Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Winning elections

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Winning elections

Some views from Yoong Siew Wah.

My comment
It is better to lose an election honorably than to resort to dirty tricks to get re-elected.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...: Unity is strength. If only the opposition including Independant candidates can agree on avoiding 3 cornered fight that will be great. If possible when come to press release etc have combined voice. This will show singaporeans that opposition despite differences in view etc they are in unison. Do more walkabouts now as currently the present ruling party are not doing as they are confident of winning. Lastly, just vie for 49% seats. Just tell singaporeans this round let they form the Govt but let the 49% come in
Please avoid any 'boo boo' and try understand the ;ground'; April 22, 2010 5:06 AM
Anonymous said...: PAP understand the ground very, very well. And they are also very united. So far that is, based on the outcome.

Why can't the opposition learn anything from them? Or is it a hopeless case, learn or not learn?; April 22, 2010 8:41 AM
TracyTan said...: Mr Tan,

I agree with you that it is better to lose honourably than to resort to dirty tactics to win.

But does the PAP know what's honour?
That's the tragedy Singaporeans face. If Singaporeans dont wake up soon and right that wrong, our future generations will suffer the consequences of our neglect; April 22, 2010 9:30 AM
Anonymous said...: REX comments as follows,

How do people decide who to vote? In my opinion there are just 3 basic points, often dressed up in different style but still embedded in one's subconscious:

1. Sense of Justice, or,
2. Sense of Continuity based on familiarity, or,
3. Sense of personal gain.

Vote wisely, choose 1 over 2 and 3.

Rex; April 22, 2010 10:38 AM
Anonymous said...: PAP would throw honour to the winds, as long as they stay in power.
It is a fallancy that this Party is united, they are being held in place and under control by the great MM Lee.
Just wait and see. Unless of course like what MM Lee said some decades ago, he would rise from his coffin or grave if something is wrong in Singapore, and needs him to fix it.; April 22, 2010 10:50 AM
honour not $$ said...: @ Tracy, I also doubt the PAP understands the meaning of 'honour'.

For example let's say my father is the former PM and he still wields supreme political influence, I will allow all citizens to vote for or against me should I be nominated as PM within my party.

And you know something Tracy, if I were such a PM, you can bet my wife won't be allowed to fool around with so much money and I will be too ashame to pay myself millions until the whole world knows I have absolutely no sense of proportion. cheers!; April 22, 2010 2:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi Anonymous, April 22, 2010 10:50AM

I honour MM Lee as one of the great founding leaders who established Sinngapore. However, I dispute that HE & only HE can fix things. Are so many millions of Singaporeans so incapable that everything depends on ONE indispensable person? Please, lah, felow Singaporeans have enough confidence in ourselves.

Faith in Singaporeans, Don't be Afraid; April 22, 2010 2:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Our George Yeo met up with Romania's Foreign Minister regarding the hit & run case involving diplomat Silviu Ionescu.

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_517762.html; April 22, 2010 3:22 PM
Singgie said...: Singaporeans will vote with their rice bowls and wallets.

Ask anyone on the streets:

Do you need a job?
Do you want a good life?
Do you want a car?
Do you want to party?
Do you want money?

The number of people here that will vote on the basis of "freedom"
is and will always be less than 10%
These are probably the unemployed,disenchanted because they cant buy a car, cant sell and upgrade their homes and who were not promoted. or ex SAF,Police force.. or people who could not get traffic fines removed by their MP.

Me?.. my constituency always walked over.. so no say.; April 22, 2010 6:08 PM
GG said...: You earn millions if re-elected. Why would you resort to dirty tricks?; April 22, 2010 6:47 PM
Anonymous said...: How do you define "dirty tricks"?

Sun Zi's art of war: "never be tired of using deception".

Politics will always be politics. In war, to protect your country against the invading enemy, you have to resort to so-called "tricks" to win, to kill your enemy. There is no such thing as a "clean" trick to the fallen enemy.

If the Opposition are a bunch of people who are going to ruin this country, then PAP would do whatever it takes to win and this is the right thing to do.

Perhaps the populist way is to "make" the people happy by letting a few Opposition into the parliament, since most Singaporeans want PAP in power but also want to have some opposition to make some noise. But is this the right thing to do? Because without a united government, it is difficult to set good, long term policies that would benefit the country in the future.

Which is why I can predict PAP will win again, and they will win bigger and better than 2006.; April 22, 2010 11:32 PM
Anonymous said...: REX comments on 11.32pm

There seems to be a slight sense of bias towards a certain party in your post, though it might appear neutral at first glance.

You said "without a united government, it is difficult to set good, long term policies that would benefit the country.."

The problem is that a "united" government is capable of making united but wrong/stupid decisions that will not benefit or make worse the majority of citizens' well-being. Humans being humans, can miscalculate, for a variety of reasons - it is not even related to "unity".

"Unity" is a temporal quality. It usually begins with a strong charismatic leadership and when that transpires, fractious groups and subgroups, often appear, each looking after its own personal interests. The history of China and many other countries is full of such examples.

It is time to think about these ideas and plan ahead, way ahead.
To recap, the ideas are
Unity in Stupidity and The Temporal Nature of Unity.

Rex; April 23, 2010 8:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Allowing a few to decide on the fate of the many is not "united".

It only appears to be.

Allow the many to deliberate and offer honest, truthful options.
It is always in the interest of the presenter to present views which will further his cause. Allow alternative views and allow the many to speak. Show how the polls go.
Show what the many are saying.
At the moment, we hear only one side of the situation.

Some say that this will waste time and end in gridlock... well so be it.. let there be gridlock.

It will spur thinking and ultimately a solution.. a solution that all are aware of, but not neccessarily agree with. This is what I want.

for example: Allow the ERP to creat jams and more jams.. do nothing until an open dabate is organised and the issue is debated on the why, how, when and WHO is accountable. Then, we can see clearly what needs to be done...
The jams will cause unhappiness, this will spur thinking.. and we will grow to be better.. painfully as it may be.

Let there be light.; April 23, 2010 1:51 PM
Anonymous said...: I sighed as I read ANON: April 22, 11:32 PM.

First of all, Singapore is not in a state of war. Are you suggesting we employ warfare tactics on our own loyal citizens?

Secondly, democratic elections are about different ideas and values among different political parties. BUT everyone is a LOYAL citizen. They are the LOYAL opposition. They are not a FOREIGN enemy. They are fellow Singaporeans.

Thirdly, nobody and no political party has a monopoly on loyalty to Singapore.

Fourthly, just take a look at the "dis-united" political parties in United Kingdom. The diversity of views breed creativity. UK has one of the highest per capita Nobel prize winners in the world. A "united" approach will never breed new ideas. Einstein's theory of relativity completely turned the world of Newtonian Physics upside down.

Fifthly, your own Sun Zi example. A brilliant and original piece of work written more than 2,000 years ago. Since then, has a united Chinese empire or country come up with another equally brilliant piece of military literature? 2000 years and billions upon billions of Chinese people. And still no equivalent piece of work.

It's the same with Singapore today. One brilliant leader. 45 years later ... and still the same old ideas. Aren't you even ashamed that Singaporeans have no original political ideas other than what LKY says in his countless books?

It seems to be the Asian curse. We will always be 2nd class to the Europeans when it comes to creativity because our Asian leaders don't trust their own citizens to do the right thing.; April 23, 2010 1:57 PM
Anonymous said...: When I read Anon 1:57pm post, I realised this is probably the reason why PAP is still winning the election.

Posts like 1:57am showed how easily people can be influenced by perception rather than by reality. Such post only present things from a micro level rather than from a macro level.

Singapore has its pool of talent as well. It doesn't mean a country needs to have Nobel prize winners to be a good and well governed country.

Most of the policies set 45 years ago has evolved with time and updated to keep in pace with the changes around us. Sound fundamental values don't change but good ideas are implemented after they are found to be feasible. Haven't you noticed the changes around or did you just wake up after a deep slumber and think that "45 years later ... and still the same old ideas"?

Just because PAP still rules doesn't mean there are no good leaders. Khaw, Teo, Ng, Sharmu, George are leaders in their own right and they are brilliant men. Didn't they bring about changes to our society for the last ten years with new ideas?

Be objective in your views and give credit when it is due.; April 24, 2010 2:17 AM
Lao Tzu said...: Why are people starving?
Because the rulers eat up the money in taxes.
Therefore the people are starving.

Why are the people rebellious?
Because the rulers interfere too much.
Therefore they are rebellious.

Why do people think so little of death?
Because the rulers demand too much of life.
Therefore the people take life lightly.

Having to live on, one knows better than to value life too much.; April 24, 2010 4:32 PM
Anonymous said...: Rex comments on Anon. 2.17pm post:

My dear sir, you are contradicting yourself grossly.
On the one hand you warn people making conclusions "from a micro level rather than from a macro level"
and on the other hand you start to quote exmaples of a couple of leaders whom you are particularly fond of and you ask us "to give credit".

Specifically in the case of Singapore, we should not stoop to examining micro level variables like which minister is good which is bad. For sure you can find some good and some bad, it is a meaningless pursuit!!

More impoartantly as far as elections is concerned and as far as the future of SINGAPORE is concered, PLEASE LOOK AT MACRO LEVEL (to use your own words). Ask yourself, Is the entire system stable? is it Just? Is it selfless or self serving? Is it self-perpetuating? Is it creative? Is it honest and transparent?

So my fellow Singaporeans, follow the advice of Anon 2.17 pm. and look for Macro indicators not micro issues!!!

REX

Ju; April 24, 2010 8:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Anon. 2.17pm comments

"Just because PAP still rules doesn't mean there are no good leaders. Khaw, Teo, Ng, Sharmu, George are leaders in their own right and they are brilliant men. Didn't they bring about changes to our society for the last ten years with new ideas?"

Big deal! even leaders from North Korea and Myanmar also bring about changes to their countries for the last ten years with new ideas.; April 24, 2010 10:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear ANON April 24, 2010 2:17 AM.

I deliberately delayed replying to your post because I wanted other viewpoints to be expressed.

While I disagree with many of your points, I'll just address the most important one (to me anyway).

"Just because PAP still rules doesn't mean there are no good leaders. Khaw, Teo, Ng, Sharmu, George are leaders in their own right and they are brilliant men. Didn't they bring about changes to our society for the last ten years with new ideas?"

Therein lies my issue with folks like you.

Singapore and Singaporeans have no validity in your eyes without the presence of PAP to bless the occasion or event.

I don't deny my debt to LKY's leadership. But there are other Singaporeans too, who have contributed and been neglected by our "impartial" media and history textbooks.

- Who wrote our National Anthem "Maju-lah Singapura"?
- Who created our Merlion icon?
- How about our own Tan Kin Lian? Who as a young man was tasked to create an insurance company from nothing?; April 25, 2010 4:22 PM