Skip to main content

PAP Election Strategy and the Asian Thought Behind Voters


2015 PAP Strategy 战略 1

PAP has another set of calculation

Although my prediction of 13 single parliament seats and a total of 89 seats is right, however, my guessing of the number of group representative constituencies is wrong.

I was misled by the instruction PM Lee gave to the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee. PM Lee wants an average size of GRC < 5. I thought EBRC could understand his intention and predicted there were 3 5-member, 14 4-member and 3 3-member GRCs. This will give an average GRC size of 4.

42 当选区划分遇上地方效应,傑利蠑螈如何进行?   Google Docs.png
http://pijitailai.blogspot.sg/2015/07/blog-post_21.html?spref=fb

However, it looks like both PM Lee and EBRC are less confidence for the PAP to win the election. They retain the 2 6-member super constituencies, reduce 5-member constituencies to 6  and increase 4-member constituencies to 8.

In the new election map, if we take 4*8=32, the 4-member GRCs is only 42% (32/76) of the total GRCs. It means the average size of GRCs is > 5. PM Lee’s instruction of ‘smaller than 5’ can only be met when we add in the 13 single seats into calculation. {(13+32)/89=50.56%}

Election is a mathematical game.  It is talking about number, especially for the first-past-the post system. The winners take all.  Gerrymandering as I explained is an integer optimization problem.  The PAP has all the statistics and they can quite accurately make the election prediction using technology.

EBRC has kept their promised and beautifully delivered their white paper of 89-seat parliament in GE2015, following closely all the instructions given by PM Lee: average GRC size < 5 and at least 12 single seats.  

How can we read their minds behind all these magic numbers? How can we break their ideal optimization calculation?

  • By retaining the 2 6-member GRCs, it is a ‘sure win’ strategy.
  • By reducing the number of 5-member GRCs, it is a ‘cut loss’ strategy.
  • By increasing 4-member GRCs and 1 more single seat, it is a ‘competition within oppositions’ strategy.

In this election, the PAP is in the defensive and they want to remain in power for many more years. EBRC is only the first step. From now on till polling day, their super-computer and election consultants are ready and on stand-by for further detailed analysis of the outcome.

They want to prevent any opposition breakthrough and hopefully continue to enjoy two-thirds majority.   

The mood of electors is the only factor that can break the PAP’s monopoly in parliament.  

This factor will be affected by historical reasons (CPF, population, transport, education, democracy, transparency etc) and ad-hoc effects (rally, social media, institutions (MRT) breakdown, bad news (corruptions), etc) .

Singapore is an Asian society and in term of democracy, we are far behind other developed Asian countries like India, South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan etc. Singapore will follow the trend sooner and later.

Asian thought? Beyond god?

So, how to read the mood of Singaporeans?

28Jul2015 onLHL   TODAYonline.png

Yesterday’s Today newspaper has an interesting opinion piece on PM Lee’s comment on godless society.
Lee seems to suggest a no religion society will invite communism.

Since 75% of Singaporeans are Chinese, I would like to discuss this from another perspective. If Lee is referring to China and Chinese communism, I think he got his fact wrong. This worries me as China is the next superpower and Lee is promoting a wrong understanding of China. How can Singaporeans do successful businesses there?

Chinese thinking is very complex and it is always linked to the past (language, history, culture, philosophy).  The blue plan of today’s China infrastructure development is just an ‘update’ of Sun Yat-sen Grand Development Plan in the early 1900s. Chinese history clearly shows many big project developments in different dynasties.  

What has this got to do with Singapore?

Singaporean Chinese, even though less 'Chinese-ness', still have some Chinese thinking, especially older Chinese. For this election, statistics show there are slightly more post-1965 voters than older generation voters. However, the Chinese thinking remains here. LKY tried very hard to change it but even a Englsih-speaking Singapore Chinese still maintain some Chinese thinking.

PM Lee commented on godless society. I wonder what is his religion? In Chinese history, Chinese are more philosophical rather than religious. Sometimes, they can be very practical, for example, the many air travel incidents and behaviours of Chinese tourists. This leads to the question of ‘LKY dividend’. Respect of LKY and supporting PAP and PM Lee can be two different things.

When Singapore jumps from third world to first world, the Chinese thinking or Asian thinking (Indian and Malay Singaporeans may have the same experience too) remains. It is a complicated and complex process, different people experience different degree of change. Some only want to buy clothing in London, many still prefer to shop in Johor. The income inequality has made more JB shoppers than London shoppers, so do the voters.

The PAP has failed to understand the different degree of change.  Their assumed First World status is just a broken promise, applicable to minority Singaporeans. Since PM Lee took over the prime minister, he has got it wrong in every election.  Just like he claims he understands China but fails to understand Chinese history.

There are historical reason why Singaporeans vote for the oppositions. Aljunied voters are just taking the lead, others will follow as they too see the real colors of the PAP.

If you are interested to know more about naturalism and super naturalism in China, here is a reference video:  




 

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

因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。

  因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。 如果只有一套解决方法,很难看出好坏,方便还是不方便,易通还是不容易通。用新方法代替旧的系统,人们当然会做比较,尤其是科技产品,使用的人很多,一用就马上看到结果。 这是一个竞争的世界,即使一党独大,也要考虑到便民。当人民觉得不方便,不好用,不易通,就会反映,发声,不满。为什么没有预先想到,最可怕的是测试时,已经接到反应,还是不加改善。或许,行动党还抱着“令伯”最大,用者自行解决问题。 易通公交收费系统的整合,似乎缺少一种人文,沟通,反而更加多表现出政府的独断独行。尤其重要的是,如果只有一套系统,我们是看不出问题,做不出好坏的评价。 这其实证明国会里不可以只有一把声音,没有比较,没有进步。

After 60 years, after 3 failed political imaginations, the PAP is deteriorating...