Skip to main content

Will emotionless Singaporeans give Dr Chee Soon Juan a chance in Parliament 2016?


Yes if you are in the cycle of social media. No if you are on the side of main stream media. So, what is the chance of Dr Chee Soon Juan getting your votes in 2016?

By the probability of throwing a coin, it is 50:50. The chance right now is perhaps below 50% as his constituency groundwork has yet to begin. We have to assess his new ‘emotion’ in the next few years and re-rate his chances.

Let’s be very clear that less emotion does not mean less rational.  Singapore voters are calculative and they want to have both economic growth and democracy, just like they want upgrading with government subsidy plus oppositions in the parliament. When they know they can’t have both, they will make the best choice for themselves, for example Aljunied GRC.

Singapore ranks as the most emotionless society in the world, beating out Georgia, Lithuania, and Russia. Singaporeans are unlikely to report feelings of anger, physical pain, or other negative emotions. They’re not laughing a lot, either. “If you measure Singapore by the traditional indicators, they look like one of the best-run countries in the world,” says Jon Clifton, a Gallup partner in Washington. “But if you look at everything that makes life worth living, they’re not doing so well.”http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-11-20/singapore-confronts-an-emotion-deficit

Best company with no work-life balance

From the above report, we know Singapore is one of the best-run companies in the world but it does not mean a work-life balance is provided in this company.  We look at the figure and pay you based on your performance. You have your compensation and bonus accordingly but be ready to report to work every time you are needed.

With this life style, you are motionless even you have high pay and fat bonus. Unfortunately, if you are not in this class, you become even more emotionless. Going down to the social ladder, you see more emotionless faces as they have to struggle for a living.  

Emotion or emotionless Dr Chee?

Same to Dr Chee, after getting the news of his annulment from bankruptcy, let’s guess he is emotion or less emotion now.  His past action is considered emotion to some or rational for others. And what about the future, especially in GE2016, will his participation as an election candidate lead to a new emotion?

Let us wish him all the best after Friday, 23 Nov 2012.  It is good to see him in parliament and so we can judge him whether he is ‘too emotion or too rational’.

The Government says Singapore opposition leader Chee Soon Juan's bankruptcy has been annulled after an unprecedented concession by two former prime ministers to whom he owed about $400,000.
A government office statement says ex-prime ministers Lee Kuan Yew and Goh Chok Tong agreed to accept a reduced amount of S$30,000 from Mr Chee, which will free him from bankruptcy proceedings formally on Friday.http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC121121-0000128/SDP-leader-Chee-Soon-Juans-bankruptcy-annulled

Dr Chee as an MP in 2016?

Based on the SDP percentage of valid votes of 36.8% in GE2011 and its best performance result of Holland-Bukit Timah GRC (39.9%), it is really not an easy task for Dr Chee and SDP. You need a 10.11% swing to win.  Is it possible?

And the SDP team in Holland-Bukit Timah was (as claimed in social media) already the best of the best from the oppositions in 2011. There is no doubt the percentage of valid votes of SDP in 2016 will increase from 36.8%, but by how much?

GE % of valid votes

PAP
WP
SDP
NSP
1984
64.8%
41.9%
46.1%
-
1988
63.2%
38.5%
39.5%
34.6%
1991@
61%
41.1%
48.6%
37.9%
1997
65%
37.6%
33.1%
30.1%
2006
66.6%
38.4%
23.3%
32.5%SDA
2011
60.1%
46.6%
36.8%
39.3%
@ By-elections strategySource: www.singapore-elections.com 

23.3% in 2006 for SDP is an unusual low and could be a statistical error due to some unusual and unfavourable campaigns.  Confidentially saying, in 2016, the SDP percentage of valid votes should increase to more than 40%. But will this enough to make a breakthrough?

The SDP before 1991 and after 1991 is a totally different party under different leadership.  If history repeats itself and SDP manages to gain back its glory, then we will see the first SDP MP under the leadership of Dr Chee in 2016.

A better organised SDP with more qualify candidates should have a chance in 2016.  But Singapore voters are the richest in the world, the most emotionless in the world, and as reported above Singaporeans are unlikely to report feelings of anger, physical pain, or other negative emotions.”

This makes getting their feelings difficult not to mention their votes. And SDP does not a have National Conversation to talk to the people even it only reaches to a certain group of people.  

Fight to win

We will see a very different picture from the past for future general elections or even by-elections. In the past, especially in the 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, participation in elections is like playing a game, full of fun.  It is certainly more emotions and many candidates participated in elections just for the fun. And for the PAP candidates it was a fun too, competing with each other to see who had the highest margin!

The future elections will be less emotions and less funs.

You stand as candidate is to win the election, not for fun. There is no room for fun playing candidates unless you want to lose your deposit. Even the PAP candidates have to fight to win and opposition candidates will have to choose a party that gives them a higher chance of winning.

Will all these future emotionless candidates lead to an even less emotion Singapore?  I hope not.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...