Pragmatic Voters or Misleading Voters?
Bukit Batok voters were on their pragmatic side when they voted for the PAP candidate last Saturday.
Could it also be the misleading information resulting to the pragmatic decision? Worst. If the pragmatic decision is based on a misleading information.
The pragmatic side needs a qualification. Singaporeans are known to be pragmatic lots as we are 'kiasi and kiasu'. It means Bukit Batok will be better off under Murali as he is a government MP while Chee Soon Juan, being an opposition, has nothing to offer.
What’s worrying is the misleading information that the PAP and the Press, especially the Chinese media, trying to influence voters as in the past general elections or by-elections.
Older voters who have no alternative news will base their pragmatic decisions on misleading reporting and distorted news. And Bukit Batok has quite a high percentage of older voters.
So, it can be a misleading ‘pragmatic side’ thanks to our 154th free press ranking in the world. For this by-election, it even go further to character assassination.
[38.8% vs. >40%]
A below 40% votes for Chee is a disappointment. Some even argue with this performance, Chee or even SDP will never get into the parliament.
Without the character assassination, will Chee get another 1.3% votes to pass through the psychologically support base? It is very likely, especially for the older voters’ pragmatic side.
But to get >40% and to get 50.1% is totally different story.
It will be very hard for oppositions in Singapore to get 50.1% due to grassroots playing ground. All PAP candidates will receive strong support from PA, RC, CCC, grassroots bodies, non-profit organisations etc.
The press generates the misleading news or half-truth reports. And the grassroots reinforces them with a personal touch. Finally, the voters make their pragmatic decisions.
SDP is unable to break this link. Chinese media is the weak side of SDP. SDP also cannot give a personal touch to the neighbourhood residents. A better educated SDP volunteer may lose out to a sessional grassroots leader in explaining the misleading reports.
And the PAP has obviously seen this weak link long long time ago.