' Jo Show' also helped him to reach out the younger internet users.
However as you said WP should focus on the lower-middle class. If that is the case then internet would not be of much use. Most of the heartlanders do not know how to use the internet. They rely mainly on Chinese, Malay papers and maybe to a certain extent 'Today' for their news. Hence it is more impt for the oppo to reach out to them through these mediums.
http://pjshow.blogspot.com/
http://tomorrow.sg/archives/2005/08/15/democracy_is_not_a_populist_whor.html
Dear anonymous,
You are right again too. The middle-lower and below tends not to use the internet (whether they know how to use or not is not for us to judge).
So the medium of information is the mass media. But you are forgetting that the news they read are more (my belief) tabloids and not business news.
Information by proximity is another way (slower but ever-growing) to tackle these groups. First, cast out the information wide (onto the internet). It is of no use to cast out wide to the papers only to find them never get reported.
Once out in the open, the information will slowly reach these categories of people by hearsay. They are almost always influenced by such news. This is where censorship is unable to blank off.
Dear K.S:
I guess kopi shop rumour spreading by "undercover agents" could a good way lol.
BTW when u going to post part 3 of winning GRC. impatient leh lol...
Dear K.S.,
Very well argued piece indeed.
For all we want maximum exposures, but what are the risks involved? Especially under the current mass media set up whereby PAP minister could tell you in the straight face that the role of local media is to support government policies, explaining to the masses about their policies?
The bottomline is, how much could we trust the local media? This is not something easy to determine unless you bear the brunt of the negativity that the media has thrown on you, if you are in opposition politics.
The ruling party will definitely have advantages over media exposures. They could even have personal features put up on prime time Telecast. This will not happen to alternative parties' politicians, in Singapore's context.
Of course, you must understand the limitation we have. For the internet, Singapore's political outreach is very limited. We do put up profiles of our key people up on our website but how many Singaporeans really bother to seek and read? That is why, I say it is up to Singapore citizens to play an active role to seek information under the current mass media setup.
We do have publication, The Hammer, that put up profiles of our people too. But the circulation is limited, though very specific in area of distribution. How effective is Hammer to raise political awareness? We really don't know.
In relative terms, I think the past problem of "not knowing" the candidates arises basically due to last minute arrangement. We are sort of good human resources. And I think you have mistaken my point about the paper qualifications.
Everybody knows we need to put up a good slate of candidates; but people don't just fall down from the sky! Are you willing to join us? How many Singapore bloggers here who are critical about Singapore politics willing to step forward to join us? Well, last minute opportunists, many. But if you were in my position, would you risk your political carreer and take the chance to stand with somebody relatively so unknown to you in such an adverse environment? I bet you won't and you will make the same choice that I would make.... stand with a known veteran, maybe with less paper qualification but more trustworthy.
There are many instances whereby opportunistic people with great paper qualifications have turned out REAL BAD.
And this is part of the problem of not much of exposure on the candidates; basically because these are last minute arrangement. You want to blame the alternative parties? Well, it is a chicken and egg thing... you willing to make sarcrifices and come forward to start from ground zero?
Fortunately, WP has evolved from this pathetic situation. At least, we have enough people and we need not depend on last minute opportunists for candidacy. We do "publicize" our people you know. Subscribe to our Hammer and you will see the profiles.
Well, at least now, you could talk to me DIRECTLY over the net. No secrecy about it. I may just be an ordinary man staying next door. We are just human beings.
REALISTIC we must be, not only to people's needs, also to our own needs as well. Also towards the environment that we are working in.
Some netter in Sammyboy has said something very useful. It is not the mass media that matters. If you want your voters to know you more, you should be walking the ground, knock the doors, shake their hands, talk to them. Yes, this might be the most primitive way but it is the most effective way. And it needs people with dedication to do it on the ground. It needs helpers who will not mind the monotenous and repeative motions to work with us. Are you game enough to become part of it all? If not, you expect who else will?
Fortunate enough for WP, we do have dedicated people who will commit their time and effort VOLUNTARILY to do all this work. This is where the war starts.
Goh Meng Seng
I will stop callin myself anon, from i will call myself at82.
GMS:
I know what you mean, however chance must be taken with the mass media to widen your party's reach. There are quite a few people that WP can try to publicise using mass media. eg Sylvia Lim, James Gomez, Dr Poh.
These heavyweights in the party who are going to contest in elections. However they are grossly under-publicise. Hence there is a need to expose them to sporeans through the mass media so as to make their names more familisr to sporeans and not like never hear b4.
Dear AT82,
Tactically, we are trying our best to engage with individual reporters that we trust. That is why you see more features in New Paper, Today and ZaoBoa.
As for ST, they have not shown their willingness to work with us just yet, so we are just standing on the sideline. They have done a couple of interviews but were not out. This is not a good start for both of us.
We are not dying for exposures because it doesn't make any advantage to have nation wide coverage but your targeted voters are not truly and fully awared. Thus, I would say the mass media exposure is only secondary to our work; down to earth ground work is the main thrust. That is why we are not so hard up for media exposures. If have, it is just a plus, a bonus, if no, we still carry on our ground work which is more effective.
But need people who are willing to work with us at the moment as we are opening up new battle front! ;)
Goh Meng Seng
gms:
Glad that to hear that WP is trying to engage the press. ST had all along been the most pro-govt so it is kinda going to be hard. However Newpaper, Zaobao and Today too had wide reach and probably serve the population that WP are targeting, so hopefully WP heavyweights can the publicity they needed.
Oh ya, try Xing Ming Wan Bao too lol. They are the ultimate tabloid for the heartlanders.
Hi,
My views and comments on this article:
1) While I do not disagree with your view, the media does not give equal coverage to PAP and Workers' Party, and this is a fact. Engaging the media or not is something else.
2) Are you certain that all PAP's candidates are elite and there are no elite in Workers' Party? And do you think that elites serve the people's interest better than non-elites?
3) Workers' Party has a website in which its core people in-charge are listed, along with their CVs. Their youth wing has this too. It is the only opposition party doing so, manifesting that they are not simply an empty shell. However, the media will never publish such information in detail.
4) From what I have read, Meng Seng's does not *expect* people to find out things. He is saying, the people can only know if they show interest and find out things because the media will not publish much. The twain are different. You appear to be saying that Meng Seng feels apathy is wrong. I do not think he thinks this way, and neither do I. Apathy is not wrong, Singaporeans can continue to be apathetic for all I care, but in my view, apathy breeds abuse and Singaporeans will reap what they sow.
5) You said the PAP is working every day. I am not sure if you know the Workers' Party is also working everyday :) I feel you should rephrase it as "the PAP's work is reported in the media every day" :)
6) To "offer customers a complete solution" is different from "control everything".
7) The PAP, workers' Party and in fact all parties prepare the public for new candidates only during GE. Hence, I am unsure what you are getting here.
8) Did the PAP ever introduced new candidates to the public before election year? Perhaps you could state some examples :)
9) Of course PAP can withdraw old MPs every election. They are the only party with more than one MP :) You can't expect Workers' Party to withdraw Mr Low Thia Khiang and lose their only Parliamentary representation, do you? :)
10) Perhaps you should read how some of opposition parties' ideas were copied and adopted by the PAP government, despite the fact that the PAP claims to be better than the opposition, is paid to do their job and has a paid civil service supporting them. One of them is the health insurance scheme of Workers' Party, which was adopted by Medisave later. Or SDP's creative thinking which the PAP announced four years later.
11) Haha, I caught a gist of a little contradiction :) When the PAP modified other "shop's" ideas, it is clever. When opposition parties modified the "big shop's" idea, it is not being original :) I think you have to make up your mind :)
12) You said the people do not know anyone else other than Mr Low and Dr Poh. I do not think people read newspapers selectively, but if they do, there is nothing Workers' Party can do :) When Ms Sylvia Lim became Chairman of Workers' Party, she received more coverage than Dr Poh in 2001 GE. When we walked the ground, people asked about her. Some even thought she took over Mr Low as party leader and we had to clarify that one is Chairman and one is Secretary-General, we are a collective leadership. So I do not think your conclusion is correct.
13) Mr James Gomez received a little media coverage as Think Centre's head despite the media imbalance. If people do not know him, there is nothing he can do.
14) Another gist of contradiction :) When PAP throws out old MPs, it is renewal. When Workers' Party fields new candidates, it is throwing out rubbish. Hmmm... :)
15) You have to bear in mind that the PAP ticket stands a much higher chance of winning than opposition party tickets. Do you rememeber PAP's Mr Pang Kim Hin, who ran his first election in 1981 and it happened to be in Anson against Mr JBJ and he lost. Just as Mr JBJ was the first opposition to win in 15 years, Mr Pang was the first PAP candidate to lose in 15 years. Being Mr Pang's first election, that was his last election too. On the contrary, Mr JBJ fought 5 elections before winning in Anson. So I wonder who is "throwing out rubbish" :)
Dear sgloyalist,
My replies:
(1) Noted.
(2) The term "elite" is greatly abused by all of us here. In my case, I generalise the cream of the top brains as elite. And no, looking at the profiles of the PAP MPs, not everyone is an elite. RI/RGS is THE top schools in Singapore. You called RI elite school, but is everyone elite inside? Likewise, PAP is an elite party but don't expect to find everyone an elite.
(3) I read that. So? How many visitor hits on the party website did you get? You sure everyone from the middle-middle and below read it?
(4) Rules no1 - Singaporean are apathetic. If we are being apathy, what are the chance we are going to show "interest" in your party? More likely you are going to get a retort "I have a family to feed! And I am worrying about it!".
(5) The government is PAP now. Does the police responses to you when you dial the 999 hotlines? The police is an agency of the government, no? Don't say no to me because it will sound strange to me if I hear a Singapore Police Force PTE LTD. A pte ltd company bring values to its shareholders.
(6) Obviously! Even a 10-year-old kid can tell you that they are spelled differently literally, so it mean different matters. You have problem reading English? PAP does offer "complete solution", 正しいか? The complete solution controls everything important.
(7) Wrong! The would-be PAP candidates do grassroot works FOC! They do have their normal daily work elsewhere. Yours? They are members of Hougang Town Council - they are PAID to do their work. FOC and being PAID are 2 different things.
(8) You think I "jia pah boh sai pan ah". Every stupid question on technicality also must answer you ah? You know know the facts well yourself! Still call yourself an opposition party member? Go and ask yourself which year was Heng Chee How introduced as grassroot leader for Hougang SMC and which year was that election when he lost to Mr Low.
(9) I think you have problem with your English and I will forgive you for that. When did I say anything about withdrawing Mr Low?
(10) What are you getting at?? I already said that there are some good ideas from the oppositions. So what are you trying to tell me?
(11) WAKE UP YOUR POWDERFUL ENGLAND!
(a) Don't put words into my mouth
(b) When did I say anything about clever or original?
I think you seriously need to brush up your England, oops, I mean English.
(12) It is you who must wake up your mind and make up your mind! You said "Some even thought she took over Mr Low as party leader...". If the ground really know her well, they won't have thought about what you have just said.
(13) If there is nothing he can do, let it be loh and continue to lose the subsequent elections -> loser mentality.
(14) Perhaps you should go talk to your ex-Sec. Gen. JB Jeya and ask if he has any hard-feeling about leaving your party?
(15) Excuse me, I really think you have a problem with English! Is an MP a candidate? Yes! Is a candidate an MP? NOT NECESSARILY! So a candidate can be a "rubbish" (by the way, I have never insult anyone as "rubbish") as described by you. So "throwing out" (as desribed by you; I called it "withdraw") of Mr Pang is nothing wrong! He is not an MP.
I repeat again, you think I jia pah boh sai pan ah! Every question on technicality requires an answer? Please wake up your idea and go do the dirty job of finding out yourself. Don't expect the mountain to move for you, you bloody lazy bum. Yes, I am calling you names because I do not respect people who are just plain stupid or is out here to spolit for a fight. Please learn from Mr Goh about what constitute a good debate.
Hi,
[Quote]
The term "elite" is greatly abused by all of us here. In my case, I generalise the cream of the top brains as elite. And no, looking at the profiles of the PAP MPs, not everyone is an elite. RI/RGS is THE top schools in Singapore. You called RI elite school, but is everyone elite inside? Likewise, PAP is an elite party but don't expect to find everyone an elite.
[Unquote]
You said, "Offers candidates from different industry but they belongs to the elites". You did not say some candidates but their candidates in general. How else am I supposed to inteprete? :)
[Quote]
I read that. So? How many visitor hits on the party website did you get? You sure everyone from the middle-middle and below read it?
[Unquote]
Correct, that is my point. The website does not receive much hits but this is the best choice given the media imbalance of coverage. Isn't it better to aim for a channel with few thousand readers but your literature will surely get published than a channel with few million readers but nothing gets published? Common sense :)
[Quote]
Rules no1 - Singaporean are apathetic. If we are being apathy, what are the chance we are going to show "interest" in your party? More likely you are going to get a retort "I have a family to feed! And I am worrying about it!".
[Unquote]
Correct. Then you are contradicting yourself again by saying the people are apathetic, yet you said the opposition should put up their CVs for people to read. If people do not read Workers' Party website, how will they read CV? Contradicting yourself again :)
[Quote]
The government is PAP now. Does the police responses to you when you dial the 999 hotlines? The police is an agency of the government, no? Don't say no to me because it will sound strange to me if I hear a Singapore Police Force PTE LTD. A pte ltd company bring values to its shareholders.
[Unquote]
I am not sure how "police" and all that came about. What did I say about police? I simply said the PAP forms the government, not "is the government". The twain are different. Not all civil servants are PAP members and vice versa. Given your example that PAP is government, do you mean that if I call 999, a PAP member will come to my house? :)
[Quote]
"Obviously! Even a 10-year-old kid can tell you that they are spelled differently literally, so it mean different matters. You have problem reading English? PAP does offer "complete solution", 姝ｃ仐銇勩亱? The complete solution controls everything important."
[Unquote]
"Complete solution controls everything important"? :) :) :) :) :) I will leave it to readers to decide how silly this sounds :)
[Quote]
Wrong! The would-be PAP candidates do grassroot works FOC! They do have their normal daily work elsewhere. Yours? They are members of Hougang Town Council - they are PAID to do their work. FOC and being PAID are 2 different things.
[Unquote]
Hi, where did you get the facts? Are you certain grassroots advisors has no perks? And who said all Workers' Party candidates are members of the Hougang Town Council, all for that matter, that these members are "paid"? Your facts are wrong and you shout "Wrong!" at me?
[Quote]
You think I "jia pah boh sai pan ah". Every stupid question on technicality also must answer you ah? You know know the facts well yourself! Still call yourself an opposition party member? Go and ask yourself which year was Heng Chee How introduced as grassroot leader for Hougang SMC and which year was that election when he lost to Mr Low.
[Unquote]
I see. Apologies. Yes, the PAP introduced only those in opposition wards. There are only two. What about PAP wards? Furthermore, what is the intention of PAP to introduce them in opposition wards? Because PAP wants their "MPs" in opposition wards as well without election. You ignore this angle. Finally, if you go by that line, then the Workers' Party is introducing more of their candidates than PAP as they have listed their Area Committees, with more than two potential candidates.
[Quote]
I think you have problem with your English and I will forgive you for that. When did I say anything about withdrawing Mr Low?
[Unquote]
You said PAP could "renew some of the outdated equipment every season changes (Withdraw some old MPS every election year)". You cited this as a strength of the PAP over opposition, no? How can this be when opposition has hardly any MPs? It is akin to praising someone for being good in long-distance marathon when he is only running against handicapped people.
[Quote]
What are you getting at?? I already said that there are some good ideas from the oppositions. So what are you trying to tell me?
[Unquote]
I did not say you said opposition has no good ideas, did I? :) But anyway, where did you say opposition has good ideas? Point out to me, please and thanks :)
[Quote]
WAKE UP YOUR POWDERFUL ENGLAND! (a) Don't put words into my mouth
(b) When did I say anything about clever or original?
I think you seriously need to brush up your England, oops, I mean English.
[Unquote]
On the PAP, you said "some of the patents are modified upon from the other shops", referring to a "big way of doing business". On the Workers' Party, you said "always like to look at other peopl patent and offer modifications (Have not seen much originality yet)". Read your own posting again. I will leave it to readers to judge :)
[Quote]
It is you who must wake up your mind and make up your mind! You said "Some even thought she took over Mr Low as party leader...". If the ground really know her well, they won't have thought about what you have just said.
[Unquote]
Are you the one who should "wake up your England" instead? :) You said "who else do you know of other than Mr Low TK and maybe Dr Poh?" I said people also remember Sylvia Lim. Now you say people cannot be said to know Sylvia Lim well because they cannot remember her position in Workers' Party. :) :) :) When you spoke of Mr Low and Dr Poh, are you saying the people know them or their positions in the Party? Please make up your mind :)
[Quote]
If there is nothing he can do, let it be loh and continue to lose the subsequent elections -> loser mentality.
[Unquote]
You "noted" to the first point about the imbalanced reporting by media, yet now you are saying accepting the media's imbalance is "loser mentality". Again another contradiction :)
[Quote]
Perhaps you should go talk to your ex-Sec. Gen. JB Jeya and ask if he has any hard-feeling about leaving your party?
[Unquote]
I see, this is what you mean. Sorry, I got you now. Alright, so you assert that Mr JBJ is treated like "old equipment to the dustbin waiting for other to pick up and use"? Young man, do you know what you said can get you sued? Fortunately, Workers' Party leaders are not as sue happy as PAP leaders. When MM Lee retires, try saying the same thing and see what happens to you :)
[Quote]
Excuse me, I really think you have a problem with English! Is an MP a candidate? Yes! Is a candidate an MP? NOT NECESSARILY! So a candidate can be a "rubbish" (by the way, I have never insult anyone as "rubbish") as described by you. So "throwing out" (as desribed by you; I called it "withdraw") of Mr Pang is nothing wrong! He is not an MP.
[Unquote]
Alright, perhaps we have a miscommunication because I put MPs and candidates in the same league. This is because we have to bear in mind that most of PAP's candidates become MPs and most of opposition candidates do not become MPs. If you think comparing MPs and candidates is not appropriate, then you should not have even written this article in the first place that unfairly compares the PAP with opposition parties.
[Quote]
I repeat again, you think I jia pah boh sai pan ah! Every question on technicality requires an answer?
[Unquote]
If you think I am picking on technicalities, then you should be the one "waking up your powderful England" because you are not using it too well :) If you do not want me to pick on the technicalities, then do not commit the technicalities. Period :)
This is also my last reply to you because firstly, I am well-known internaut who does not bother too much to people who do not talk with a sense of decorum, and secondly, you did not even understand my points before responding crudely, rudely and weakly and did not answer many loopholes I pointed out. For that matter, I noticed you don't even remember what you say, having me to point them out. Do you have short-term memory? :) By the time you reach paragraph 10, you don't remember what you write in paragraph 1? :)
Young man, learn :)
Lastly, I am always learning from Mr Goh Meng Seng; he is someone I respect. Period :)
Regards
Dear sgloyalist,
I did make a mistake :)! That line wasn't meant for this small2. I did some writeups for small3, small4 and small5 (later withdrawn). But I decided not to publish the rest and while I was transfering information to my blog, I copied the wrong line. My apology!
What is so absurd that the voters should get to know those who offered to represent them?
Isn't it supposed to be a two-way thing, whereby the candidate(s) should get to know those whom they intend to represent, and vice versa? Isn't it the same as a company finding out what the consumer wants, and the consumer finding out what a product offers?
And how to define 'appeared out of nowhere'? I suppose everyone knows the ex-speaker of Parliament Mr Tan Soo Khoon, and he was MP for Alexandra where I stayed for very long time until it became Tanjong Pagar GRC. Now, I suppose a lot of people would have considered him to appear 'out of nowhere' when Mr Tan ran in another GRC. And I am not saying this lightly because while Mr Tan is famous for his no-nonsense, hard hitting comments in Parliament, surveys have shown Singaporeans to be so politically empathetic, that some couldn't even name 3 of our own ministers!
Similarly, what about new faces in the PAP's own candidates. Who are they? Where do they come from? Do they work in the Constituencies they run? You only know when the PAP tells you wo they are, isn't it? But before that? Have you seen them before? Does the electorate really know who they vote for before they voted?
I dare say a lot of us vote simply because we look at the party logo and then just draw the cross beside it because they don't give damn. If you put a China made automobile beside a Toyota, it is likely that the Toyota will just get sold, no matter what the Chinese automobile has to offer because right away, this 'other brand' automobile gives the impression that it may be problematic, unrealiable etc. and so there is nothing to know about.
And that is something Singaporeans need to do something about if we are to talk about the maturity of this nation!
Dear Nelson,
I saw that you wrote several comments, which I do not have the time right now to answer all of them - I try my best, depending on the schedule of my visitor from overseas.
Well, to each his/her own opinions. You don't feel absurd, I feel it is. *shrug* It's just a matter of opinion. There is no right or wrong here.
While you are right to point out our "responsibilities" to know what we are voting for, but the sad reality is that (you already said it yourself) - many people (no proof on that yet) voted for the party logo instead of the candidates! I don't have to quote you on that, do I?
Indeed a Toyota sells better than Chinese brands (VW-China, Shanghai-GM, Da Zhong, etc) simply because of the brand-name Toyota! You said that and I absolutely agreed!
It's precisely of these facts (party logo, Toyota) that I find it absurd for Mr Goh MS to "expect" people to find out for themselves who the WP candidates are! This is ABSURD!
Put it in layman term. Imagine you are using Cooldoor menthdol toothpaste all along. One day, Cooldoor changed the type to spearmint toothpaste and at the same time give you some rebate coupons, do you say no and switch to Ducklie menthdol?
As in every case, there will some who will switch to Ducklie menthdol because they want menthdol favour IRREGARDLESS of who is providing, even in the face of the coupons being offered!
The sad fact is most do not switch brand and all the more, they like the rebate coupons (get things cheaper)! So they accept the new spearmint favour and get on with life. Do you think they will bother to find out what Ducklie is offering? They are the consumers NOT the supplier! How often do you see a consumer (you might see some crazy ones) advertising for a product that they want? Why don't you turn to your newpapers (if you subsribe of course) and tell me how many advertisments by the suppliers and how many advertisments by the consumers can you see?
Put it back to the actual political situation. PAP has always been the ruling party for more than 30 years. They are the incumbant. If you are going offer alternatives, do you think it will work if you expect people to find out about you themselves? Why should they (the apathetic voters) switch?
You already said that most can even remember more than 3 Ministers! MPs? No need to ask them to list 10, just ask them how many MPs in the parliament? How many of you can actually give me the correct figures without going to the Parliament website to find out? [Link]
If you do not even know the faces and names of the MPs already in the parliament and whose names are constantly mentioned in the mass media, how is the apathetic Singaporean going to know about the candidates of the WP whose names hardly ever appeared in the papers? Can you teach me?
And every contested elections of the GRC/SMC, PAP was/is the winning party in 90% of the 23 GRCs/SMCs. What does this show? People have been voting for the PAP! And you expect them to go to you (where ever place you are) and ask some questions about you to find out more about you because you are providin them an alternative? ABSURD!
You don't advertise often enough and keep on complaining that the voters (consumers) do not know you enough and you have no access to the media? What do you get at the end of the day? The elections will just get over and the same old party PAP will be voted in. That's REALITY!
So instead of complaining that the voters are apathy; complaining that you don't have access to the media; complaining that the voters should come forward to know you; and complaining whatsoever, why not channeled the energy to finding out how to get the voters to know you (instead of sitting there expecting them to come to you)?
Remember the classical case study for marketing please:
"Paracetamol (C8H9NO2) is a type of medicine meant for reliving your pain somewhere. Panadol is a brand name.
You go to the pharmacy to buy paracetamol. But you asked for Panadol!
There will be cases whereby you asked for paracetamol and you get a "ha" in return. And try asking for Pacimol or Paramax. The sales assistant might thought you are buying some kind of condoms! These are major brand names of medicine!
You might say that you are not in medicine field so you do not know all the brands well. I say, even the sales assistant also doesn't know what he/she is selling!"
Put the scenario back to reality. The government is the "paracetamol" and the PAP is the "Panadol". "Paramax" is some opposition party. The customer is "us, the general public" and the sale assistant is "the low-level civil servant" who doesn't even know all about his/her government - being apathetic.
Based on this kind of argument and judgement, I find it nothing wrong for me to say Mr Goh was being absurd to expect voters to come forward to know them, in my honest opinion. You say it is not absurd - fine with me! It is but your opinion and I respected it. Respect MINE!
Dear Nelson,
I continue from before. Politics is NOT a two-way things.
There can only be 1 way! The party must offer 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.... before they can get elected! The voters? They goes to the election rally for 3 things (IMHO):
(a) Either they go there for the atmosphere; or
(b) they want to know what's in for them; or
(c) they want to know who are they voting for
But remember! How many people (in percentage) of a GRC attended a rally? Read my blog for the estimation.
So how about the ignorant majority, who does not know your opposition party candidates. Will they voted for something they already know before-hand (incumbents) or will they put their trust on someone whom they don't have an inklings of?
There is a saying "If it's ain't broken, don't fix it.". Dare you challenge the non-existant of such a similar statement!
For someone who want to buy a bed, so that he/she can sleep, he/she goes to the shop and asked about a certain bed because it caught his/her eyes. That's 2-way information exchange!
Politics is not as such a 2-way event. Given the choice, if election is not complusory, how many of you will actually turn up to vote? I don't need to know because even in politically-active USA the turnout rate is as low as 50%! You need to sell your ideas hard to pull the votes. Don't and never expect them to come to you. (Maslow's hierachry of needs) Voting is not a NECESSITY of life. It is by LAW!
I have grown past the age of needing to denigrate people, or insist on winning a debate or to hold sway over any discussion. That is what teenagers and young adults do.
I'll just concur with sgloyalist and go on my merry way.
Good for you! At least I won't get to see disturbing comments that I have to continue defending vigourously with facts and facts which doesn't to drill in your brain (a die-hard opposition brain).
Whether you are interested to comment or not does not interest me. But if you are going to comment, make it logical please.
Anyway, I have long dismissed you off as an 'old' sore loser (you are not even older than my sister). Just stay it that way so that my image of you is valid.
* clap clap * I am impressed with all these 'sore loser' and 'younger than your sister' comments coming from you. In xanga, such be-you-tiful remarks deserves 2 eprops!
Perhaps in Singapore, this is what a mature, articulate, coherent, real winner should react when confronted with opposition!
Join the PAP, dude. I have utmost confidence that with the likes of you it will take Singapore to a higher level in its future glory.
Dear K.S.,
Noted and I apologise too if I had upset you :)
Regards
Dear sgloyalist,
Thank you for your courtesy. I really meant it.
Post a Comment