king108 SG Chiam already 20 years, still one man show. Low already 15 years, also one man show. Go for debate, 2 verus 82. Siong. Stay in SMC, sooner or later also will die of exhaustion after heated debate. MM Lee is right and had given the words to go for GRC. Hence, it's could only the way out for them if they wanted to be the leader. Two merge as one lead one team will do. No risk no gain
Agenda SG They share different views, Even if they get in.. Who knows what happens behind closed doors and edited tapes?
Agenda SG And also, Clearly at this alarming rate.. PAP is gonna lose its power Something is definitely brewing to prevent this like eg. Less NS time, More poly students study in local U, Students going overseas get some sort of scholarship from govt and all those to win the hearts of young people For me, Just give me a cellphone, 50 bucks and a m4a1.. I'll survive
king108 SG In politic, no forever friendship and no forever enemy. They too have something in common. Hence, they can have non conformities and different views behind closed doors. (which we does not need to know) They can also let singaporean have a mandate to have or no to have "oppositions" in the parliament. like what MM had say, ruling party is not there to help the opposition to grow which is true. (Who will treat foes well) Prolonged "shot and run tactic" will eventually ended up like the fins faced the red invasion during the WWII. Likewise, allowed me to quote " Coming GE, a watershed event" says DPM Wong Personal view
robertteh SG No matter how MM Lee explains it, his GRC gerrymandering is most undesirable and will not benefit Singapore or lead to its ongoing progress. One-man-one-vote system allows the best individuals to come forward to stand for election with no hindrance whatsoever. Racial balance could easily be conceived through party manifesto, leadership ability and a host of other measures including good incentive scheme such as reserving of certain top ministerial posts for such minority candidates. With GRC, the individual best candidates will be decimated and checked as many of them will be hindered by the obstacle of having to convince fellow minority candidates to stand together with him which reduces our chance of finding or empowering the best candidates to serve. MM Lee was stumped when asked why he must increase the size of GRC which clearly showed that he was unable to justify it except for perpetuating his party's interest at the expense of one-man-one-vote which serves the best interest of the nation. MM Lee also did not explain well why he needs so much controls since PAP was not in danger of losing. He was not convincing in trying to say that he needs to consider the interest of the minority who will have problem in getting voted in by the majority-Chinese voters. When he was told that in earlier elections, a number of minority PAP candidates did get in, he said that that was when PAP was still strongly supported by the people. Therefore MM Lee by his own admission has revealed that GRC has been conceived to boost the PAP at that time when PAP was losing support. Conclusion: MM Lee could not justify GRC was for the good of Singapore but for PAP's own interest. Singaporeans will have to rethink the GRC if they want to throw up the best candidates to lead the country.
SG,LauBaiXing SG The Father and Son will keep all the balls, and tell you there is no level playing field in his Lee Family. Don't waste your time ! They're are always Big Time Born Winner forever...
king108 SG After reading Mr Low Thia Khiang and WP definition of coming GE..I really felt shamed...when read the part on [allow me to quote" an opposition to check and balance a PAP government.] Isn't it really a blank talking then How to apply the check and balance.. , I studied no much also can tell you, needed at least minimum 1/3 of the 84 to block any unbalanced bill. So what is 1/3 of 84 indicated in real number. My math no very good also ...I think is 29..(28 not good, "huat" leh.. (9 - longer). [Allow me to quote again "We are prepared to lose" ..MM already mentioned only fight to win..never fight to lose.. Maybe considered fight to win lah..(don't shame me again ) my english no good.
