By Election for Hougang

[sleepy]

MMM:

Personally, does it make a diff whether we are MP free now? We are still being looked after by Aljunied GRC.It's like a extended family. in any case, we also don't depend on MP to do anything for us.

Yah, I thought so too.

Actually what is the implication of having or not having by election?
Hah, I don't quite get it :scratchhead:

[Daddy D]

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_773239.html


\"Resident asks court to order Hougang by-election
An Hougang resident has filed an application with the High Court to hold the Prime Minister accountable for calling a by-election in her constituency within three months.
In her affidavit, Madam Vellama Marie Muthu, 42, said she is doing so as she is 'disappointed' that she cannot be helped and represented in Parliament by an elected representative of her choice. She filed the documents through her lawyer, Mr M. Ravi...\"

真的吗??!! This Ravi lawyer again... A bit :siao:
:siam:

[toddles]

Vote PAP:

verykiasu2010:

Although PM Lee said he would consider carefully \"whether and when to hold a by-election in Hougang\", that does not mean he won't. It is just politic-speak


It is still an opportunity for the PAP to get one more seat and to deal a setback to WP. Anything is possible.

I am not supporting any political party

I feel that any potential candidate who wants to be a candidate shd be screened with stringent criterias, a check list, if u will, so as to prevent this kind of resource-sapping incident from happening again. I feel that if there was gonna be a By-Election, WP ought to foot part of the bill, for why shd Gd Tax-Payers be made to pay...? Remember, it's Income-Tax time again...! Our hard-earned money shd be spent wisely. Surely, not like that...?!!

PAP's screening ain't great either you know.

[winchester]

Daddy

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_773239.html


\"Resident asks court to order Hougang by-election
An Hougang resident has filed an application with the High Court to hold the Prime Minister accountable for calling a by-election in her constituency within three months.
In her affidavit, Madam Vellama Marie Muthu, 42, said she is doing so as she is 'disappointed' that she cannot be helped and represented in Parliament by an elected representative of her choice. She filed the documents through her lawyer, Mr M. Ravi...\"

真的吗??!! This Ravi lawyer again... A bit :siao:
:siam:

another of crazy ravi's crazy tricks. he should have been more subtle that her put her up to it

[winchester]

toddles:

PAP's screening ain't great either you know.

lol shhhh sekali a minister send lawyer letter to the forum

[Vote PAP]

toddles:

Vote PAP:

[quote=\"verykiasu2010\"]Although PM Lee said he would consider carefully \"whether and when to hold a by-election in Hougang\", that does not mean he won't. It is just politic-speak


It is still an opportunity for the PAP to get one more seat and to deal a setback to WP. Anything is possible.

I am not supporting any political party

I feel that any potential candidate who wants to be a candidate shd be screened with stringent criterias, a check list, if u will, so as to prevent this kind of resource-sapping incident from happening again. I feel that if there was gonna be a By-Election, WP ought to foot part of the bill, for why shd Gd Tax-Payers be made to pay...? Remember, it's Income-Tax time again...! Our hard-earned money shd be spent wisely. Surely, not like that...?!!

PAP's screening ain't great either you know.[/quote]Keywords: 'any potential candidate', doesn't denote any particular party, governing or opposition. Why the emphasis on PAP & it's screening procedure...? Totally uncalled for; wrong contextual focus...!

[Vote PAP]

toddles:

Vote PAP:

[quote=\"verykiasu2010\"]Although PM Lee said he would consider carefully \"whether and when to hold a by-election in Hougang\", that does not mean he won't. It is just politic-speak


It is still an opportunity for the PAP to get one more seat and to deal a setback to WP. Anything is possible.

I am not supporting any political party

I feel that any potential candidate who wants to be a candidate shd be screened with stringent criterias, a check list, if u will, so as to prevent this kind of resource-sapping incident from happening again. I feel that if there was gonna be a By-Election, WP ought to foot part of the bill, for why shd Gd Tax-Payers be made to pay...? Remember, it's Income-Tax time again...! Our hard-earned money shd be spent wisely. Surely, not like that...?!!

PAP's screening ain't great either you know.[/quote]Not to defend PAP, but how do u define 'ain't great'? What's ur parameter, benchmark, or criteria? U'll hv to back up ur claim, for, otherwise u may be construed as making a baseless claim against the legitimacy of our elected. Care to elaborate ur assumption?

[toddles]

Vote PAP:

toddles:

[quote=\"Vote PAP\"]

I feel that any potential candidate who wants to be a candidate shd be screened with stringent criterias, a check list, if u will, so as to prevent this kind of resource-sapping incident from happening again. I feel that if there was gonna be a By-Election, WP ought to foot part of the bill, for why shd Gd Tax-Payers be made to pay...? Remember, it's Income-Tax time again...! Our hard-earned money shd be spent wisely. Surely, not like that...?!!

PAP's screening ain't great either you know.

Keywords: 'any potential candidate', doesn't denote any particular party, governing or opposition. Why the emphasis on PAP & it's screening procedure...? Totally uncalled for; wrong contextual focus...![/quote]Context is hougang by-election. Preceding sentence refers to preventing \"this kind of resource-sapping incident\". Any plain reading infers 'any potential candidate' of WP. However, if you state outright now that you want to mean \"any potential candidate\" then sure. It is now clarified. But it's not because there was a wrong contextual focus.

[toddles]

Vote PAP:

Not to defend PAP, but how do u define 'ain't great'? What's ur parameter, benchmark, or criteria? U'll hv to back up ur claim, for, otherwise u may be construed as making a baseless claim against the legitimacy of our elected. Care to elaborate ur assumption?

Surely the lady doth protest too much! [Shakespearian quote. not saying that you're necessarily a lady]

Is this a scare tactic? How does my earlier sentence make a \"baseless claim against the legitimacy of our elected\"? Did I say they rig elections? Do word your sentences carefully. Only a sentence like \"the elections are rigged\" questions the legitimacy of our elected.

But sure, I don't mind clarifying. What I meant by saying that PAP's screening \"ain't great\" was an allusion to the Steve Tan case, which everyone is aware of without it having to be spelled out. But since you specially requested, I shall accede. How they fielded him (surely he must have been screened?), how there was a sudden withdrawal, precipitating a last minute scramble and reshuffle?

Anyway, I shall desist from further comments. Such engagement in other threads has not proven to be edifying.

[Vote PAP]

toddles:

Vote PAP:

Not to defend PAP, but how do u define 'ain't great'? What's ur parameter, benchmark, or criteria? U'll hv to back up ur claim, for, otherwise u may be construed as making a baseless claim against the legitimacy of our elected. Care to elaborate ur assumption?

Surely the lady doth protest too much! [Shakespearian quote. not saying that you're necessarily a lady]

Is this a scare tactic? How does my earlier sentence make a \"baseless claim against the legitimacy of our elected\"? Did I say they rig elections? Do word your sentences carefully. Only a sentence like \"the elections are rigged\" questions the legitimacy of our elected.

But sure, I don't mind clarifying. What I meant by saying that PAP's screening \"ain't great\" was an allusion to the Steve Tan case, which everyone is aware of without it having to be spelled out. But since you specially requested, I shall accede. How they fielded him (surely he must have been screened?), how there was a sudden withdrawal, precipitating a last minute scramble and reshuffle?

Anyway, I shall desist from further comments. Such engagement in other threads has not proven to be edifying.

Surely not edifying when \"election-rigging\" was brought up to suggest that I was suggesting that, when nowhere do u find me suggesting that. My \"baseless claim\" alludes to the words used to describe PAP's screening process(s). Let's not smokescreen this & make this into something it is not... Pls discuss according to context. Makes for more mature conversation...