Last Sunday, during WP's walkabout at Nee Soon East SMC & Ang Mo Kio GRC. A party member shared with me about rumblings in a local Internet forum (Sammy Boy) that some forum participants were unable to reconcile with the fact that I voted for Teo Ho Pin in GE2006.
This party member subsequently sent me the forum link here.
I am of the view that it is a trait for humans to operate within the paradigms of subjectivity and objectivity. Personally, I do not believe in opposition for opposition's sake. In this regard, there is nothing inherently wrong for me to vote for an MP, regardless of his/ her partisan background, whom in my opinion is the better man who can better serve the interests of Singapore and my community (Bukit Panjang SMC).
Consciously in so doing, I have raised my understanding on a required 'standard for parliamentary entry'. In another words, being a forefront partisan activist, myself am of the view that a particular candidate from the ruling regime deserves my vote rather than another from the opposition, this invariably reminded me that, the WP has to 'strive so much harder', 'offer so much more' and 'convince so much more' in order 'to get there'.
Actually during GE06 itself, there were also some in WP who raised their eye brows when I shared with them that I will be voting for Teo Ho Pin. On polling day, one urged me that since the incumbent will win anyway I should perhaps 'spoil my vote' instead. However as a citizen of our constitutional state, I take my voting duty very seriously and will never waste my precious vote, unless the political circumstances really warrant it.
The interesting question perhaps would be, if a WP candidate is to offer himself/ herself for election in the constituency I reside, will I vote for this WP candidate? Partisan considerations will certainly weigh heavily in my considerations. Having said that, ultimately this WP candidate has to convince me that he/ she has what it take to better serve the interests of our country and the constituents to win my vote.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
127 comments:
sorry..i think u got it all wrong.i do not share your view.
This is one of the most basic question voters need to ponder on. Should I vote for a particular political party to support its core values even when the candidate is a very poor one?
I say the answer should be "NO". It is not possible for such a poor quality candidate to represent the party's core values so he / she does not deserve the vote.
The quality of the candidates also reflect the quality of the party. The next question one should ask is whether the political party upholding the core values it declared?
Will I consider voting for a candidate even when the other candidate is better? The answer is a conditional "YES", provided this candidate is competent to the job. We can call it "affirmative action" to help the weaker party to build up and grow.
So, vote for a lesser candidate if he / she is competent, but don't blindly vote for a any candidate just because he / she is from a specific camp.
Well dont be fooled by YSL, y did YSL vote for Teo H P, the reason is simple, to raise his public profile to increase his chances of winning, in his words "I dont belive in opposing for opposing sake" but hw often he supported PAP. If given the chance would he assisnate top PAP leaders?
OK lets come bk to the issue why he voted for Teo H P, 1st of all even 1 more vote for Ling H D he wont win, secondly and moet importantly he wana show to the world tht he dont support opposition blindly thereby pple would feel this is indeed a credible opp candidate hence increasing his won chances at the polls. Its a gd deal make Ling lose his seat but win 6 seats for AMK GRC, this kind of business deal who dunno hw to make.
I think the last anonymous comment is utter rubbish. I agree with YSL as I am also someone who think the GRC should be given to the most appropriate candidate provided he/she had shown results in the past.
I detest those who are in the politic scence with string attached or nepotism. We cannot afford "ka ki nang' gahmen as there will be too many closed door policy passed down to the commoners.
As a Singapore citizen I want to have my rights to vote for everything including the president of Singapore but unfortunately out presidency electoral system is a closed door system with only selective votes.
Let the Singaporean decide who should run the country, not with any string attached.....
I do not share your view for the following reasons:
1. A typical PAP MP has virtual no influence on party policies, and is more often seen as a mouthpiece of the government to convince/ push its policies to the constituency, regardless of whether he believes in it or not.
2. We typically interact and read about contesting MP during the election period, which is about 2-3 weeks or so. Is this adequate time to assess a person's capability and sincerity? Mr Low Thia Khiang might not be as eloquent or "educated" as a PAP MP but he was able to prove his mettle with the test of time.
If your criteria for selecting an MP is to ensure the candidate can better serve the interests of Singapore, then you should never vote for PAP.
Why? Because regardless of the quality of the candidate, the interest of singaporeans can ONLY be served when policy development are thoroughly scrutinized and debated, and then put to an open vote in parliament instead of applying the party whip to force the bill through.
And the above can only be achieved when we have more opposition members in Parliament, not more "quality" PAP MPs. If the opposition starts getting more seats, they will be able to attract better quality candidates.
Mere quantity of "opposition members in Parliament" will not achieve the objectives stated by Banglarock. It is the quality that matter.
What can a pap MP do, when everything, policy already laid down and he can't please you if you propose or suggest any idea.Don't talk about quality,all pap candidates are sieved thru throughly,meaning their quality is number 1.What we want to show to pap is that many ppl are unhappy under their rule.YOu can win 84 seats out of 84, but we are still unhappy whether how good quality is your MP does not matter to us.
I am disappointed that Yaw made it public that he voted for the PAP candidate.
He may think the opposition candidate is not up to the mark; but with himself and his party members in similar situation, I would expect him support anyone that has the courage to stand up against a ruling party that has made things very difficult for the oppositions.
It is such mentality of voters like Yaw that we will never get more oppositions into the Parliament.
At least, he should not make it public that he voted for the ruling party.
Well whether YSL voted for Teo H P or not we all do nt knw afterall voting is secret, maybe he din voted for him but he say yes further boosting his own chances at the polls.
Hello All: Thank you for your comments.
Black Feline: I understand where you are coming from :)
Salary: Well said. I agree with your points.
Anonymous Commenter (May 12, 2008 10:51:00 PM): Good try. Unfortunately you were off the key.
Anonymous Commenter (May 13, 2008 1:41:00AM): Well said too!
Banglarock: Actually it is not entirely accurate to say that a 'typical PAP MP' has virtually no influence on party policies. Any MP who is voted into the highest decision making body in the land, will certainly have some influence in policies' molding and its respective outcomes . I believe the issue here in Singapore is that of political hegemony and its excessiveness.
I agree that it is rather difficult for an opposition newbie to be adequately assessed in terms of his capability and sincerity during the short span of campaigning. This is exactly the reason why the opposition journey here in Singapore is certainly not a stroll but a marathon filled with obstacles + pitfalls. Remember the fact that JBJ entered politics in 1972 and was only elected in 1981, whereas Low Thia Khiang entered politics in 1981 and was only elected in 1991.
Admittedly I deliberated on the point, 'for the better serving interests of Singapore' that I should perhaps just vote for the SDP candidate. However, in view of Mr Ling's past performance & antics, I just could not bring myself to vote for him. Had SDP sent someone else - for instance their ex-party member Christopher Neo Ting Wei, I will certainly give more weight to the 'better serving interests' consideration, prior to the exercising of my vote.
I agree too that the interests of Singaporeans can ONLY be served when policies' development are thoroughly scrutinized and debated. On another hand, Singaporeans have given Mr Ling How Doong a rare chance in 1991 at Bukit Gombak SMC. Did Mr Ling treasure that precious chance? Or perhaps, I should have given him yet another chance?
Gary: I understand where you are coming from.
Anonymous Commenter (May 13, 2008 8:05:00 AM): There is hardly a political view that is not uncontested. As such I am glad that you feel strongly about my 'what I should or should not have done' in regard to my democratic right to choose, to vote and to share. Care to serve Singapore together with us?
Anonymous Commenter (May 13, 2008 8:49:00 AM): How would the incurring of wrath, via such a sharing with potential supporters like yourself win votes for YSL?
im disturbed enuff to add another 2 cents...never ever sleep with the enemy...no matter how good your intention is.
Hello Black Feline: Thank you for your new input. Frankly I never view the PAP as an enemy, political opponent yes, but not from the perspective of enmity. I am of the view too that all political parties ought to operate, base on the principle of good intentions for our country and people, regardless of affiliations.
The pro-Singapore, love-Singapore and for-Singapore societal vision I envisage is an inclusive model. Although the adopted approaches by ruling, alternatives and NGOs are certainly going to be different, still so long the interests of our country and people are placed above that of sectarian interests, I am prepared to work with such like-minded individuals.
I believe you are a patriot yourself, who feels strongly about people, society and politics. Care to serve our country together? Collectively we can mold a common vision and determine our courses of action. Do email me :)(yawsl@wp.sg) Best Regards.
The more tht YSL try to explain the more we r suspicious of him, he hates PAP to the core, nearly folded his party, alwasy attacking his beloved JBJ hence hw can PAP nt be his enemy, maybe he secretly planning a celebration when LKY dies. who knws, maybe he has sent him a coffin already, who knws.
Furthemore YSL deleted some of my critical comments abt him, this really shows wht kind of a person he is, he only willing to accept views from his supporters.
Let me use Taiwan as an example. The people voted in the DPP 8 years ago and voted DPP out this time round. It is not just a simple case of changing government as part of the democratic process. DPP suffered defeat after defeat in a series of elections in the past few years because of poor governing record and string of corruption scandals among government officials and their family members including the First Family.
The impact is not limited to DPP defeated in elections. It also resulted in many social and economic ills in the society. Most important of all, a big setback to DPP in terms of public support. One can hardly blame the previous DPP supporters for abandoning the party. They voted in DPP trusting their clean image only betrayed by corruptions and scandals within the DPP government.
It took decades of works by DPP forerunners to build up the party's image and household brand name and all ruined in the 8 years DPP corrupted governing of the country. Now DPP need to rebuild from the ruin and start all over again.
The lesson to us: Voting in any opposition may make us feel good in short term. But it may sow the seed of greater setback in very short span of time and ruin the past effort.
We can only grow and build up Singapore democracy by voting in quality people. Voting in bad people, and it will corrupt the opposition from within.
The role of the Opposition candidate is not simply to offer himself as a better town council manager or debater in Parliament, though these are important functions in themselves.
The role of Opposition is also to establish a different set of policy directions for the nation from the ruling party, and also to allow people the chance to express their displeasure at the ruling party. Yaw Shin Leong said to himself that the reason they contested Ang Mo Kio GRC was to allow people the chance to vote against PAP and balance out the playing field. Isn't that Opposition for the sake of Opposition itself -- in a positive way? Why then does Mr Yaw contradict himself now in his most recent blog posting (thanks to ActVirgin for providing the link), in saying we should not have opposition for the mere sake of opposition?
How Opposition members themselves vote must depend on the prevailing state of affairs at the national level. Are we already a stable multi-party democracy where rights are respected? Or are we still struggling to achieve political plurality against a party that has almost 100% domination of Parliament? Unfortunately in Singapore the latter is the case.
Since we are clearly very far from achieving political plurality, Opposition must vote with one clear voice. Mr Yaw has deviated from that ideal. If we feel certain Opposition parties are inadequate or have flaws, let us approach them and give them constructive feedback, rather than just posting on our blogs that we voted against them. Wouldn't that be much fairer?
A vote for the PAP is not just an endorsement of its candidate, but more importantly, is an endorsement of its policies. In Mr Yaw's zeal to endorse MP Ho Teo Pin, perhaps he forgot about this.
Hello Anonymous Commenter (May 13, 2008 9:39:00 PM): There is no basis in what you said. Please feel free to post/ re-post what you wish. The Internet is a free world, censorship does not apply.
Salary: Agree wholeheartedly.
E-Jay: Very well articulated points you have there.
The contextual application of 'opposition for the sake of opposition' mean different things to different people at different times.
As such I agree to disagree with your views. This is the beauty of democracy isn't it? :)
Whether or not YSL deleted some of my comments he know better, assuming today he and LKY is in a rm, jus the 2 of them and YSL has a gun LKY dont hv, wht u think he would do?
[The role of the Opposition candidate is not simply to offer himself as a better town council manager or debater in Parliament, though these are important functions in themselves.
The role of Opposition is also to establish a different set of policy directions for the nation from the ruling party]
I never had the same quandary since I live in Hougang SMC and my choice in 2006 was clear-cut.
While you cited 3 criterias for making a choice between parties to vote for, you cited one as seemingly the only criteria on who the author should vote for. Such headlong statements are fast becoming a typical trademark of a certain ginggang.
You also omitted that while the author stood under an opposition ticket, he voted as a citizen. The only thing is perhaps I agree with Locke that he should not make it public because, among all things, the vote is secret and there isn't a need to.
There is one criteria that I place more importance than any of the 3 you listed - disposition. The opposing candidate in question has been known to have none of it, be it by the opposition circle or public perception. The party chief you so appear to idolise had a taste of it on several occasions when they both co-runned the party, with all the public spat with the 154th press. Before that, he and another piloted the preceding chief's exodus and your seeming idol, then newbie, got an unfair share of the blame. I am sure he is relieved that a long-time time loyalist has now taken the former's place.
Disposition is also what determines, apart from the policy direction, whether the person will stand to this when he is in power. This, I assume, is what most who cite LKY's democracy-fighting days before he came into power, will agree with me.
Personally, I am not one to believe everything tagged with ruling party insignia have to be malignant and "impellers" like Tan Cheng Bock, Tan Soo Khoon (whom I remember even handles who share your zeal of the same party have praised) and Teo within, the PAP would be worse than it is. Take them away and the PAP's malignant hand will be freer.
Acknowlegded that the above-mentioned may not compel you but is to me.
Regards
Dear Team mate :)Thank you for your well thought comments.
I would like to clarify my earlier pts about having more opposition MPs in the parliament.
My point was based on the assumption that the PAP remains the ruling party, meaning they have already or seems likely to be returned to power on nomination day.
With that in mind, why should we give PAP 82 or 84 seats?
Consider this:
- I see Mr Low or Mr Chiam being treated condescendingly by the PAPs because they are simply outnumbered
- I see MPs "thumping" their chairs in support of a smart alec retort made by an fellow MP to the opposition
- I see Ho Peng Kee getting away with making snide remarks about Mr Low's inability to hear
- I see how the PAP MPs laugh along at Thio Li-Ann's sick jokes in her 377A speech
Doesn't it makes your blood boil?
Now, if this is how our "better quality" MPs behave in parliament, then I am sure the Chiam and Low will appreciate Mr Ling's company instead of Mr Teo Ho Ping. I'm also sure the PAP MPs would think twice before dozing off if we have 30 oppositions shooting questions.
Last but not least, PM Lee and his team are paid millions of dollars a year, so why should they not spend more time thinking of "how to fix the opposition"? Why should they have it easier when the rest of singaporeans have to constantly compete against each other and with foreigners?
I reckon a little crisis will make them less complacent and justify their pay as well.
Dear YSL
I'm very disappointed to learn about your voting arguements.
You have voted for someone who represents a party that decides to serve last the citizens of opposition wards. Do you agree with this method of governance?
The PAP candidate must have supported his party's decision - does this make that candidate an honest man? Or have you ever heard that candidate dissociate himself from that immoral policy?
You have voted for someone who is undoubtedly immoral - you should repent. It is not too late to reverse your judgement and apologise to the citizens of Singapore.
Shin Leong, I agree with you on one point. WP members have no obligation, not even moral obligation, to vote for SDP candidates. Just as SDP members have no obligation to vote for WP members. This applies to all parties. Otherwise, there wouldn't be so many different parties. All have some differences and different preferences.
However, I disagree with you on two points:
1. You weren't a mere member. You were a candidate contesting PAP and rallying for voters to vote against PAP in one constituency, but yourself voting for PAP in another. For your case to hold water, you must have believed that Teo Ho Pin wouldn't only be a good MP but could be a better PM than Lee Hsien Loong.
2. You explicitly clarified that even if had a WP candidate stood in your constituency against PAP, you would have to consider whom to vote for. You said the WP candidate had to convince you to win your vote, but the WP candidate as your comrade had already convinced the party so as to be fielded as candidate.
Nw we all know YSL is a "traitor" of the opp camp, wld u vote for a "traitor" or wld u kick him out? But being a "traitr" up his chances at the polls, if he indeed voted for Teo shows us the ballot paper, if he indeed voted for Teo jus keep quiet y bother to let the world knw let alone putting up on his blog, all the explanations here merely show he wana increase his own chances at the nxt polls.
The image YSL is trying to project is clear and simple, "I may be an opp man but i may nt vote for an opp candidate blindly hence I rationale". Hence when voters came to knw abt all these, they will say "This is indeed a diff man, lets giv him a chance". This is the true intention of YSL, trying to make himself diff from the rest, trying to show he will choose th best man for the job (even though tht maybe his enemy). All these r part of his efforts to rack up his chances at the next GE. YSL is indeed smart and diff.
I am disappointed that Yaw made it public that he voted for the PAP candidate. Why is he so naive to provide ammo for others to shoot?
What does that revelation do for WP? What does that revelation do for the opposition? What does that revelation do for him? But that revelation is a winner for PAP. Now it's on msm and opposition is made to look a fool. If Yaw has nothing better to say, he should keep his mouth shut. Yaw's political days are over. Such a naive fellow, how do you expect the public to vote for you?
It sound good and noble that you never view the PAP as an enemy but merely as political opponent.
Personally, I view anybody or any group that practice any form of despotism as enemy of democracy.
Technically speaking, such a person or a group is an enemy of the state based on our constitutions since Singapore is still a democratic republic.
Don't even get me started on gerrymandering...
Yaw, thank you for your comments and patient reply. I agree to disagree with you too.
Melvin Tan, I understand where you are coming from too, and likewise, I will agree to fully disagree with you.
OMG! Did you voted against democracy and for a party who practice gerrymandering?
I disagree with your view on vote spoiling. I think that citizens have every obligation to spoil their votes, in a system that has compulsory voting, if they feel that none of the candidates put forward are satisfactory. This is especially so in Singapore, where the choice is often between an uninspiring PAP candidate, and a incompetent opposition one. While I do believe that one should not oppose for oppositions sake, you have implicitly endorsed Teo Ho Pin, to the detriment of anyone else who will stand up to contest him for your ward come 2011. As a politician, part of a political party's slate, these things are best not revealed. If there is one thing about the PAP that is formidable, it is incredible party discipline. Rarely do PAP MPs challenge each other on fundamental principles of governments, and they certainly do not undermine their cause. WP has to learn from this episode and be more professional and ruthless. I'm afraid this incident will be the end of your political career, because you've completely destoryed your credibility in the eyes of Singaporeans. I know you voted PAP because you were anti-Ling How Dong, and I think he's a joke too, but you've given the PAP the an easy propaganda walkover and that revelation has only managed to hurt your party and the opposition in general, and yourself in particular. Very, very unwise.
Shin Leong,
I applaud you for exercising your independence at the ballot box. But I agree with Melvin that you should have kept it a secret.
Shin Leong,
Well said. Agree in general except one point: if there is a contest between WP and any other party, you should vote WP. Because you belong to the party, it is only right that you should support your own party. That much loyalty you owe to your party.
If you cannot agree with the people that your party has accepted into its ranks, then you should change parties so that your loyalties do not continue to be divided.
Of course, this is only the KTM's view and you don't have to agree. You're a good man and the KTM hopes that you will find your seat in Parliament one day. :-)
It might not have been very wise of you to have revealed your voting preferences, but your current response to the criticism in a blog entry is a good move. :-) Since you have nothing to hide, just explain yourself instead of letting rumours fester.
Principles are important. Many Singaporeans talk about democracy - but it's clear from some of the posts here that many have no understanding of what democracy means. This is sad.
Banglarock,
Mr Low Thia Khiang might not be as eloquent or "educated" as a PAP MP
Rubbish. Mr Low is more eloquent than most of your PAP MPs. :-P
I see Mr Low or Mr Chiam being treated condescendingly by the PAPs because they are simply outnumbered
This is Parliament and not a gang fight. It's not numbers that matter in case you haven't figured.
vincent,
You weren't a mere member. You were a candidate contesting PAP and rallying for voters to vote against PAP in one constituency, but yourself voting for PAP in another. For your case to hold water, you must have believed that Teo Ho Pin wouldn't only be a good MP but could be a better PM than Lee Hsien Loong.
This argument is flawed. YSL only said he will vote for the best candidate. He has a problem only if he was voting in Ang Mo Kio and he voted for the PM instead of himself. :-) Actually, is that possible? Does one get to vote if one lives in the same constituency that one is standing for election in?
Although i totally agree with YSL's choice and rationale in his decision in voting for a PAP member as opposed to an opposition, but i fear he has made the biggest mistake by telling it to the entire world! the opposition right now needs the support of 1)people who believe in their values plus 2)those who will vote for the opposition for the sake of.. you cant alienate anyone at this stage cos your support base is still small!
I very much agree with what Vincent mentioned, that is "You were a candidate contesting PAP and rallying for voters to vote against PAP in one constituency, but yourself voting for PAP in another".
While it is true that everyone is entitled the freedom to vote for any party based upon their beliefs and personal convictions, you must realize that you are essentially a political member heralding from an opposition party in Singapore.
In a dominant one-party state such as Singapore, it is unfortunately commonly viewed that a vote for opposition is equivalent to a vote against PAP.
Unlike a multi-party political system, your line of reasoning might falter in local context.
Finally, last but not least, you should weigh the consequence of making your vote known to the public.
While it is probably premature for me to judge, but I postulate that your actions might have detrimental effect on WP.
Go visit the Straits Times online. I can only hope that you had already predicted the public reactions.
Nw YSL has further achieved his aim of boosting his chances at the nxt polls cos it hit the papers. Maybe it was YSL who leaked the story to them. ST further reported tht Mrs LKY has a stroke, YSL must be v happy, is he planning a celebration?
Dear Shin Leong,
I am sorry you are getting all this flak. You acted as a responsible and sensible voter, and for that I applaud you.
Putting aside considerations of who will serve the people better, though, the more important point is this: you are a citizen, and being given the right to vote, you have every right to vote the candidate of your choice.
In other words, this has nothing to do with partisan politics. Being a WP member does not preclude your right as a citizen of this nation to vote.
-Selene
Hi Shin Leong,
Its been quite awhile my friend. :-)
From a public relations point of view, with regards to this voting for the other side, some things are better left unsaid. In other words, your voting stance during GE2006 should not have been made public.
Especially since you're with an opposition party and more so because you, along with the other 4 WP candidates, put up an admirable fight in GE2006's other battle royale in the PM's ward. Some political capital may be lost due to this revelation.
Sorry to see you getting flak for it though but it wasn't wholly unexpected.
Take care :-)
E-Jay, it's fine and thank you for the gracious response.
Vincent, the one nagging issue is what if someone from the WP, NSP or SDA disagrees with the SDP more than the PAP. I, for one, fall into that category and, for one, don't believe in casting an invalid vote unless in very extreme circumstances.
Nevertheless, it doesn't mean I will vote for the PAP, especially in their opposing party's last GRC team, there were two good friends Gerald and Chris Neo and there was no one in the PAP team of THP or Tan Cheng Bock likes.
At this point of time, I am unsure if YSL would vote against a WP candidate. If so, I disagree with him. I, for one, wouldn't vote against a WP candidate. Even those who have left WP, with the exception of one, would get my vote if they ran under another opposition party.
Regards
Lets start a campaign to sack YSL from WP, the silence from LTK and Slyvia LIm is deafening, do they condone such behaviour or just protecting him. Imagine YSL contesting the ward he's staying in, would he voted aginst himself?
Why WP like to score own-goal? Now, PAP is capitalizing on the state media to score point. Think before you open your mouth and don't shoot yourself in the foot.
Dear Mr Yaw
I respect your opinion and respect yr decision.
Perhaps you subscribe to the "partisan non-partisan" (or is it "non-partisan partisan"?) stance of Barack Obama...in trying to find some Third Way or something...Its ok with me.
On the other hand, your "honesty" in disclosing that, as a Opposition activist, you voted for the ruling party, is as unnecessary as Ronaldo telling the referee it wasn't a penalty.
Your decision to do so smacks of political naiveity, which i hope does not gnaw away the credibility that you have tried to build up all these years.
Even Obama has to play the political game to win votes.
Ed
Fortunately, we are not invaded by any country more developed or advance than Singapore 'cos by your logic if you THINK or FEEL that invading country can provide a better life. You are then going to vote/support them in their actions.
Sometimes it's not what you feel or think but who or what you belong.
What were you thinking of? To quote the judge of a local debating program, the task of an opposition is to oppose - let the other side do the proposing. So you think Ling is not worth your precious vote - ever thought of a spoilt vote? By your despicable act, you have contributed to the 66.6% "mandate" that justifies their riding roughshod over us in GST, SMRT, electricity tariff, etc rate increases. If you have any honor to speak of, you should resign from your party, and save Low and Sylvia from the embarassment.
Politics 101
Politics is about what you stand for, not the best candidate nor who can get the job done. If it were, compare man to man, can you beat PAP? You have fallen into what PAP would have us believe--the best man for the job.
We want an alternative to the PAP, not some party that accepts PAP. If that's the case, we might as well vote for PAP. A vote for PAP means an acceptance of PAP's policies, including SELECTIVE DISCRIMINATION against fellow citizens such as upgrading and mean testing. Erosion of Citizens societal position,etc.
What we want is an alternative to the PAP that fight for the interests of all citizens and to treat all citizens equally.
Hahahahahah YSL belongs to 1 of the 66.6% who voted for the PAP hence do not blame us cos YSL also voted for PAP. No 1 "traitor" of the opposition is none other than YSL, lets giv him a award.
Any1 knws of YSL hp pls bombarb him nw its 90679368.
It is said that PAP need not do anything and opposition will self implode. How true! Just give the opposition enough ropes and they'll hang themselves with it.
Goaaaaaal!
What a great goal!....and the scorer is....Yaw Shin Leong!
Unfortunately, it's an own goal.
"Vincent, the one nagging issue is what if someone from the WP, NSP or SDA disagrees with the SDP more than the PAP."
Melvin, that's not the nagging issue. I have no issue with that. We knew who Shin Leong voted for two years ago. He told us all.
The nagging issue is that your teammate is not only ready to vote for a PAP candidate who is "better", but also ready to vote against a WP candidate who doesn't "convince" him.
In spite of all their years of education, some people still do not know what is democracy. Give them a choice of 2 candidates and they think that's democracy.
If Sg is democratic, why the uneven playing field? Some people just don't use their head.
just remember whatever u do:
begin with the ending in mind...so said a guru. This unfortunate episode will cause u and the WP to lose considerable amount of political mileage..for a long time to come. You owed it to those who put u there in the first place. It's no longer about YOU alone..it's about US (including YOU)
First of all, I must declare that I am apolitical. But still, even I am moved to opine that there should be some kind of party whip to dictate what members can or cannot do... say or cannot say... vote according to party doctrine etc etc... and to whip this person into shape. Hee hee...
I think by revealing what and why he did it in the blog, he is damaging his own credibility and that of his own party.
Questions that could be raised in the next GE:
1.Who did LTK vote for in GE2006?
2.Who did Sylvia vote for in GE2006?
3.Who did Perry Tong vote for in GE2006?
4.Who did Eric Tan vote for in GE2006?
5.Why shoudn't people vote for PAP when even the opposition OS voted for it in GE2006?
6.Why should people vote for WP when even their member voted for PAP in GE2006?
When the field is already not level, why choose to widen the gap?
Sorry to tell you, Shin Leong, you have just told the whole world you are not a politician. Seriously, you have made a grave mistake....
Mr Yaw,
I certainly do not disagree with what you've mentioned in your post here. This is a democracy and you can exercise your choice of whom you want to vote, right?
A more personal question i think most people would like to know is, did you vote for Dr Teo because he is a good MP or did you vote him because you prefer PAP Policies?
I do have one niggly thing to bring up though: Your vote's supposed to be secret. Bringing this up is going to hurt you politically. I'm sure you could have been smarter than that. It's a big political no-no, and you should not have done it. How are you going to clear up this mess now?
Master Yaw Shin Leong,
Following your reasoning, should I vote for you or PM Lee Hsien Loong in the AMK GRC the next time round? Do you think you are a better candidate that PM Lee?
Vincent, fair enough.
[The nagging issue is that your teammate is not only ready to vote for a PAP candidate who is "better", but also ready to vote against a WP candidate who doesn't "convince" him.]
Personally, after reading again, I see that he had expressed that "Partisan considerations will certainly weigh heavily in my considerations." The key word I see is *heavily*.
Perhaps the last statement "this WP candidate has to convince me that he/ she has what it take to better serve the interests of our country and the constituents to win my vote" sounded like an escape clause that created some confusion.
However, I recall that - for what you may not know - YSL had a big part in shaping the WP's decisions on who to field as candidate. With that, the last round of candidates must have convinced him they had what it takes or why would YSL waste time proposing them to party decision-makers? Therefore, I don't see any reason why he would not vote a WP candidate over THP.
He also commented that he could vote for Chris Neo, someone he and I know closely. Chris ran under the SDP (though now NSP). Perhaps YSL could have stated this foremost as well as that the issue wasn't about voting for a "better candidate" like THP but it was one where the opposing candidate was too "unvotable". The problem was that the opposing candidate was just too far off the mark in disposition. Virtually everyone I know in my life - any classmate, any colleague that I throw a stone and hit - can make a better candidate - that's how bad I think it is.
Regards
There is something called spoil vote.
Thank you all for your comments. I have nothing further to add. Best Regards.
Young man, I hope you have learnt your lesson. Your party and the opposition pay dearly for this one folly of yours.
YSL finally concedes defeat by saying he has nothing to add if he hasnt i think WP top leadership shld say something, they hv been keeping quiet the whole time, i wonder if WP endorses YSL, time to kick him out time to kick him out of entir opp. In Ysl words then every PAP candidate is better than a opp man hence return all 84 seats to PAP, wld he happy then? Is he a dog sent by PAP? lets organise a meeting in public (speakers corner) with full media coverage and grill him there, wonder he dared to turn up or nt.
But you got it all wrong...
Your reasoning is that you will vote for anyone who can serve Singaporeans and yourself better... this implies that you are not confident in the opposition at all - most opposition candidates in Singapore have absolutely no experience as MPs, and thus there is no way to gauge whether they will be able to do a good job.
Your reasoning implies that all Singaporeans should continue to vote for the 'tested and proven' choices... which means there is no choice as that would be the PAP.
The same goes for yourself - you had no previous experience, how can you substantiate that you will better serve the Singaporeans in your ward if you win?
I am disappointed at the caliber of opposition politicians in Singapore.
After reading all these, I just feel sorry for the constituents who voted for Yaw and gang during the last GE.
They wanted an alternative VOICE in the parliament; they wanted to show the PAP their displeasure over certain policies implemented; they gave their support to WP; they took risk to support a bunch of youngster who are nobody (as compared to some tried and tested politicians in PAP).
But what do they get in a return? A WP candidate who voted for PAP claiming that he voted for someone whom he feels will better serve the constituents and nation.
Why didn't he give the opposition a chance just like others gave him and his gang? Is it a political decision because the OTHER candidate is Ling How Doong? A clown, his appearance with a wig may suggest, but who can give concrete examples to prove that he didn't serve his constituents well when he was MP? How is Yaw better than Ling? Who can prove?
While credit should be given for his honesty, I can't help but to feel a sense of betrayal. So will the 33.86% of voters in AMK.....
Hi Shin Leong,
Just out of curiosity : if fate has its way that you are to be pitted against Mr Teo Ho Pin in the next GE (if you're lucky enough to be politically involved then), how are you going to convince the constituents to vote for you since even you yourself have voted for Mr Teo? What can you do, without a proper track record as an MP, to prove that you're a better candidate?
You got the BIG PICTURE totally wrong, but have choose to elect a candidate for your own local benefits.
The enviroment is not conducive for good opposition candidates to step forward to offer themselves, as such, the PAP candidates will always look good compare to what other alternative candidates there are. That is precisely the urgency to setup an alternate platform which canot be achived if everyone vote on local considerations.
Even SM Goh has praised the residents of HG and PP for not falling for the upgrading carrot. 33% people have voted for you and your team in AMK, do you think the PAP candidates there are not 'good' MPs? I think they are good, at least better than you.
But there is a bigger message to convey by voting for the alternate party, it is almost never the case where the local PAP candidates are not good. I think you are stuck in your local self-benefiting mentality. Go for your upgrading son, but no praise from SM Goh.
People might mistaken your 'admission' for 'honesty'. I would think honesty is when you come clean in 2006 on the stage of the rally when you urged others to give you a chance. Honesty is not when you admitted it 2 years later. No honest credit to you for this admission, its 2 years late.
Every GRC you stand in, you will waste 5 other candidates. Now please do the needful and go.
Why is there a GRC system in the first place? Ans: You get 5 good PAP candidates for 1 vote.
Seriously, Teo is a good grassroot connector, that is why he is in a Singel Seat Constituency. But most of the voters in Singapore have to make do with GRC where lesser known candidates tailgated into Parliament with a Minister.
Is Teo ever going to change the system for you? You have fallen into the PAP game of comparing man for man, you should focus on the political system to be changed in you voting decision.
Man for man, Teo might be a good grassroot leader, but under a GRC system, one good man cannot enter Parliament, and not so good men are able to. That is the type of danger that Singapore faced.
They gave you 9 SMCs but put majority of voters in GRC, and all you think about is how good your SMC MP is. Do you vote to change the system? Good for what anyway? Planting trees and shaking hands?
I really think Mr Yaw is leading by example. This is an example of responsible voting. I'm not a supporter of any political parties, but i'm a proponent of national interest. Political parties may demise, but this should not happen to our country. By voting base on partisan background and not on issues and capability of the candidates is voting irresponsibly, and this is not an act of mature democracy.
Besides, Singapore do not need opposition who can't represent us well. How many would love to go on the streets in the name of democracy to create unnecessary social disorder? Opposing for the sake of opposing simply does not lead to the improvement of the nation. There is no one government in the world who is perfect, no one political party who is superior. That's why we need credible opposition parties to provide alternative views to smoothen the edges of policies.
I simply do not agree with some criticism that accuses Mr Yaw of his intention for publicity. The reason being as simple as where's the prove? We have the rights to freedom of speech provided that it does not lead to social unrest. I respect people have different views on an issue, but there's a thin line between expressing individual's view and baseless accusation. It is a good practice to reflect on our own intention before we comment on issues, because we are the best judge for ourselves. You can't read another person's mind, so how do you prove the person's intention?
Given that PAP is most likely to win, I believe you should cast your vote to the opposition to show PAP that you do not support their policies and way of doing things. However if you think differently, there is nothing much to say. By the way, I think you have created a chance for PAP to laugh at WP...
"By voting base on partisan background and not on issues and capability of the candidates is voting irresponsibly, and this is not an act of mature democracy."
get your priorities right.
the responsibility comes only WHEN YOU GET INTO THE HOUSE - dealing with actual issues!
By self professed proponent of national interest.
"By voting base on partisan background and not on issues and capability of the candidates is voting irresponsibly, and this is not an act of mature democracy."
So by filling the entire house with PAP and killing off democracy is a responsible and mature act?
The main priority is to get enough opposition to fill a third of the house to prevent PAP from changing the constitution freely. This is the ONLY way to guarantee your rights and freedom. That also means your rights to vote freely. To achieve that, I'm prepare to vote in clowns and monkeys.
"To achieve that, I'm prepare to vote in clowns and monkeys."
Who is an idiot to join a party with clowns and monkeys in the first place?
Mr Yaw is certainly not an idiot!
"By voting base on partisan background and not on issues and capability of the candidates is voting irresponsibly, and this is not an act of mature democracy."
If you cannot guarantee your rights and freedom, what is there to talk about democracy? What is there to talk about voting responsibly or irresponsibly?
for what it's worth, mr ling is not a monkey. he is just a bad communicator with bad hairdo. other than that, he generally reflects the party stand. on that note, he should still get their members in. that's the least he could have done for HIS CHOSEN party.
"If you cannot guarantee your rights and freedom, what is there to talk about democracy? What is there to talk about voting responsibly or irresponsibly?"
agree. the action is in the house! sometimes, better to have monkeys than leave it to goons.
Yaw Shin Leong said, "Thank you all for your comments. I have nothing further to add."
In my post above (14 May, 4:34:00 AM), I called on Yaw to reverse his stand and apologise to the citizens of Singapore. Now in the light of what Yaw is saying, I'll turn my address to readers of this blog.
Dear readers - irregardless of what you think of Yaw, or of Ling, or any other member of the opposition parties, you should not change your vote for the opposition parties. Look at it from a logical point of view - if we truly believe that Yaw was wrong not to vote for SDP's Ling How Doong rather than PAP's Teo Ho Pin, then it make sense that we would also be wrong not to vote for Yaw or any other opposition member. To think otherwise would be inconsistent and make hypocrites of ourselves. We have to walk the talk.
If we do not vote for Yaw just because we think he is flawed or somehow no good in whatever way, then we cannot turn around and say he was wrong not to vote for Ling just because he judged Ling to be not as good as Teo. I hope you guys understand what I'm saying. He was doing exactly what we would be doing - and I'm saying it would be wrong.
As an illustration, look over at neighbouring Malaysia side. Over there, for the first time in 20 years, Malays are voting for Chinese DAP and Chinese are voting Muslim PAS - for the simple reason that they understand it's a vote against the ruling party. We Singaporeans have to learn from that. We must vote for the opposition candidate no matter what you think their flaws are. So, yes, we have to vote for Yaw Shin Leong too.
It doesn't matter to me whether Yaw has made a mistake, or if he does not admit it, a vote for the opposition is still a vote against the PAP - never, never, ever forget that. The one vote that we have is so very precious, it is battling against the 66% votes of the sheep mentality here in Singapore. Including Yaw's I might add.
And please, please stop talking about mature democracy and all such highbrow stuff. We are dying here, who wants to entertain the academics?
now you are talking about justification by faith. you are asking for people to put their faith in someone with apparent flaws.
only if he knows to remain in the light for all to see - unlike goons!
To YSL and ALL,
I have read all the postings here and I find it very interesting.Interesting indeed to know how you people think,write and vote in a parliamentary election eventually.
I have studied all these years since 1972 on how great singaporeans vote.Very interesting indeed YSL voted for the other side in GE2006.
And I must say always that during my 'gomen service' days(left the gomen service 1984) till this very day I have voted the opposition candidates on practically every GE since 1976, then 1980,1984,1988,1991,1997,2001 and 2006 without fail.
That's how it was, becos I believe a change-reform in parliamentary democracy has to be inplace.
No matter if you were the gomen servant or gomen pensioner, you have the right to vote the opposition and eventually deny 2/3 majority for the lky pap.And it does make sense in that aspect.
It goes to the same logic for YSL to vote lky pap's candidate, altogether -- the right to vote whoever.
YSL,my friend,
I respect your decision to vote the lky pap's candidate becos eventually that's your rights -- nobody could ever take away your rights.But that does not mean I personally agree with your stance.
To all,
I hope this episode will give an 'eye opener' opportunity for many 66% to support a good and promising opposition candidate who really wants to serve as full time member of parliament as oppose to incumbent part time member of parliament who goes MIA with an unbecoming character and lost touch with the local great singaporeans.
Well,think about it carefully.
Tokselehon
next GE i hope you will not be in my electoral area as i will rather void my vote than to vote for you...yet again, i will not vote for PAP too...seems like you have no principles to be in opposition. very dissapointed with WP to have such a traitor like you!
Here we are trying to level the playing field and here you are undoing everything we have done.
Erm, your comments has severely damaged the credibility of yourself and to a certain extent your party in my opinion...
The people (in general) will not take it as a vote for the best man, instead taking it to mean that a sign of weakness in the opposition.
Even if you voted for PAP, you could had kept mum instead of creating national headline stories for our papers to twist.
Well what's said been said and I still wish the WP best of luck in the next GE though my standard bar is now a notch or 2 higher than before this incident.
To quote Zhuge Liang:
Projecting your power effectively requires good human relationships; infighting would inevitably occur without support.
If the officers are not in harmony, gaining the soldiers' trust will be difficult, advices will not be taken to heart, the court will not be as one; even with intelligence like (shang) tang or (zhou) wu, one will not win the rambling average joe.
Would YSL vote against LTK in the future?
Mr Yaw Si Liao (politically)...
When so many ppl are saying that you did the wrong thing.... there must be some truth...
You're a responsible voter.... but should a responsible voter vote for u?
Can u imagine this?
The Shitty Times' headline during GE2010 :
"PM Lee : Even Opposition Leader Voted For PAP"
You'll bring the political downfall of not only yourself.. but WP as well....
"When so many ppl are saying that you did the wrong thing.... there must be some truth... "
Don't be a follower, think for yourself. We need more people who can think independently for the opposition cause.
"....I have voted the opposition candidates on practically every GE since 1976, then 1980,1984,1988,1991,1997,2001 and 2006 without fail."
Hi, care to tell us which constituency that is that you are lucky to have voted so many times.
Honestly, I agree with Mr Yaw’s stand that one should vote for the candidate who can “better serve” the constituents. Think about it for a second. The PAP USED to be the opposition, and the very fact that it is now a dominant party says a lot. This just shows that the opposition is still a long way away form being an alternative to the PAP.
I think the very first step that the opposition should do is to get credible candidates. A doctor or lawyer speaks volumes against an electrician or a facilities manager (no offence intended).
An MP shouldn’t only be focused with parliamentary duties. He should also be focused on serving his/her residents. An election is a battle of the heart and mind. To win this battle, one must really do well to serve the residents and show sincerity in serving them. Then, after that battle is won, should one think of winning the battle of parliamentary and policies.
We all saw LHD at Bukit Gombak. I leave it to you to judge.
And what about LHD? With both hands tied, see how you perform.
We should think of the big picture, not short term gain. If you don't know what the big picture is, read the comments again.
Hi anonymous(17/5/2008-8.44)
Yes,I am very lucky to vote for opposition since,
1976-macpherson
1980-macpherson
1984-bricksworks
1988-nee soon
1991-nee soon central
1997-nee soon central
2001-nee soon central
2006-nee soon central
Tokselehon
I am disappointed too.
What kind of political acumen is this? Like that how to contest election party in the future.
But deep down I know you will never admit what you had done is wrong and naive...it all about face too....
Why did you have to reveal who you voted for in your blog. Is it fear that made you inform Teo H P that you will be voting for him? In my opinion you should not have done what you had as an opposition political party member ie voting for the ruling party and publishing it on the net. Think about it...
You are giving ammunition to your opposition (the PAP)
YSL you are a disgrace and a letdown to many people who stood by the Workers Party.
Mark my words - somewhere, sometime, someone from the PAP party will say these words - EVEN THE OPPOSITION (the workers party) voted for us.
Yaw's very own election speech in 2006:
"If you have one chance, just ONE chance, to show the PAP that you're not happy with High Cost of Living, increasing GST, Transport Fares Hikes, Health Care Cost, Retrenchment, Reduced CPF, Utilities Bill, Foreign Talen and PAP Elitism (me: yeah man well said I am not happy!). Also if you have one chance, just ONE chance, to signal to my teammates & I that you want us (me: yes, I want you and Mr ITE, no problem!), the fourth generation leaders of Workers' Party to continue fighting for the people of Singapore. Do it here in Ang Mo Kio (me: sic, but not in my own constituency please). Give the WP a good percentage of your vote! Do your part as a patriotic citizen (me: now either you are not patriotic, or you are saying I am not patriotic, becos I realised we voted for different parties) who believes that with political competition, our lives in Singaporecan only get better. So who must you vote for?"
(me: quietly go back to vote for PAP MP becos he is a good MP. He forgot about the SYSTEM we are trying to correct. All PAP MP are constrained by the Party Whip. Who is asking about National Reserves? Who is asking about Ah Mat escape? Who is going to correct the problem of GRC where not so good candidate tailgated into Parliament? No, he voted for a good MP, wow new age sensational one time partisan one time non partisan candidate. Everyone has a right to choose, yes, but not everyone stand up on the election stage to urge people to vote for them and go home to vote otherwise. KNN ITE better than you, don't give me partisan big words)
Hi Tokselehon,
You are indeed lucky to have voted so many times. I only managed once and the rest walkover. That's why we need to support opposition. It's sad that those who get to vote almost always take it for granted and voted blindly without thinking of the consequences. They fail to realize that without opposition, there will be no voting.
When Chiam said he had money to build lifts on every story on Potong Pasir flats, I cried. I knew he was lying, or had very poor maths skills.
When SM Goh showed voters the Town Council Statement and how Chiam would never have enough funds to fulfill his promise without Government Assistance, I knew he was telling the truth.
When Chiam won, SM Goh was glad with the voters' choice.
Chiam was an old man with poor health and no succession plan. The better choice to the old folks at PP was to choose the man in white so they don't have to climb the stairs. Why do people choose him?
If you don't know this, you don't know politics.
Many young chaps do not know.
Before Ling, there was something called Seet, who would most likely went on to be the first female minister.
What Ling had to offer was an alternative to weed out incompetent candidates among the Whites, something that the current regime's internal mechanism was not capable of.
Just look at Joo Chiat today, 2 MPs taking care of one constituency. Someone was not capable and could not be removed by the current checks inherent in the existing regime. Thats an issue.
Ling was an old man. He spoke an old language, in an old tone, not like our eloquent Xiao Lian Gei. He ran the whole election without SDP support and probably no rally.
Like people of his age group, he had very poor interpersonal skills, and he did not know internet and did not speak well of the media. But that was his true background, he was truthful to his background and he need not apologise for that.
He had done his part by offering himself as an alternative and had created a mammoth precendent by taking down Seet, a cabinet member. Letting legions of would-be followers know what was possible. He still did not know internet. And he still speak like an old shopkeeper. Let him be, young men, why talked about him in your blog.
He stood in a Single Seat. Yaw and Melvin were, ehem, safely tagged in a GRC. You knew not what he went through. He still had very strong grassroot support despite the media portrayal of him and SDP in general. Not many can work with Chiam.
Come and take him on in a 3 corner fights, I see how Yaw or Melvin lost their deposits.
Ling's inspiring speeches were, in my opinion, one of the main contributor to what was the Opposition's proudest moment in modern history, 3+1 seats in the pre-Chee era, that the mild-mannered Chiam and Neo could not had mustered together. The impact was wide in the western areas.
Of course, high cost of living was another. But we had high cost of living every year. Young aspiring politcal science students could take a leaf out of his speeches at his prime time. That was singapore coffee shop style politics to the max. His face still refreshed many memories of singaporeans when he came on air.
You Yaw, you Mel, you could not hold a candle to him. Even Low with all his achievements had never defeat a cab member and single-handedly brought 3 seats over. That was a legend you were throwing stones about.
Granted he was a sunset figure now. He ought to let go, his style of play no longer appealed to modern and educated singaporeans.
But he had had his time and place in the record books. Do not use him for your political mileage, or anyone else, not even the whites.
Some humilities go a long way. There were many young WPs that thought winning 33% was a big yaya. I believed Low knew otherwise.
Dear YSL,
I believe you have made the right choice in voting with your head, not with your heart.
However some things are better left unsaid. In your own circle of friends/teammates, you can always share your views. But this is a public blog, mind you. Your words can effect and affect many readers.
That said, I do not think it is wise to voice your choice of vote. Not because I think your vote is secret (which I strongly believe the PAP has used this to cripple people's choices and out of box thinking), but you do represent another party.
It's like Microsoft endorsing IBM's product. DUH!
Next time, if you don't have something good to say/write, don't say/write it. What you have lost is credibility within the socio-political blogsphere, which can be so very important to gain support in the next election.
Yet I know how your feel about trying to be real to the readers. However it can go either ways.
A+ for honesty, transparency
D for public relations
Kaffein
The main thrust of Yaw SL's (and his supporters) defence for voting the PAP is that Ling HD is simply "unvotable". That may be the case, but I have these question for Yaw SL. As reported in TNP, Teo Ho Pin recounted that Yaw SL had told him that he and his mom will vote for Teo weeks before nomination day. So can Mr Yaw answer this - why did you readily pledged your vote to Teo Ho Pin even before knowing who is contesting against him? What is your motive for letting Teo know that you will vote for him even before nomination day?
Regards
James
Yaw, 你这个骗子不得好死。
WP, nice to see you all using cock to help covering his backside.
It is more exciting then watching porn.
Mr Yaw,
Unfortunately, this incident won't blow over for a long long time. i'm afraid you may have to take a more drastic damage control step, like taking a break from Politics.
As i said, revealing whom you voted for is a no-no, especially when you are a leader in a political party here. Let this be a lesson learned.
When I first read this in the Straits Times... wrt your comparison between the PAP and opposition candidates in casting your vote... my first reaction is do you think the 33.33% voters voted for you in AMK realy thought that you were better than our PM?
Given our current political environment, there're many more good reasons for people to vote for the opposition!
You should know that many opposition supporters didn't even have a chance to vote. As a leader in our most promising opposition party, how do you expect your supporters to accept that you had voted for the PAP!
You've put yourself and your party in a crisis for 2010.
Hi Shin Leong,
I’m an BPian ex-classmate of yours. Sec 4G, class of ’92. Days of Tiger Tan. I understand your point of view, and why you cast your vote thus. And in a true democracy, I would probably do the same in your shoes. But that’s where the similarity ends.
Nation before party before self. Agree 100%. But taken in Singapore’s current context, what is in the national interest? The way I see it, as of May 2006 (and even today) a vote in the national interest would be a vote to 1) reduce the PAP hegemony in parliamentary seats and 2) Increase alternative representation in parliament. Had there been a realistic chance of a freak result happening, then a re-think along your line of thinking would have been necessary…
But, lets be brutally honest, the fact that a PAP government would be formed was never in doubt on Nomination Day, never mind Polling Day. So the issue of needing your vote to ensure that the best government is elected on Polling Day in the National interest was a non-starter, IMO.
As it is, your vote can be, is and will be construed as an endorsement for 7% GST, increased ERP charges, more ERP gantries, hospital means testing and the numerous and wide ranging bitter pills shoved down Singaporean’s throats between May 2006 and May 2008 and who knows what down the road. You’ve just made the grand opening Act for the PAP’s Election 2011’s campaign.
I’m quite disappointed at your choices (your vote and your decision to come clean). Both were wrong, and un-necessary, IMO. But that’s just me. We should catch up the next time I’m back in Singapore (tentatively Jan ’09). Will get in touch as the date approaches, if you’re keen.
Shin Leong,
To expand a little into what I said in my previous post, if Singapore’s electoral system was truly democratic, with a relatively level playing field, I would have considered a course of action similar to yours. For I do think that administratively (note emphasis) the best government for Singapore currently is the PAP. However, with the blatant skewing of the electoral system towards one-party (THAT party) hegemony, and where every single vote is rightly or wrongly, considered a referendum on their policies by even the PAP themselves, your vote and revelation has turned into a tragedy for those who do not support the policies of the PAP.
Expect the PAP to use this repeatedly in the next Election Campaign. (To the SDP): See! Even other Opposition candidates do note vote for them. (Against all other Parties candidates): Singaporean might be tempted to vote for WP/NSP/SDA/etc, but are you sure their candidates are not voting PAP?
Spoiling your vote, or voting for a less-capable (subjective) opposition member than the ruling party incumbent, in the current context, is NOT a waste of your vote. Voting for said incumbent, is the real waste.
Hi Anonymous(18/5/08-7.22)
Yeah, lucky indeed not becos where I stayed but the opposition is around to contest on every constituency where I once lived and lived.
True enough, the opposition is exactly the people for the great singaporeans to vote for citizen's rights of choice.
No opposition menas no contest for the constituency and local residents won't be able to exercise the rights to vote.
I do not know how some people are for the BEES(give automatic mandate to lky pap to be next gomen, just like that) to strategically play a role and at the same time giving the advantage opportunity to lky pap to have the 2/3 majority.
Some even to the extension of 3 corner fight against opposition's incumbent or wanabe opposition as just to stack the risk to lost of deposit to the poor opposition guys.
These are the tactics of 'divide and rule' by the staber/s of opposition who definitely advantage the lky pap camp, no matter how.Devillish of them to do just that, killing politically the opposition's institution in Singapore.
These are unbecoming of some guys in the opposition camp, but they are actually not even a member of any opposition party.
Why do that?
Well,I must say that they are actually the born-loser in politics.Bankrupt of pretty good ideas for all to re-learn and re-form.
Tokselehon
Hi Anonymous(18/508-8.29am)
Yeah, you make me like I want to cry again while reading your posting just now about Ling How Doong of Gombak.
I am really very sad indeed after the-in-fighting of SDP debacle, one opposition guy, a staber of opposition camp,named Farid Wajidi went for the 3 corner fight against incumbent Ling How Doong.
It's was a tactic of 'kamikaze' -- a 'divide and rule' that advantage lky pap's camp.
It was not until the early morning of 2 January 1997, most great Singaporeans are confident that Cheng San GRC too could win the GE97.
But.What happen?
We lost all the contested seats including,Nee Soon Central, Bukit Gombak and Cheng San GRC-the hotly contested seat except Potong Pasir and Hougang.
Now, why we lost GE97?
For me the reason is simple and yet poisonous.
It's becos of the ill stricken and devillish, staber of opposition that killed the whole opposition's institution.
This kind of people is the one that oppose for the sake of opposing.
Are we going to repeat BEES and 3 corner fight again and again and again?
YSL,my good friend,
Please think about all these bad consequences.
I for one damned him to hell and death.
Tokselehon
I think there are many critics that would come fast on you and say that as an opposition, you failed to support opposition. But I agree with your stand that we should not vote for the opposition for the sake of opposing the ruling party.
I read many replies to your revelation and found that many people have the mindset that they will just want to vote for the opposition no matter who that is. I believe that is no way a democracy should work.
But I think if a WP candidate should stand for election in your constituency, you should vote for him, period. You mentioned that the candidate should convince you of his/her capability. Well, does this mean that the WP fields candidates for the sake of fielding them? Is it not that the party feels that the candidate can do better than the incumbent?
To PP,
I hope people like you don't get to vote for at least 20yrs. Then, maybe, you'll change your mind and learn to appreciate any opposition.
"I believe that is no way a democracy should work."
I don't know why people like to talk about democracy when they know nothing about democracy. Do you? Care to enlighten us how democracy works? Does it work lopsidedly? Does it work on an uneven playing field?
Before you talk about how a democracy should work, what are the characteristics of a democracy?
"... many people have the mindset that they will just want to vote for the opposition no matter who that is."
I can tell you it's the same with pap fanatics.
"...we should not vote for the opposition for the sake of opposing the ruling party."
You mean opposition is not suppose to oppose but to co-opt with the ruling party? Gee, that's new to me.
"...we should not vote for the opposition for the sake of opposing the ruling party."
Should we be voting for the ruling party for the sake of decimating the opposition?
I totally don't agree with you.
I stay in the biggest GRC I voted for the SDP, not because I agree with what they do. Frankly specking I don't even know who are they.
I voted for them because I DON'T agree with MIW policies
Like many others who posted comments earlier - I feel that Yaw's admission is a fatal error that hurts not only himself, but more importantly the WP, the party’s supporters and the opposition cause.
The level of his political naivety is staggering, and his inability to watch his mouth when dealing with hostile media is shocking.
What is most sad however, is his obstinate refusal to give voice to anything sounding like regret or apology for the disservice that he have done to his party – how the WP had to clamp their mouths shut and have nothing to say in return to the trumpeting in our local media of how even opposition candidates choose to vote for the PAP in his own constituency.
If Yaw wanted to play a knight in shining armor he should have taken up stage drama instead of politics. If Yaw sincerely wanted to do any damage control, he should at least start showing some remorse for the damage done.
Shin Leong said Lin How Doong was "unvotable" due to his "performance" and "antics". Interesting. Let's see what were those.
In 1988, How Doong scored 47% againt Seet Ai Mee. Shin Leong (probably a primary school kid then) must have thought that almost half of Bukit Gombak residents then were morons.
In 1991, Lin How Doong upped and scored 52%. Lo and behold! An actual win! Against a minister-of-state no less. Shin Leong (probably a secondary school teenager then) must have thought that Bukit Gombak residents should get the IMH project instead of Buangkok Green.
Between 1991 and 1997, during How Doong's term as MP, what went wrong with Bukit Gombak? The nice little clean and beautiful between Bukit Batok, Bukit Gombak and Choa Chu Kang? What went wrong? I say nothing.
Saying "don't talk cock" in Parliament? Worse things have been said by JBJ, whom Shin Leong and many other opposition aspirants still idolise.
Now, to Shin Leong, reflect upon yourself. How do your performance and antics compare with Lin How Doong?
"...we should not vote for the opposition for the sake of opposing the ruling party."
I've heard this many times... this sounds like the right thing to do in democracy. But come on, not in our context... with 2.38% (2/84) of opposition and one-sided playing field!!!
Get the opposition in first, be counted! The opposition will strenghten naturally overtime and the people will be the winners as there'll be more meaningful check-and-balance.
I agree with YSL that the better candidate deserves the votes. Therefore do not be hoodwinked by WP's claim that you need an alternative voice in parliament. Just follow YSL's advise to vote for the better quality candidate and we will see a washout for WP at the next election.
Cannot understand this YSL's logic.
I have left the same questions that I asked him here, hope he can reply. This are my questions which many ppl would like to know:
1. YSL says that he voted for THP as he cannot bear to vote to Ling due to his "antics". But then we read in TNP which reported Teo Ho Pin as saying that Yaw had already pledged his vote to Teo weeks before nomination day. Now, how does Yaw know who will be contesting against Teo Ho Pin at that time?
2. Second question is - what was Yaw's motive for informing Teo that he will vote for him, considering the fact that our vote are supposed to be a secret.
I think these 2 questions are being deliberately ignored by Yaw and his WP supporters here.
Regards
James
firstly, whoever he votes for is his own right. he can belong to the opposition camp, no doubts. but tat doe snot mean one shd vote blindly, n without reason. being in the opposition doesn't mean u die die hv to vote for yr own team.
secondly, not every GRC is contested by his own opposition party. so there is little conflict of interest shd tat person votes for the PAP. i think wat he did is commendable, becoz it sends a right signal, tat the opposition pple can still chose whoever tat can deliver the goods in their respective wards.
the fact tat members of the opposition do not necessarily vote for the opposition clearly demonstrates maturity in the opposition camp.
Do you people even know the danger and implications of allowing the ruling party to change the constitution freely and unhindered?
To those who support the ruling party near total domination of the house and like to put all your eggs in one basket, when your rights are taken from you, it would be too late. Which is why we need to deny the ruling party from having a 2/3 majority. This is your only guarantee.
You may not even get to vote in the future. And here, we have myopic people squabbling over their rights to vote so and so without looking at the big picture. YOU DECIDE YOUR VOTING FUTURE.
Your rights and freedom are enshrined in the constitution. However, as the ruling party has a greater than 2/3 majority, NOTHING in the constitution is guaranteed as the ruling party can change it freely and at will. Your voting rights is, therefore, not a right, but a PRIVILEGE granted by the ruling party. It is imperative to regain your rights before that privilege is taken from you.
Certain provision of the constitution can only be amended by a national referendum with a 2/3 majority. As for voting rights, haven't found anything on it. Perhaps, some lawyer can comment on this.
I like to read books on history and sometimes wonder what really makes a person go against his own country and people. A traitor that is. You, sir, is a or has a making of a traitor
I wouldn't want you to be fighting besides me against any threat to our country. 'Cos you will turn if when you think the enemy are better. Your loyalty is not absolute. Your loyalty is questionable.
During sporting events involving Singapore, I would also expect you to be supporting teams and athletes of other countries 'cos you feel they are the better team or athletes.
Sounds simple enough? More examples needed?
A traitor is a traitor. There isn't any need for reasoning to be given.
Sad. You don't have what it takes to be a politician but you think you do.
You may be good at organising events. But in politics your are still at pre-kindergarten while the people you are dealing with are doctorate degree level.
For the sake of all opposition parties in S'pore please exit, gracefully while you still can.
Latest report in the Straits Times mentioned that some of your colleagues said that you were brave to reveal that you had voted for the PAP.
I cant believe what i had read. Are you feeling proud now, the papers reported that you are brave.
You and your colleagues missed the point big time. It is not about bravery. How about brave but stupid and naive.
You also mentioned that in the event that if you have to vote btw a WP party member and a PAP member, the WP member have to convince you that he is the better man before you cast a vote in his favour. What is this - Something very bad is going on within the WP.
Sylvia Lim and LTK what is happening to the WORKERS PARTY. Care to give another press conference again, damage control is very much needed. Tell you what I am a bit hesitant now to give my support to you guys again in the next election. Disappointed and sad.
Obviously THP is the better person who can serve the community in which YSL resides. Everybody knows that voting for the opposition means having to sacrifice the benefits of upgrading to the estate (or will be last in the queue). If YSL himself is not ready to sacrifice theses benefits, on what moral ground is he campaigning for votes for the WP and asking other Singaporeans to make such sacrifices?
During election, it would be myopic not to consider the partison background on which the candidate is standing for. You vote not only for the candidate, you also vote for the party. You dont need much brain power to know this.
If YSL wants to argue on the qualitiy of candidates, then he should realise that he pales in comparison to our PM in the contest for AMK GRC. Where then is the logic for people to vote for WP?
When ethics, morality, principles and logic are being thrown out the window, the existence of WP is just a hollow shell.
You are basically echoing the views of what NCMP Steve said in his book. He said an opposition should not oppose everything just because he is an opposition.
I am not criticizing you. In fact, I think you are right. There was this saying: 'An opposition must be constructive and not disruptive. They must oppose, but not obstruct. Too much opposition, that is opposition pushed to the limits, will threaten to wreck the entire political system apart.'
So you followed that in voting for the right candidate, seeing the SDP's habit of putting up trouble makers in the streets.
You're one useless and boring fart who shouldn't receive any vote come next election.Get lost!
Dear Mr. Yaw,
If your intention of announcing your controversial vote is to arouse the public’s interest about your personality and character, you have succeeded.
But if your intention is to convince the public that you are above conventional wisdom by the way you exercise judgement when you voted, then you have failed miserably.
While you are absolutely correct to say that voting should be based on choosing "the better man who can better serve the interests" of the country and the community, this should only apply when voting is carried out in a free and fair election. I don’t suppose you have any trouble coming to terms with the fact that such elections don’t exist in Singapore. But in case you have, do you know of any other democratic country where the ruling party redraws the electorate boundaries as they see fit in every election? Do you not think that the formation of GRCs pose a huge barrier for opposition parties contesting in elections? Does the percentage of eligible voters who actually get to vote during our elections not indicate the unfairness of our election system? With such bias mechanisms in place, it doesn’t take a very intelligent person to know that elections here serve very little in achieving their fundamental objective. Instead, Singaporeans see the ballot box as the only legitimate way (and a rare privilege for some) to show their dissent with our government policies. This is the sorry state of our democracy, but unfortunately, this unfair system of election is also the only way that ordinary Singaporeans are able to participate in, to bring about reform in our government policies.
As an opposition candidate, for you to cast a vote without taking these factors into account is to give undue consideration to the large portion of Singaporeans who do not support the ruling party and are deprived of the right to vote. You have demonstrated support of the ruling party’s propaganda that our electoral system here is ‘free and fair’ because you reason that voting on the mere basis of choosing a more qualified candidate over a lesser one regardless of partisan background is a befitting act for our elections. And you argue that spoiling your vote in our elections amounts to giving up your constitutional rights when clearly, our election process exhibits little that is constitutional in the first place. In fact, Singaporeans who spoil their votes use it as a means of showing disgust at how unconstitutional our election system has become, to the extent that only a pitiful number of quality opposition candidates get to contest in our elections.
I can therefore, only draw two possible conclusions from the way you have voted: either you lack the basic insight into what it means to vote in Singapore, or you endorse the way our ruling party has distorted our election campaigns into unconstitutional exercises. Either case disqualifies you from being a credible opposition. You should consider relinquishing your position to avoid bringing further assaults that will only be detrimental to the reputation of your party.
I like this blog because it reminds me of myself. Thanks for posting!
Search Engine for Internet Marketing
Add Url Free
6,000+ sites indexed you can advertise on for free
View by Traffic, Quality, Reach, Popularity, and more!
Post a Comment