Presidential Elections 2017
-
pirate:
Tharman is a class above the so-called 4-G leaders. I see no reason why Tharman should not be the next PM, even if it is only for one term. No reason other than internal PAP politics, that is. :razz: And to blame it on the ethnic Chinese voters is really lame. :mad: Even my Chinese educated pioneer generation mother thinks Tharman is by far the best choice.
I totally concur with you. Just 1 term. Surely he can help to 'dong' 1 term first until the 4G are ready?
Everyone loves Tharman. He did very well in China recently. Li Keqiang gave him face by accepting his invitation to visit Singapore. Another guy I notice the Chinese inner circle likes very much is DPM Teo Chee Hean, but he is definitely not in the queue due to his age.
My elderly aunty thinks they pick a female minority this time cos \"女的比较容易控制”. You know, if you're the boss, you wanna pick someone you feel 'song' to bow to at the Istana. If the President is more popular or charismatic than you, bet u'd be 'buay song'! -
Zeit:
He's my least favourite. But he should be our PM's favourite as well though: he sings the same tune.. er, I mean, shares the same view as his boss..
1. Ong Ye Kung (my favourite for the post of PM) - only half a term's exposure
http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/multi-party-political-system-could-ruin-spore-ong-ye-kung [quote]SINGAPORE — Should the political landscape here evolve into one with more than one dominant political party, it could mean a lot more “jostling on the ground” as unions and various associations and even the media become split as parties seek support, said Education Minister Ong Ye Kung (Higher Education and Skills).
And should political parties align themselves along “sinister” lines, such as by race, language or religion, this “toxic mix” could leave the country broken, said Mr Ong, noting that even as political parties represent diverse views, that very same essence can “take a nasty twist, sowing discord and dividing societies”.
Mr Ong set out these scenarios yesterday at the Institute of Policy Studies’ (IPS) Singapore Perspectives conference, where he spoke at a session on a multi-party system in Singapore.
The Republic’s formula for success, noted Mr Ong, who is among those touted to be Singapore’s fourth-generation of leaders, could well be a one-party system.
One major long-term risk, he noted, is that a multi-party system could slow down decision-making and nimbleness while navigating an “ever-changing world and environment”.
“Imagine, if we have a multi-party system back in 1965, will we have come so far so quickly?” said Mr Ong in a speech opening the session.
But a single-party system in the case of Singapore is not a prescription but an outcome of choice resulting from elections, he pointed out. For example, the state of Massachusetts in the United States has been dominated by the Democrats for a long period, he said, adding: “Smallness and concentration often do go together.”
If the people of a country wish for a multi-party system, it will be so. “The job of the opposition parties is to point out the risks of a single-party rule. That is their job. But the job of the PAP (People’s Action Party) is to make sure that Singapore continues to flourish. We will also point out the risks of a multi-party system and, most importantly, we must always keep out the ills of complacency, elitism and corruption,” he said.
Mr Ong’s remarks are the latest on the issue of multi-party systems, which was also touched on by Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen during a dialogue with Yale-NUS students on Jan 13. Dr Ng had said that the extent of progress in a country should not be measured by its number of political parties.
In 2015, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam had said that one-party states with no political competition face a disadvantage, but having a dominant player in politics is an edge.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong also weighed in on this topic in 2011 at the Kent Ridge Ministerial Forum, saying that a two-party system is not workable in Singapore as there is not enough talent to form two “A teams”, and it could also bring about a division in society based on class or racial lines.[/quote] -
starlight1968sg:
As Saturday is not official \"non-working day\", unlike Sunday, there will be no gov declared \"PH-in-lieu\" on Monday.
Can't recall if Mon will be off in lieujanet88:
if PE voting is held on a saturday, does that mean Monday will be a off in lieu public holiday?
i need the time to revise with daughter for her year end exam. 6 subjects
However, if Saturday is a non-working day for the company, then it's up to the company to offer off-in-lieu. -
Zeit:
:siam:pirate:
Tharman is a class above the so-called 4-G leaders. I see no reason why Tharman should not be the next PM, even if it is only for one term. No reason other than internal PAP politics, that is. :razz: And to blame it on the ethnic Chinese voters is really lame. :mad: Even my Chinese educated pioneer generation mother thinks Tharman is by far the best choice.
I totally concur with you. Just 1 term. Surely he can help to 'dong' 1 term first until the 4G are ready?
Everyone loves Tharman. He did very well in China recently. Li Keqiang gave him face by accepting his invitation to visit Singapore. Another guy I notice the Chinese inner circle likes very much is DPM Teo Chee Hean, but he is definitely not in the queue due to his age.
My elderly aunty thinks they pick a female minority this time cos \"女的比较容易控制”. You know, if you're the boss, you wanna pick someone you feel 'song' to bow to at the Istana. If the President is more popular or charismatic than you, bet u'd be 'buay song'! -
As the EP is already a minority representation, it is unlikely PM will be of minority representation. I think depends on how SG wants to position itself with China. Even tho he was well-received, he may be regarded by the Chinese leaders as \"more distant\" as there are no common roots, as Chinese tend to value relationships in order of 情，理， 法。
Also, if EP is female, then also unlikely PM will be of female gender. Just a feel.Zeit:
I totally concur with you. Just 1 term. Surely he can help to 'dong' 1 term first until the 4G are ready?pirate:
Tharman is a class above the so-called 4-G leaders. I see no reason why Tharman should not be the next PM, even if it is only for one term. No reason other than internal PAP politics, that is. :razz: And to blame it on the ethnic Chinese voters is really lame. :mad: Even my Chinese educated pioneer generation mother thinks Tharman is by far the best choice.
Everyone loves Tharman. He did very well in China recently. Li Keqiang gave him face by accepting his invitation to visit Singapore. Another guy I notice the Chinese inner circle likes very much is DPM Teo Chee Hean, but he is definitely not in the queue due to his age.
My elderly aunty thinks they pick a female minority this time cos \"女的比较容易控制”. You know, if you're the boss, you wanna pick someone you feel 'song' to bow to at the Istana. If the President is more popular or charismatic than you, bet u'd be 'buay song'! -
limlim:
for schools and stat boards, saturday is not a working day. so if the PE is held on that day, monday will be a public holiday? if PE is held on 2 sep, 4 september happens to be september holiday week. someone told hubby xx school will be used for voting.
As Saturday is not official \"non-working day\", unlike Sunday, there will be no gov declared \"PH-in-lieu\" on Monday.
However, if Saturday is a non-working day for the company, then it's up to the company to offer off-in-lieu. -
Looks like 9 Sep (Sat) unlikely? Then soon it will be psle though
-
Coke Chan:
Yes, agree with you. We know it's not likely to be Tharman, as he's already reiterated that it's not going be him and the PM also reiterated the electorate isn't ready for a non-Chinese PM for now, based on some IPS racial survey conducted in 2016.As the EP is already a minority representation, it is unlikely PM will be of minority representation. I think depends on how SG wants to position itself with China. Even tho he was well-received, he may be regarded by the Chinese leaders as \"more distant\" as there are no common roots, as Chinese tend to value relationships in order of 情，理， 法。
Also, if EP is female, then also unlikely PM will be of female gender. Just a feel.![](\"https://s28.postimg.org/q3vwlhmdp/2017-08-24_2.png\")
https://s28.postimg.org/q3vwlhmdp/2017-08-24_2.png\">
![](\"https://s28.postimg.org/p2vnwd5e5/2017-08-24_3.png\")
The Chinese value 情，but it must be reciprocated accordingly, which isn't quite happening like before, i.e. our leaders must 领情 also mah...I don't see them embracing China so affectionately as LKY and GCT did. They seem more keen to 'de-sinicise' Singapore more than anything else, say by triggering the election of a minority president (the best if this president looks the part), and appointing a couple of minority diplomats and trade consuls to make Singapore appear more multiracial to the world. They are also placing greater emphasis on 法 now。
In any case, there's no such 情 advantage with a Chinese PM in today's geopolitical context. Look at Malaysia. You don't need to have DAP to form a govt or a Chinese PM to attract investments from China. The Chinese can trade with Sultans, Bumis and Africans anytime. The 情 leverage or card is rendered useless and irrelevant now. Singapore used to have an advantage as China was exceeedingly proud of LKY and Singapore because after so many centuries of 'bullying' by the west, there was finally a capable Chinese global leader who managed to 扬眉吐气、光宗耀祖 in the west dominant world. A lot of privileges and concessions were granted to our businesses.
In view that the 乡情 advantage is no more, I feel there's no need to compulsorily have another Chinese PM. Tharman, who is highly valued by the Chinese for his IMF/WB/AIIB expertise, can take over SG premiership easily. -
mum_sugoku:
Well, he's not wrong to support that view. He spoke from personal experience as his late father was MP from Barisan Sosialis, so he understands how a 2-party system can wreak havoc and impede the passing of impt bills and laws.
He's my least favourite. But he should be our PM's favourite as well though: he sings the same tune.. er, I mean, shares the same view as his boss..Zeit:
1. Ong Ye Kung (my favourite for the post of PM) - only half a term's exposure
Bear with me. This is VERY OT!
Why Ong?
1. Age, health & fitness, overall disposition - He should be in his late 40s, but he is very fit and plays a lot of contact sports. He flew in a fighter jet with RSAF trainers; he scuba-dived in a training pool with the Navy; he dabbled with arms - basically 'bao sua bao hai'...
I personally believe our PM must be very healthy and fit. PM should exercise regularly or at least portray that he's exercising regularly to keep fit to take the country forward. LKY used to play golf, cycle, jog and swim. It's worrisome that I've never seen PM Lee or Heng SK exercise apart from doing those lame SG Workout with the PGers! Look at Putin. Old & saggy muscles but still can dive into the Siberian lake to harpoon fishes! Look at Queen E 2, still can go horse riding.
2. Multifaceted experience - Seems to be he has the widest range of exposure in both public & private service, even though the tenure may not be long like those old guards had during LKY's era.
* MCI - check
* MOE - check
* MOM - check
* Mindef - check
* MOT - check
* MOF - check
* MFA - check
* MTI - check
* UNIONS - check
* Private sector - check
* China - check
Overview as former PPS - check
3. Ideology - Not so very 'white' to me. So far, he hasn't attacked the opposition; he doesn't lick the bosses' boots like some MIWs; he doesn't seem too 'cheng hu' because his spouse isn't in Admin Service/civil service like Heng and Chan's spouses. I'd say Ong is little more inclined towards the 'corporate/private' sector type because of his stint, albeit short, at Keppel. From my observation of Ong, he seems to be minding his own business, quietly learning his ropes as he is lagging behind his peers. He's a balanced leader - not too radical, not too PAPish.
Ong appeals to voters from age 21-45 (possibly because of his current portfolio).
4. Not so conservative or buttoned up - Ong has several interesting hobbies like art and playing the guitar. Actually you can psycho-analyse if a person is a bookworm, nerd or technocrat by looking at the type of music they listen to, the FB posts they write, their love stories, etc.
Go google his Chinese and Eng interviews with the press. Very insightful
But Ong is not as good a public speaker as Chan CS and Tan CJ. He cannot galvanise the crowds in rallies imho.
-
Next time, when reciting pledge, must change a bit…
"We, the citizen of Singapore, … regardless of race, …" to "We,… differentiated by race whenever need to elect president every 5 rounds"…
The whole "reserve" thing goes against the fundamental principal of meritocracy.
Best man gets the job… no bias, no unfair rules to block someone out.
Even if really want to add a rule it should be "If there is no non-Chinese for 5 rounds, the next one will be reserved for non-Chinese" etc… instead of reserving for only 1 race. Keeping out all other races just sounds so wrong at any level.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login
Online Users
Recent Topics
Statistics
