Why do people still vote for PAP?
-
Our current government is not perfect. And in this current economy downturn, it amplifies their imperfections even more. People are feeling the pinch and pain more and naturally we looked at dubious policies to raise GST, raise ERP etc. But however bad they are, I must then look at the alternatives presented to me.
Of all the credible OPPOSITIONS we have in Singapore, and no, I am not counting people in this forum who does Coffee Shop talk, I can only count JBJ and Chiam See Tong as the OPPOSITION who will make a difference and who is credible enough as a leader of a country.
My point is, yes, our government is not perfect but we are in fact riding through bad times better than most countries. Our lives probably and I am sure will get more difficult with rising prices but still we can count Singapore as still one of the safest countries in the world, one of the most stable countries in the world. Does not that count for something?
Yes, we need changes. But to go as far as to overthrow the whole government would be to kill the chickens because of one rotten egg. If you overthrow them now, who next to be government? You? Me? The uncle next door? The Bahchormee seller? Who?
-
because the voting slip has a serial number.
-
me never got to vote...
-
Originally posted by sirAdrian:
Yeah, those who say to change or singaporeans are naive and too self concern for their benefits than the long term beneficial aspect of having a multi party/ full democratic society or singaporeans lack guts, can try do tat and see wat happens. Maybe the PAP will give up their power.I feel our Oppositions party is not strong enough to challange the PaP, nor do i want some 1 like Dr Chee Soon Juan to be my PM.
maybe some of u guys can join oppositions party(to make it strong enough) to challange PAP in the next gerenal elections.
yeah basically the opposition parties are just not strong enough and also not really convincing that they would do a better job than PAP, also would u let a party to run a country without any experience?
Anyway PAP have been doing quite a good job for sg and I think that only a big screw up would make them lose favour with the masses.
-
Originally posted by xfool:
yeah basically the opposition parties are just not strong enough and also not really convincing that they would do a better job than PAP, also would u let a party to run a country without any experience?
Anyway PAP have been doing quite a good job for sg and I think that only a big screw up would make them lose favour with the masses.
except for the rise in domestic prices (less the oil..etc. which r global issues). no problem. -
except for the rise in domestic prices (less the oil..etc. which r global issues). no problem.What about mas selamat incident?
Still out there somewhere.
-
Originally posted by Troy437:
LKY make him bankrupt?? Are you sure LKY 'make' him, or CSJ made himself bankrupt with his words and action?
Removal of bankrupcy easily done at high level? Sound exactly like corruption.
accept defeat graciously? We have voted via election. After all these years, isn't it clear CSJ dun accept and have nv considered himself defeated? Somemore you are sure. Gomez was also sure he handled over the form that time, someore god-dam-farking sure he did.
LHL dare to take up the challenge? Isn't the both of them challenging each other all along for years, that gives us so much to talk about in this forum?
Edit: Never mind. No point explaining to a foreigner.
-
could it be bcos despite all these the gov have ensured that very bad things such as riots, strikes or even worst civil war has not happened in a bad way here??
just wondering... our own security as individuals are pretty safe in sg as compared to many other countries no?? i think people are sometimes not happy with the gov but after weighing out the pros and cons they still decided to vote for the current gov?? plus i think singaporeans also like the sheltered feeling, afraid of the unknown..
just my 0.02 don flame pls!
-
I observed many posers who support the PAP backed their choice by mainly using economic arguments. That is truly what the PAP wants the people to think, that the money is king, everything else is secondary. I don't dispute that Singapore has grown exponentially over 30 years to become the current state and achieve the current standard of living. However, not every issue can be solved by growing the economy, the usual PAP retort. If only life is that simple. Do values like justice, equality, human dignity, fairness, compassion mean nothing to Singapore and Singaporeans? Isn't it time to ask for more than food on the table and a roof over our head?
-
Originally posted by gohysteria:
I observed many posers who support the PAP backed their choice by mainly using economic arguments. That is truly what the PAP wants the people to think, that the money is king, everything else is secondary. I don't dispute that Singapore has grown exponentially over 30 years to become the current state and achieve the current standard of living. However, not every issue can be solved by growing the economy, the usual PAP retort. If only life is that simple. Do values like justice, equality, human dignity, fairness, compassion mean nothing to Singapore and Singaporeans? Isn't it time to ask for more than food on the table and a roof over our head?
can i ask wat do u want beside food on table and and rook over our head tat would benefit most if not all singaporeans?
Isn't that the basic needs of every 1? Some countries doesn't even have a roof over their heads and food on their table.
Pap is not the only countries tat use economy as a retort, most or infact all countries do this. Once US economy has a slow down, the whole world follow.
-
Originally posted by gohysteria:
I observed many posers who support the PAP backed their choice by mainly using economic arguments. That is truly what the PAP wants the people to think, that the money is king, everything else is secondary. I don't dispute that Singapore has grown exponentially over 30 years to become the current state and achieve the current standard of living. However, not every issue can be solved by growing the economy, the usual PAP retort. If only life is that simple. Do values like justice, equality, human dignity, fairness, compassion mean nothing to Singapore and Singaporeans? Isn't it time to ask for more than food on the table and a roof over our head?
In a social context, PAP survived base on one important factor. That is the ability to narrow the gap both in term of social status between the rich and poor, this set the condition for stability, equality and their votes. -
Originally posted by angel7030:
In a social context, PAP survived base on one important factor. That is the ability to narrow the gap both in term of social status between the rich and poor, this set the condition for stability, equality and their votes.
Issit ? No leh.. rather they created the middle class to squeeze em dry , no ?And the rich.. no include the minister lah...that's a lie.
-
Originally posted by gasband:
Our current government is not perfect. And in this current economy downturn, it amplifies their imperfections even more. People are feeling the pinch and pain more and naturally we looked at dubious policies to raise GST, raise ERP etc. But however bad they are, I must then look at the alternatives presented to me.
Of all the credible OPPOSITIONS we have in Singapore, and no, I am not counting people in this forum who does Coffee Shop talk, I can only count JBJ and Chiam See Tong as the OPPOSITION who will make a difference and who is credible enough as a leader of a country.
My point is, yes, our government is not perfect but we are in fact riding through bad times better than most countries. Our lives probably and I am sure will get more difficult with rising prices but still we can count Singapore as still one of the safest countries in the world, one of the most stable countries in the world. Does not that count for something?
Yes, we need changes. But to go as far as to overthrow the whole government would be to kill the chickens because of one rotten egg. If you overthrow them now, who next to be government? You? Me? The uncle next door? The Bahchormee seller? Who?
"Our current government is not perfect. "Exactly. I for one would be more tolerant of their drawbacks if they were more humble. I'd be more willing to be ride out storms with them.
However, they are as arrogant as it gets, forever boasting, claiming to be the best in the world, taking huge salaries for themselves while telling the rest of us to tighten our belts. They put down the opposition as if they themselves are perfect, they refuse to listen to anyone. They act like their policies are all bulletproof and what they say goes no matter how much feedback they get to the contrary.
If they behave that way, then bloody well better make sure they really are perfect.
-
Originally posted by jojobeach:
Issit ? No leh.. rather they created the middle class to squeeze em dry , no ?And the rich.. no include the minister lah...that's a lie.
Yes, it a lie, but look at the poor in Singapore, the psychology play an important part, and that is what PAP is good about. In many countries, poor are outcast, some cannot even go to places of rich, but our poor, can live next to the rich, shop the same shop, got NTUC orchid country club to go to, NTUC bar club, NTUC disco, NTUC resorts, NTUC travel to help the poor to feel that they are not outcasted, they can enter all shopping centres, airports, offices etc etc whereas in some countries, poor are not even allow to enter.RIch go cold storage, we go NTUC fairprice
RIch go banyan tree resort, we go NTUC resort
Rich live in houses (dengue), we live in HDB
Rich go for spa, we got NTUC spa
etc etc
The brain child here is to close the gap in term of social context, a gives feeling to the poor that they are part of the fabric, they are respected and they are free to roam. That alone prevent demonstration, riot, fights, kidnapping and many other unrest as you seen in most countries when the poor start to rise against the rich
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
As state hundreds of times, we dun hv a credible Opposition to vote for, so what choice do people have??Secondly, we dun like changes, we like to remain status quo
And thirdly, we hv to ask ourselves, so far, singapore good or not?? Not bad lah, there are sure to have problems, but not so worst as other countries, we still can post, chitchat at orchard cafe, and for uncles at kopitiam, we still can upgrade our education and skills, we still can go shopping, we still hv work, hmmm...cross PAP
Sure, status quo...Like a patient in ICU; not critical, still alive, vitals are good, so far ok..
so the same medical admin and medical attention is upkept till eventually patient lapses into a coma... then the prognosis is; 'still technically alive, not brain dead...' and the same rigmarole is upheld, till patient eventually expires...
Perhaps, we are ALL waiting for just such a scenario... when it is all too late, and when crap is splattered all over every one - especially on to majority of those who have no wings to fly away...
-
Originally posted by NowWhatDoIDo?:
"Our current government is not perfect. "Exactly. I for one would be more tolerant of their drawbacks if they were more humble. I'd be more willing to be ride out storms with them.
However, they are as arrogant as it gets, forever boasting, claiming to be the best in the world, taking huge salaries for themselves while telling the rest of us to tighten our belts. They put down the opposition as if they themselves are perfect, they refuse to listen to anyone. They act like their policies are all bulletproof and what they say goes no matter how much feedback they get to the contrary.
If they behave that way, then bloody well better make sure they really are perfect.
What you have highlighted is exactly their imperfections. They are arrogant. And they even dare singaporeans to vote for the opposition which is the epitome of arrogance.
But what I was trying to say is exactly this, they are IMPERFECT, they are arrogant, they are boastful etc... but:
1) can we discount the good they have done for Singapore? Unless you are saying that they have done any good at all for Singapore as a whole, which I will of cos not agree, but i agree to disagree.
2) is there anyone else better? Politics is not a school prefect council. It is not based on who is popular and who is more likeable. It is who can bring about results. And to put it crudely, they will sacrifice people as long it benefits the whole country as a whole. What good if we bring in the opposition to reduce the ERP, to reduce the GST, to reduce the hospital bills but in the end become a government that does not gain respect of other nations, a government that does no good for the economy growth. Except for JBJ and Chiam, do we trust our country in the hands of Prime Minister Chee Soon Juan? I do not think so. I will shudder at that thought. The fact that they are arrogant is because they know they have given MOST singaporeans things that the opposition cannot now. At least not yet.
I am hoping that the opposition will improve and then at least all these engagements will become more meaningful and credible rather than just a forum of people whose only solution to problems is to blame the government and reduce this, reduce that.
-
After decades of political suppression of the opposition, P4P has emerged the ONLY political party with highly qualified candidates.
What other GOOD ALTERNATIVE political choices do Singaporeans have?
-
Highly qualified candidates does not guarantee these candidates are effective. PAP attracts people who will say yes to the old man and party.
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
After decades of political suppression of the opposition, P4P has emerged the ONLY political party with highly qualified candidates.
What other GOOD ALTERNATIVE political choices do Singaporeans have?
Then its up to the opposition to do something about it. Scolding and attacking them on the net will not bring them down. If people really think that there are really NO OTHER GOOD alternatives, then they can always choose to accept or to leave. There is NO WAY that by lamenting will PAP relinquish its power. For me, I also am affected by all the rising prices and how I wish they will lower taxes, lower GST, lower ERP but the fact is here to stay and since I have no money to migrate, I have to stay and make sure i work even harder to survive in Singapore.
-
Originally posted by gasband:
What you have highlighted is exactly their imperfections. They are arrogant. And they even dare singaporeans to vote for the opposition which is the epitome of arrogance.
But what I was trying to say is exactly this, they are IMPERFECT, they are arrogant, they are boastful etc... but:
1) can we discount the good they have done for Singapore? Unless you are saying that they have done any good at all for Singapore as a whole, which I will of cos not agree, but i agree to disagree.
2) is there anyone else better? Politics is not a school prefect council. It is not based on who is popular and who is more likeable. It is who can bring about results. And to put it crudely, they will sacrifice people as long it benefits the whole country as a whole. What good if we bring in the opposition to reduce the ERP, to reduce the GST, to reduce the hospital bills but in the end become a government that does not gain respect of other nations, a government that does no good for the economy growth. Except for JBJ and Chiam, do we trust our country in the hands of Prime Minister Chee Soon Juan? I do not think so. I will shudder at that thought. The fact that they are arrogant is because they know they have given MOST singaporeans things that the opposition cannot now. At least not yet.
I am hoping that the opposition will improve and then at least all these engagements will become more meaningful and credible rather than just a forum of people whose only solution to problems is to blame the government and reduce this, reduce that.
To answer that question, "can we discount the good they have done for Singapore?". We have to define what is "Singapore" to begin with.
As a brand name, sure. They built it up, but they would not have been able to without all our financial contributions as well as the work every one of us, our parents and grandparents put in.
As a nation, maybe. It's glossier and more modern now. Whether that's a good thing or not. Open to debate.
As a people. Absolutly not. We are opressed, we are financially drained, we are selfish, we are stressed out and we are all living in a pressure pot. You may argue that this is our own fault and not the governments, but look at their policies (from housing, to parking, public transportation to anything) it's all geared towards maximum profit for them. This has HUGE social impacts which contributes to the stress, the lack of graciousness and even our desire to propagate.
So we have a glossy surface, but underneath it all are unhappy people living in stress unable to even think of a peaceful retirement.
So now whether the PAP are doing a good job or not depends on what you think their job is. To build a brand name, or to look after the people who voted for them.
As for the opposition, with the current hugely unlevel playing field of course the opposition do not look up to par. The point here is to get more in to check the PAP. 4 years from there for us to gauge who is opposing for our benefits and who are opposing for the sake of opposing.
As it stands, without contention, the PAP are just running wild with their self-serving policies.
-
Originally posted by skythewood:
Court transcript :
CSJ: Mr Lee, we get to meet at last.
LKY: (pause)...Sorry?
CSJ: We get to meet at last.
LKY: I thought we've met many other times across election rallies.
CSJ: Your memory fails you. I've never met you before and you know why? Because you keep avoiding me. (Mr Lee laughs) Well, we have this opportunity right now. Let me ask you this question. You gave an interview saying: "If you defame us, and if I'm involved, I go to the the witness box and you can question me not only on the particular defamation issue, but on all issues in my life." Do you stand by your words?
LKY: I do.
CSJ: Good. In the course of the cross-examination, will you then answer questions not just on this particular defamation issue, but on all issues in your life -- and I don't mean your personal life, I mean your political life? Will you stand by that?
LKY: Your Honour, we appeared in court when the issue was whether or not the summary judgment was proper. That was the time to challenge --
CSJ: Mr Lee, that was not my question.
Judge: Allow the witness to answer. Mr Lee, please go on.
LKY: I have to answer. I'm a lawyer. I no longer practice the law. I know your purpose. You dodged that occasion and you're trying -- Dr Chee is trying today when the issue is the question of quantum of damages, it's not liability. I'm here to answer questions relating to the quantum of damages.
CSJ: Thank you. Then why is it that you say you will go to the witness box --
LKY: I have already explained that, Your Honour --
CSJ: -- and answer questions not just particular to this defamation issue but on all issues of your life. Now tell me, are those just brave words meant for public consumption and in this situation right now you're turning tail and running?
LKY: Ha ha ha, no Your Honour --
CSJ: Good. Then you won't mind me asking you why is it that you make this application to cut short your cross-examination precisely when you walk in at noon and say that you have to be stopped in the cross-examination by 2:15 giving me. the defence, only two hours and fifteen minutes, and then insisting that all of us can't go for lunch. And on top of that refusing to tell the court what this "important matter" you have this afternoon is.
LKY: That's...Your Honour...(pause)
CSJ: I'm lost for words too as I think you are right now.
LKY: ...(pause; Mr Lee was seen opening his mouth to answer but no words came out)
CSJ: Go ahead, Mr Lee.
LKY: ...(pause)
CSJ: No answer? That settles the question then.
LKY: Ha ha ha.
Judge: Dr Chee!
CSJ: Fine, let Mr Lee continue. I'm just waiting. He's probably lost for words because he doesn't quite know what to say at this stage.
Judge: If you keep interrupting the witness...Yes, Mr Lee.
LKY: ...(even longer pause)
CSJ: Please don't run down the clock. I've only got a few minutes.
At this stage, Mr Davinder Singh jumped in to bail out Mr Lee.
Singh: What is the question? Dr Chee has made so many points in his speech. He has already been told that the time to cross-examine the witness was during the summary judgment. If he had leave to defend. All issues would have been open for Dr Chee to have questioned him. The witness said that for Dr Chee to have questioned him. The witness said that Dr Chee had dodged that application and is now trying through the back door to introduce impermissible material. The witness said he is here as he said to answer questions on quantum. Dr Chee should really get on with the issue of quantum.
CSJ: Let me ask the question again. Mr Lee, you have said that you are here to answer these questions and I say that in that case why did you make an application to, halfway through the session, want the court to cut short this entire hearing. Now, I remind you that we have got until the end of tomorow, the end of tomorrow. So we have one-and-a-half days. But you insist that we have to finish by 2:15 for you to attend to some matters that you won't even reveal to the court. Now I ask you now does this sound like somebody who's willing to come to court and meet and resolve the issues?
LKY: Your Honour, I had a message from one of my counsel's aides to say that I should be in court by here 2 o'clock - by 12 o'clock because Your Honour has imposed a guillotine that the cross-examination of the prime minister would end at twelve. So I turn up at twelve. I was told that the guillotine allowed - had already been late he would be given 2 hours. I suggest - I asked my counsel to request the court to finish this two hours so that I can attend to some important matters. There's no disadvantage to anybody to be sitting here and finishing off this cross-examination within the two hours. What I do not want to be a party to is a deliberate abuse of the process, of the proceedings of the court by delaying tactics.
CSJ: So, Mr Lee --
LKY: And by asking irrelevant questions, Dr Chee is running out the gullotine. At the end of the day, we've had this confrontation face to face have you thrown any dirt, have you dug up any scandal? Are you still saying as you've said before that this government is run like the NKF?
CSJ: Now, Mr Lee, let me try to --
LKY: No, we are here because you have said that --
CSJ: Mr Lee, I'm going to ask you this question and I wish you'd just stick to the questions that I pose to you. I'm asking you why did you come to court --
LKY: Because I was asked --
CSJ: Let me rephrase my question. Are you telling the court that you had nothing to do with the curtailment of this entire process?
Singh: Your Honour, I made the application this morning and Your Honour would remembers that I said I was very troubled with what the Chees did yesterday and that it was quite apparent that they had nothing to ask which was of any relevance and that unfortunately or otherwise has been proven in this exchange. And I said, Your Honour, that the whole purpose of the cross-examination was to insult, annoy and to scandalise and that's also been proven true. For that reason, I had asked that there be a guillotine. Your Honour had full powers to control the proceedings. The order has already been made and I don't see why this witness should be asked to explain something that was the subject of my application and Your Honour's order.
CSJ: Do you see the game that's being played here, Mr Lee? Do you see how you are beginning to hide behind your counsel and then claim, "Look, I'm willing to confront them. It's my counsel." Now I'm going to ask you a very simple question: Right here, right now, tell Mr Davnder Singh "Don't interrupt. I will answer these questions as they are put to me right now."
LKY: Heh-heh. Your Honour, I've briefed counsel, I've always found it's never wise to be my own lawyer in my own case. I know that some perople believe that they can do otherwise, and I'm quite sure that Dr Chee is making a very great impression on all the reporters in this court of how he is better than Mr Ravi --
CSJ: I think you meant Mr Singh.
LKY: I believe Mr Singh is better qualified to deal with the legalities of this case.
CSJ: Well, I should hope so with all the training that he's got. Now, coming back to my question, Mr Lee, is your answer no, that you wll not tell Mr Singh: "Stay out of this. Let me answer my question because --
LKY: I --
CSJ: Let me finish my question -- because you have said -- and I repeat to you -- that you will answer not only questions about the "particular defamation issue, but on all issues in my life."
LKY: Yes...as long as that was what was an issue and that was the, it was an issue in the summary judgement was appealed against. [Note how garbled the answer is.] And we turned up for the hearing but you dodged the hearing.
CSJ: Mr Lee, you are not unintelligent.
LKY: Thank you.
CSJ: You knew precisely what you meant and what you mean is: "Come and ask me all these questions that doesn't pertain to this defamation suit and I will answer you because my entire standing, inlcuding the standing of this government, is at stake." Is that not correct?
LKY: I think, Dr Chee, we'll cut short this proceeding to become more relevant.LOL,it seems that LKY and his son are hiding behind their counsel all the times to avoid being questioned.These "big bullies" need an Indian guy to protect them,Sad @ss.
-
Originally posted by Chris88110:
Hi people, call me noob but i'm abit curious, why do, inspite of all the critizing of PAP you guys do here, you guys till vote for PAP? I mean some, hang on, most people must be voting for PAP since they're still in power right?
I don't know, cos I haven't vote before.(Another piece of information for all my "fans")
-
Originally posted by Chris88110:
Hi people, call me noob but i'm abit curious, why do, inspite of all the critizing of PAP you guys do here, you guys till vote for PAP? I mean some, hang on, most people must be voting for PAP since they're still in power right?
People here no represent singapore. People here tends to be of younger age group than the general pop mah... so what u are seeing here is probably a reflection of future.
-
My 2 cents worth of why people vote for the PAP:
Factors favouring the PAP:
1) If it aint broke - dont fix it. PAP is doing well & unless there is a method to show otherwise, there is nothing one can do to change the status quo.
2) Joker & clown politicians. These specimens with their irrational, irrelevant, unrealistic & impracticable utterances will make the voters think twice before casting the votes for them & the PAP will be laughing with glee to have such candidates because this situation will absolutely work in their favour.
3) Not politically savvy voters. Mostly are uncles, aunties & lesser politically knowledgable people who will say the words 'chen hoo' (govt) & always vote for 'chen hoo'.
4) GRC. This will make the opposition to field quality candidates more difficult.
5) Unfounded fear of the secrecy of voting. It's an irrational fear among the lesser politically knowledgable voters bordering on a delusion which nothing much can be done. (Definition of delusion = A false belief which cannot be altered by argument or reasoning, etc.)
6) Threat of gloom /doom for Sg if u vote opposition. The PAP big guns will always say that if u vote for the opposition, it will be the beginning of the end for Sg. This warning/threat, prior to an election, will put fear into the above-mentioned voters & make them vote for 'chen hoo'.
Factors against the PAP
1) High salaries of the Ministers. This may swing some votes to the opposition - more so since the high salaries have been much publicised locally & internationally.
-
My grandma voted for PAP because she said before election she gets money...