Punggol East By-Election coming ? MP steps down
-
MMM:
Yes...this I completely agree.
Seriously I rather he don't say a single thing.... He is the education minister whom the children are familiar with... As a parent, I want to continue to respect him and trust that he will continue to improve the current education system. I know his party role and his education minister role is \"separate\" but.....Joule:
6) Losing PAP candidates becoming 'grassroots advisers'?
When I saw him on TV showing his support for the Punggol PAP member, I asked hubby why did he mention education :?
The education system applies to children staying in ALL parts of Singapore...children staying in Punggol East are also entitled to quality education and not to forget, ALL schools are good schools right ? :evil: -
concern2:
Of course not! Immigration policies is not children playing masak - you don't give me, I don't friend you - :rotflmao:BTW, I am curious. During the entire process of citizenship to be Singaporean, is there anywhere in the papers, direct or indirectly that they have to vote for the incumbent? Do you know of any new citizens that do not vote for the incumbent? Is it an obligation, or do they feel they owe it to the incumbent and have to vote for them, even if they might be inclined to agree with the oppositions on issues?
Also, if a citizen gives up all his/her voting rights by not voting, will his/her citizenship gets revoked/void even if he/she is born here?
No, you can't \"give up\" your voting right. The right is not yours. That's the duty of a citizen; this \"discharge of duty by citizen\" is applicable to any country in the world for that matter, not exclusively to Singapore. However, you can cast your vote in a manner that it would be consider as void/invalid. -
concern2:
Of course not! Immigration policies is not children playing masak - you don't give me, I don't friend you - :rotflmao:BTW, I am curious. During the entire process of citizenship to be Singaporean, is there anywhere in the papers, direct or indirectly that they have to vote for the incumbent? Do you know of any new citizens that do not vote for the incumbent? Is it an obligation, or do they feel they owe it to the incumbent and have to vote for them, even if they might be inclined to agree with the oppositions on issues?
Also, if a citizen gives up all his/her voting rights by not voting, will his/her citizenship gets revoked/void even if he/she is born here?
No, you can't \"give up\" your voting right. The right is not yours. That's the duty of a citizen; this \"discharge of duty by citizen\" is applicable to any country in the world for that matter, not exclusively to Singapore. However, you can cast your vote in a manner that it would be consider as void/invalid. -
concern2:
d Honourable Minister for Education's mouth was not connected to his brain when dat gem slipped off his tongue.MMM:
Heard on CNA that HSK said that voters should vote for incumbent so that WP can work harder for them... :scratchhead:
Ya, was also :scratchhead: how to make oppositions work harder if they lose the election. I think here think there also cannot figure out how. Can someone please enlighten me?
d ST's report on his speech today has cleaned it up for him.
So we shd take it dat it was a slip of his tongue.
-
Tax heavily on foreigners and PR. This should release some tensions. Why now then mention about cooling measure on properties?
-
concern2:
If wan fails to vote, he/she is removed fr d voting register.
Also, if a citizen gives up all his/her voting rights by not voting, will his/her citizenship gets revoked/void even if he/she is born here?
But person can re-register to vote in subsequent elections by writing to ED with valid reasons or pay a penalty. -
Whether real, perceived threats or just plain mischief, a more savvy politician who aspires to be a public figure wld hv just get report d matter to d police to handle n use d little precious time to get on with d more important business of winning votes in a short campaign.
When d MSM sees it fit to make dis d highlight of KJ's campaign to headline d Top of the News screaming \"Rally goes on despite threats to RP chief's son\", wan has to question if d security n safety of KJ is of prime concern or is there a more dubious motive at work here.
In d same ST report, Mrs Jeyaratnam said (bold is mine),
\"I called him and woke him up. He removed it before anyone could have seen it.\" \"I can't reveal what exactly was written in those threats because I don't want the person to be alerted and leave the country or hinder police investigations.\"
Totally inconsistent when on d wan hand, she n KJ don't wish for d public to see d alleged threat for fear of alerting d 'culprit' but she speaks to d press who then publicises it for all to read, :siao: unless she is also of d opinion dat very few ppl read MSM anyway for balanced political opinions. -
MMM:
IMHO, all dis drama is not helping him win votes, but rather damaging his campaign.
Read about KJ potentially wanted to call off today's rally because he was concerned about his safety and those of the people attending that even the Singapore police and...INTERPOL were involved.
He shd just let d police handle it n get on with his campaign proper, unless of course winning is not his main objective.
His father used to stand alone in public places selling his books without incident.
Has SG become a less safe place than London in recent years?
-
a very nice summary video on wp rally
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R16TWPuVt20][/youtube]
it reminds me the early time of pap when they are good
but now..... -
pirate:
Yes, WP appears to be more frank and practical, and taking each step as a step steadily as it comes. I also believed it would have been overwhelming if they had won more seats than they expected, so having a good small win (in terms of numbers in parliament) was good for everyone, including the sentiments on the ground. Overthrowing the government would have been too much for the everyone to handle, and bad for the country.
I agree it is not exactly ideal. But then AIM came along and remind me that the alternative could well be even more dangerous for Singapore. So, how?HVR:
The way I see oppositions is they are not the same. WP seems more sincere and credible and rather upfront. They are saying they do not wish to seize power from PAP but just want to check the government, watch the government. They even admit PAP have good policies. They want to be in parliament so that they can continue to 'check' and 'watch' government.
To me, this is dangerous for Singapore. From what they said, I took it that they know they can't ran Singapore and they are happy with their 'checking' and 'watching' roles. I am fine with it even though I think if I am the one who do all the hard works, coming up with solutions and policies but someone who doesn't do much can just 'check' and 'watch' and get all the credits, it will be hard for me to continue doing it. In this aspect, kudos to the PAP. Now what if WP comes into power? Then they no longer can 'check' and 'watch'. They have to do it, like what PAP is doing now. If they are as capable as the incumbent, I don't even bother who will form the government, as a political party, I just feel if you want my vote, it is not enough to play the roles of check' and 'watch'.
Anyways, we are still a long time away from WP saying they are ready to form a government. I think WP will find the going a lot tougher if they ever become big enough to capture, say 1/3 of Parliament.
As for eventually forming a government, be it WP or PAP, or whichever party in that sense, finding the right people will always be one of the biggest challenge. If it is tough for the PAP to find the right people to join, how easy is it for the oppositions to find the right people to join?
Another question is \"When the right people come along, will you give them the chance?\" We seem to see people's willingness to do that with the Aljunied win. And getting to know how well they have done with Aljunied GRC will pave their track record for being re-elected again in the future. It may not be as easy as it seems.
The oppositions have to work even harder than the PAP. They are like the country that US refuses to sell weapons and technology to, and have to build and come up with their own. It is having to build what might already be available, sounding inefficient and going by a longer route, but a chance for something out of the ordinary, and possibly, cheaper, yet competent, and who knows, maybe even better, for it pushes the human spirit to higher grounds, of accomplishing what may be deemed impossible in the past.
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 š
Register Login