“But we will make sure nobody falls below the poverty line.”

Apparently, there is no official poverty line in S’pore. Just wondering how is the govt going to make sure nobody falls below a line that does not exist.

The international standard for poverty line is living at less than US$2/day. If that is also the standard PAP adopts, the PAP government does not actually has do anything at all unless Singapore overnight becomes a bankrupt country.

Remember Dr Vivian Balakrishnan once said: “How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant”

Brave of you TOC.

Balls of brass.

Better sleep in different brothel each night for a few weeks, Andrew. ))))))

what can be so wrong putting two quotes side by side? after all they did come out for the Emperor’s mouth didn’t it? Sue lah. Sue TOC for defamation lah!

what can be so wrong putting two quotes side by side? after all they did come out for the Emperor’s mouth didn’t it? Sue lah. Sue TOC for defamation lah! – gemami (#4)

MM Lee should write a post on TOC as a guest writer to engage citizens. At least, we can gauge ourselves that he is still not senile and that his ideas are still relevant to Singaporeans today. Unlike his son, MM Lee still commands much respect from Singaporeans, so why not?

Perhaps we should kick off Khaw Boon Wan’s euthanasia proposal with LKY and save him from embarassing himself any further.

Maybe the Euthanasia is for LKY. He wants to die by Euthanasia because he realise his senility is catching up with him.

remember Teh C W ? he was ahead of his time.
recall how he kicked the bucket ? self administered euthanasia.
oldfart should do the same as Teh C W.
most importantly is to double the dosage for oldfart to be doubly sure.
khaw probably had him in mind. lol
quickest way to end the golden period for the emperor and his eunuchs.

Er ,,, what is there to sue?

These words are spoken in public and placed in public domain.
Why the FUD? There is no implication here; just words from one old man. MSM also published them too, the government to sue? A few blogs also put these quotes together to illustrate the “fortune telling capability” of one old man. Sue them too?

Why? Certain quarters do not like the critical mass generating online, is it?

Do you trust the growth figures?

his definition of poverty line….when u r really desperate to the point of having one leg outside the ledge. So as of now…all of u are doing fine….

The only sympathy I have for the “gaff” that came with the first quote is that the Old Man is speaking as a politician. I would not have expected a politician to said otherwise.

However, what amuses me is how much reverence people put into the Old Man. I would say he is indeed a sly politician and deserving of praise for that role. But certainly not a Sage.

I suppose many people seemed to have forgotten that he has made judgement in the past, which was papered over by events. For instance, his insistence that Singapore had to merge with Malaya then, often over the objection of his colleague. Had the merger succeeded where would Singapore be?

Also not too long ago, back when Japan seemed to be the “next” super-power, and he was touting the superiority of the Asian Model, he predicted that Japan would be the next engine of growth, what happens?

Almost immediately after his speech Japan went into a 10 years slump.

What about his, supposedly, fantastic foresight in driving the SuZhou deal?

This is a guy who is cut off from the real world since coming to power, how much of a Sage can he be?

Again I suppose I have to grant him praise for making people believe he is some kind of a Sage. The real question is who is the fool here? The supposed Sage or the people who think he is a Sage?

What about his, supposedly, fantastic foresight in driving the SuZhou deal? – Tan Ah Kow (#12)

We may have another Suzhou Industrial Park in our pipeline. Singapore is developing the Tianjin Eco-City in China now. According to my Chinese friends, Tianjin isn’t the best place for investment in China. For many years, Beijing has been trying to modernise the Tianjing province and has pumped in a lot of cash, but no results actually materialised. Now Singapore is trying to do what Beijing has failed. Why would Singapore do better than Beijing government?

From a more constructive point of view, there were other attributions that led to the failure of the Suzhou Industrial Park. Apparently, the CEO of Suzhou Industrial Park (MP Chan Soo Sen) had angered the local community in his dealings and triggered a mass protest. The local officials then responded swiftly by condemning the Suzhou Industrial Park and that subsequently led to the failure of the Suzhou Industrial Park. Suzhou is regarded as one of the least corrupt regions in China already then.

(13) Donaldson Tan on November 10th, 2008 7.30 pm

Whilst I don’t necessarily have any regards for LKY as a Sage nor necessarily agree with his assessment of, for want of term, the “real world” many times, I won’t attribute the failure of Suzhou to solely to him. If you accept that he is human after all, such failure is inevitable. I mean if he was using his own money and failed in his own investment, I wouldn’t necessarily blame him for his lack of foresight or for him to put a gloss on the failure.

The more worrisome aspects is how — if they did — for policy makers seemed to take cue from him for policy direction. Even more worrisome is a PM that seemed to be clueless about policy directions and seemed to rely on, well, daddy to make the move for him.

There is one trait that LHL and his daddy seemed to share is that they like to craft the “real world” view as they see it and then find solutions to the world they have crafted. And what is more astonishing is that people around them seem to believe in the LKY simulated world than the real world itself.

Take for example, the case when his wife had to go to hospital in London. On the basis of that experience he would than claim how superior Singapore Hospital system was. I mean how much validity can one make out of a statement from someone who has the country at his beck and call professing to have a understanding of the hospital system from a common man’s view point.

If we went back to the Suzhou case, one of the complains I think LKY made was that why an agreement was made by Central Government with his administration was not honoured at the local level. Here again you see a tendency to view political systems from his own experience and projecting it as representative of the real world situation. A case of hmm, if I run my country as a dictatorship and China run a dictatorship too, the two systems are the same mentality.

Again if that was the view point of an individual that is fine but when you have a situation where his underling also operates in the same fashion and is in position of power like in Singapore, than it is a worrisome case.

Can we all come to our senses and be united to do something at citizenry level? No doubt the following suggestion that I intent to make may risked myself to taking the bashing from the majority commenters here, but hey, this is afterall a suggestion that can be ignored and not taken to point. If it is worthy to take adn if it helps, I am okay with the bashing which I can easily ignore as well. Here it goes:

1) Each one us [you] who are currently working, whatever position you are in or company you belong to, can you try garner enough support within your company to proactively work out a win win plan to present to your management (or if you are at management level do the same to your subordinates) to help retain jobs within your company? Be it taking a pay cut voluntarily or job sharing as proposed by Kent. Whatever you can do within your means.

I believe if this can be done as a show of unity of force coupled with whatever the government stimulus plan (hopefully they are announcing it soon as per MM’s message) to help everybody (particularly the most needy) to ride through this recession. I think the recovery may be much faster than we thought of. That said, doesn’t mean we cannot continue to make suggestions at citizenry level to the government or related authorities to help. Never mind whether they listen or not, at least that is the what we can do right and every little steps we take matters.

It is no point at moment to chastized the government what should had been done or what not. We can’t change history event can we? It is also not a show of support to the government so to speaks. If you still regard Singapore as home and are genuinely caring for our less fortunate fellow citizenry, it will be much better to work in unity in all aspect right?

This recession is like a vicious storm that has topped the scale and hard to contain and it is here to stay for a long while. It requires concerted efforts of many countries and her citizenry unity to weather it. Just for your information, some US analyst already starting to project and referring this Financial Tsunami as a deep “depression” in some states such as Chicago (where now the auto industry, the backbone of US manufacturing is suffering its worse state of health). They are predicting unemployment as high as 20~30% if the stimulus plan is not in place on time and work. Obviously, there are other areas that has beginning to realize the impact and the scale of it cannot be quantified. What has this got to do with Singapore? You think of the ripple effect. It does somehow affect us indirectly.

China had unveil its 4 trillion yuan stimulus package. Hong Kong had follow suit and oll out initial 1.8 billion stimulus package to help local SMEs (with another request of 2 billion from the Government Reserves) and the Hong Kong Government will soon announce stimulus package to help the market and citizenry level here to weather through this recession as well.

So, please, let’s buried whatever hatchet or displeasure we had with the current government and work as one people if we genuinely want to help our fellow citizenry. Yes, inclusive of the opposition or alternative parties.

I think Observer (SG-HK) has a very good proposition and one that is workable. For the doubters, I would like to relate a personal story.

Year 2003, SARs outbreak, Healthcare industry a its worst. More so if you happen to work in Tan Tock Seng, where I was and still is.

I had 3 elderly uncles, all above 62 years old. Should there be any retrenchment, they will be the first to go, never mind if each one of them had been loyal to the hospital for their whole lifetime.

In fact, I was in a position to know that plans were already underway to have them retrenced. I was saddened and so were my other colleagues who found out about the possibility of retrenchment.

I then gave it very much thought to find a way that we can retain their services. I drafted a plan to have the department operate 24/7. This would allow the department to service the hospital in direct patient care – which is the most important aspect of the healthcare industry – and most plans that cater to this end will most likely get a hearing ans possibly approved.

By introducing a new plan, it arose that there is a need to hire instead of fire. This was exactly what happened. The department hired a couple of temporary staff while at the same time retained the three uncles by converting them to contract employment.

They are still with me today, 5 years on.

When we put our minds and hearts into what we want to achieve, you can never under estimate the power of the human will.

I’m beginning to see this portal evolve into a PAP blasting vehicle.
Every article seems to want to take PAP by the throat and forced them to admit their “errors”.
I remember the purpose of the portal when it first started was to provide unbiased and objective (not subjective) views/opinions as the founders were sick of the biased view of the mass media.

Now, is the portal travelling into the same zone as the mass media?

Com’on… contrasting 2 quotes taken at 2 vastly different times to reflect that LKY was wrong is …well.. wrong (pun intended).

At that point in that (July 2007 was it), there was no sign of impending global crisis. Almost all experts on wallstreet, in IMF, economists in major economies all did not forsaw that. So, he was very right in saying what was correct at that point in time.

Now, the statement he made is vastly different but it is reflective of what is ahead based on information given.

So, if I want to say, I would say he have spoken the truth. Nothing but the truth.

The old man is always free with his words and prognoses and fortune telling. Words are cheap, even free. The majority of Singaporeans dont remember after a while. They feel good. LKY knows how to make themfeel good.

(17) isa on November 10th, 2008 10.26 pm:

Now, the statement he made is vastly different but it is reflective of what is ahead based on information given.

If LKY was an individual giving his own personal opinion about the state of the Singapore/World, then his word is nothing but a personal opinion.

However, if the policy makers themselves are unable to realise that his world view is but one of many and potentially fallible one, then we really have a serious problem.

If you judge by the actions of the policy makers, then you really see a problem. As you said LKY statement is reflective of the information he is given. Now the question how is he sourcing his information? Is he only listening to what he wants to hear not hear what he don’t want to hear?

Ok if we accept that statements he made are purely opinions, then the bigger question ought to be posed to our policy makers. What is their source of information? Do they only listen to LKY’s opinions or do they accept other sources?

(17) isa on November 10th, 2008 10.26 pm

At that point in that (July 2007 was it), there was no sign of impending global crisis. Almost all experts on wallstreet, in IMF, economists in major economies all did not forsaw that. So, he was very right in saying what was correct at that point in time.

If LKY was only regurgitating what other “experts” are saying, what is his role in the LHL administration?

You mean to say the people in LHL administrations don’t have the ability to hear from the “experts” themselves and they need LKY to translate for them?

erm sorry, I think many economists and experts actually warned that a bubble was soon to burst. They just didn’t know when. The subprime crisis was actually boiling and many people on wall street were very cautious and actually fearful. Unfortunately, LKY pressed ahead on his “golden period” prediction, just like what he did for his eugenics fetish. luckily, i think most people didn’t care what he thought anyway and dismissed his views
and we must understand this clearly. LKY wasn’t and never was giving his PERSONAL opinion.He is the Minister Mentor in Singapore Government. Whatever he said on record goes onto record and reflects what he thinks as Minister Mentor, as a very important public servant. Taxpayers in Singapore do not pay him millions to give his personal view. They pay him millions(no choice) to hear what the government thinks according to him.

This is like what I watched on the news in Taiwan.

The stock market is going down the drain…
Economy is bad…

But unluckily, President Ma ..came to power..
and you see common folks making a hoo-haa over how the govt is not doing anything to stop the market from declining or how the economy have not been improving..

Duh… No one can control that…

#3

Now, now. You’re revealing his secrets.

Govt bashing, Opposition bashing, Media bashing, Hallelujahs! — let them all come together, so what?

Take it as HLP online.

While the speakers talk, the dong dong chang goes on around the park. Shut your ears to the dong dong chang if you find them irritating. Keep your focus on the speakers. In time, you’ll find that news come better with the dong dong chang than without it (like MSM).

I’m beginning to see this portal evolve into a PAP blasting vehicle.
Every article seems to want to take PAP by the throat and forced them to admit their “errors”. – isa (#17)

TOC is hardly a PAP-blasting vehicle. If there is any truth in this statement, TOC is only de-constructing the god-like whiter-than-white image that PAP has aggressively marketed itself to the electorate for the past 43 years. This is what happens when truth emerges. PAP is not helping the situation by withholding essential information data from the public and making comments without considering its weight on public opinion. In contrast to mainstream media such as Straits Times, TOC appears to be PAP-bashing, yet Straits Times is such a bad benchmark for fair reporting in the first place. The Guardian, Financial Times and Wall Street Journal are good examples of what fair reporting is. TOC and Straits Times ought to be benchmarked against those presses.

If we went back to the Suzhou case, one of the complains I think LKY made was that why an agreement was made by Central Government with his administration was not honoured at the local level. Here again you see a tendency to view political systems from his own experience and projecting it as representative of the real world situation. A case of hmm, if I run my country as a dictatorship and China run a dictatorship too, the two systems are the same mentality. – Tan Ah Kow (#14)

I agree with you completely. This demonstrated LKY’s lack of understanding of the Chinese governance structure. The Chinese adopts an informal and formal governance that runs parallel to each other. Formal governance takes up the form of provincial officials such as the governor, whereas informal governance takes up the form of the local chapter of the Chinese Communist Party. There is no clear division of governance between formal and informal government at the provincial level and this division varies province to province. Holding Beijing responsible appears to be a deviation from LKY’s usual pragmatic approach. LKY is certainly no God or Emperor, and our policymakers in Singapore must acknowledge this too.

heh heh. even if LKY isn’t God, he sure has a serious God complex! One day he will sue Singapore for defamation. Or everyone who has ever read, contributed, been cited on or commented on TOC, Singaporedaily, etc.

Anyway on a more serious note, so LKY tells the truth. That is right too, but where is the foresight LKY has always been preaching? Must have foresight, so we have to pay our million-dollar ministers to do their jobs and bring F1 and casinos to our country. But no foresight to predict this. But the Gahmen put money away to tide Singapore through a rainy period right? Turns out Gahmen lose money too…and still giving out money to help with IR.

We can’t say LKY lied, but we can say that he’s losing a lot of credibility. As for PAP-bashing…no mah. We’re just doing what citizens should do: remembering WHY we put that guy up there in the first place, and CHECKING to see if he’s accomplished his task of representing the people. PAP made it such that we’re too busy to remember…got to run around earning money mah. So it is good that we have webbies which remind us of what’s been spoon-fed to us, digested, shat out, and flushed away.

(isa),

I don’t think TOC is a platform for anti PAP, it’s just that most feedback seems ignored or gets the coffeeshop talk treatment that participants are pissed off. If the government could just provide an amiable platform for alternative views/feedback, such bashing would not get off the line. It will actually provide for a more mature and inclusive society rather than a politically apathethic one that we have. BY making noise or even poking fun, it shows that citizens do care for the country and their future.

After all, our politicians have already made enough self-contradictory statements of late, like the foreign talent saga (if they leave, Singaporeans end up jobless vs. they are here to ensure competitiveness – something like a you win, i lose situation) and the secrecy with which they do things…

We’re just doing what citizens should do:

Fellow Singaporeans,

We’ve had it for too long with the government always telling us how good they are, how credible they are, how honest they are…blah….blah…..blah….

Don’t you think we’ve had enough of this?

How about having Singaporeans come together to draw up a list of Key Achievable Areas (KAA) and Key Performance Indicators (KPI) to appraise and judge how each MP performs as well as how the govermnet performs as a whole?

It is about time the people of Singapore be the ones to appraise them based on our criteria and standards. It cannot be by their own standard which they have been lowering day by day to the point of Singaporeans getting the feeling that we are being purposely deceived.

What say you, my fellow Singaporeans?

“isa on November 10th, 2008 10.26 pm
At that point in that (July 2007 was it), there was no sign of impending global crisis. Almost all experts on wallstreet, in IMF, economists in major economies all did not forsaw that. So, he was very right in saying what was correct at that point in time.”

So experts are no magicians and so-called experts after all. Experts in wallstreet are in US and effectively they were passing the risk to the rest of the world. Maybe, just maybe, they did forsee the risk but the rest of the world did not forsee that they were actually having a last hold of those twisted worthless products.

Going by your rationale and by extension, one is always right in saying in the context of his time and line of reality. That goes for you and everyone else.

isa,

For most people here who commented, we are neither pro nor anti-PAP. We are stating the obvious fact. What TOC posted here is also factual, isn’t it?

If you strongly believe that some of the posts or comments here are not factual enough, please enlighten us with your facts. Please do your necessary part as a thinking Singaporean, one that is not guided by latched lease.

The one who gets a verbal bashing is the one who gives others a reason to do so. Logical?

I wonder who advises the MM when the world economy is obviously going downhill?

Regarding the matter of pro or anti-PAP, I would like to quote:

Edward R. Murrow:

We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it.

I think the best way to see and focus what we are doing here is Pro-Singapore instead of pro or anti- specific political party.

33) sarek_home
.
You’re absolutely correct.
Any other label will not do for us.
We are Pro-Singapore.

Ya i think that we should be labelled bro-Singapore than anti-PAP though there is some truth in the latter from what I read here.

At least 90% of the comments I read here are not supportive of the govt’s policies and principles. Nevertheless, it is never wrong not to support the govt as so far I guess they have prove to be disappointing.

I think the worse thing is that we felt helpless about the whole situation. Though we are democractic with the right to vote and often LKY has called on Singaporeans to turn the table on them if they population dislikes the govt but so far this have never happened before.

The most MPs the opposition parties had in Parliament was a good ten years ago with 4 MPs elected but they did such a bad job that they were fired just after one term. So getting in qualified opposition MPs may be key to the whole political climate change.

Veterans like Chiam and Low will be there for a long time unless something drastic happened. They have so far done well by not rocking the boat too much and speaking logically in Parliament. Nevertheless, I don’t think Singapore wants such opposition MPs. They are too mild and conceding for their own good. It is like they are pro-govt themselves. Maybe these two MPs have lost their edge.

What do Singapore really want? Do we want more of opposition MPs in Parliament to check the ruling party or a complete overthrow? Or if the current govt is more proactive to the cries of it’s people are we appeased then?

These are valid questions we need to ask ourselves.

we’ll know when the MPs bonuses are made known this year end

35) Gilbert Goh Keow Wah

First of all, I don’t see CST going for another term. I feel he will retreat to a more peaceful life after this term in office because of his health.

In order to try and understand what Singaporeans really want, we need to grasp an understanding of:
1. how things are at the moment,

Just like you, I have problem reading into this. Is it because Singaporeans have
become so disenfranchised that they become anti-PAP no matter what; or; is it
because they are only fed up with some of the policies and are voicing out against
these policies only, or; is it a combination of both.

2. what Singaporeans hope for and

Basically, Singaporeans hoped to be heard. Their voices are crying out daily to be heard. They want the government to turn their eyes inward from time to time rather than outward all the time.

It has come to a point when Singaporeans are already giving up on being heard. This is why they are turning to any voice that makes sense to them. Even a little bit of sense will do and they will cling on to it for dear life. This is desperation and when one is in such a desperate state, any solution other than the ones dished out by the govt will do.

This is however, not a prolonged state. When one gets over this, his future decisions will be based on how well or how badly he had been treated in his time of need.

What do you think he will hope for then? Singaporean will hope for an alternative choice. They will hope that this choice is always there for them. Should one choice fails them, they can choose another. This is their ultimate hope.

They may not have this choice now but who is to say they won’t have it in the future?
Which bring me to my third point.

3. how much are Singaporeans willing to endure to accommodate an alternative?

Singaporeans are no longer as dumb as they were before. The easily accessible information from alternative mediums have done wonders for their education on socio-political issues.

They know that an alternative is imminently needed and as far as I am concern, I am willing to lower my standard in my expectations on how well this alternative can perform. Realistically, I can enjoy this allowance because I know for sure that the alternative party will not take over the govt overnight. I foresee a new govt in nothing earlier than the next 10-15 years. I will allow the alternative party/parties this time to learn the ropes of the trade, so to speak.

So you see, it’s not all gloom and doom after all. The choice is there and the call is for you and me to make.

I agree with gemami point #3.

We have to give any possible alternative parties time to learn the ropes of governing. Such thing don’t happen overnight under nornal circumstances. We must allow them to develop gradually over 2/3/4/5 GEs. If more alternative parties politicians are voted into parliament, it will attract more talented and altruistic citizens to come forward and join the alternative parties. Only with a substantial number of abled politicians can we talk about forming a shadow cabinet to evaluate and propose alternative policies.

While the WP had put forward a manifesto in the last GE, it is very different to have a shadow cabinet who can examine policies of individual ministries.

As such, I am also prepared to give any decent oppositions a chance to prove themselves even if it means some short term pain for my ward just like Potong Pasir and Hougang.

38) Yamasam

Thanks for sharing the same sentiments.

One thing we have always been told, especially during election time, is that the opposition cannot even run itself properly let alone allowing them to run the country. These are the sort of arguments that the PAP uses to scare the electorate into voting for the PAP.

Well, one can fault them for making such an accusation. It is true.

This is where the minds of Singaporeans must remain focussed. We know that such comparisons are like comparing oranges with apples in the present state of things.

Our focus should be to allow the oppositions to build up themselves and any comparison can only be made in say, 15 to 20 years time, at the earliest. If we don’t dare to give this chance to the opposition, we will still be talking like we do now. Nothing would have changed.

Their journey must start now and start immediately. Whether they have been elected or not, they have to continue to work at it, to learn all they need to learn to govern this country. They have to set their goals and show Singaporeans what they hope to achieve – together with the people.

It has to be bang! bang! bang! everyday. They have so much catching up to do and if they really have Singapore’s interest at heart, they must get to work now.

On our part, we must give them the chance and the opportunity to learn.

oops! … should read: “one cannot fault them for making such an accusation”

39) gemami on November 11th, 2008 4.18 pm 38) Yamasam

Thanks for sharing the same sentiments.

One thing we have always been told, especially during election time, is that the opposition cannot even run itself properly let alone allowing them to run the country. These are the sort of arguments that the PAP uses to scare the electorate into voting for the PAP.

How do you expect a new chef to prepare a good meal when all their pots and pans in the kitchen are being taken away? THINK!

“One thing we have always been told, especially during election time, is that the opposition cannot even run itself properly let alone allowing them to run the country. These are the sort of arguments that the PAP uses to scare the electorate into voting for the PAP.”

I remember when town councils were first introduced, it was THE way to “fix” the opposition. The scare was that HDB estates, if run by opposition town councils, will degenerate into slums due to mismanagement. Fast forward 20 or 30 years, this did not happen. The only “slum” appearance in Potong Pasir and Hougang was because the PAP unfairly withheld the upgrading program until every PAP held constituency is upgraded first. This is naked political discrimination. How can any pro-Singaporean stomach it?

41) tiredsingaporean on November 11th, 2008 4.59 pm

“How do you expect a new chef to prepare a good meal when all their pots and pans in the kitchen are being taken away? THINK!”

I agree to a point. Using your analogy. If I look at it from a different perspective, can they improvised or how can we try to make sure that there are some pots and pans left in the kitchen? Nobody evrer says that a good meal cannot be prepared without proper pots and pans or a good meal can only be prepared with pots and pans right? I think it is more of a determination and how eager you want to cook a good meal. What recipe to use and what combination of recipe will yield the best results and whether the reulting good meal is acceptable to your customers or you need to convince your customer to try your new menu…etc. There are a lot of ground work that is needed before you consider whether their are proper pots and pans to complement it. There are time where things are market driven but there are time where you need to create the market need with a certain target customers in mind. Presentation is all but a packaging, substance is where it really matters.

Yes, it is always the best way to know whether one can do a better job than the other is to give them a chance to proof themselves. However, our present system is no different from those politics played in many large corps. You scratch my back and I scratch yours, never mind if you cannot perform, just go by the flow and to find fault or kick out those who are not in the team, sad but very true.

42) Faircomment
The only “slum” appearance in Potong Pasir and Hougang was because the PAP unfairly withheld the upgrading program …

No, no, no, you must have forgotten the three storey pile of rubbish in Tanjong Pagar. That was the real slum even with money in the town council.

43) Observer (SG-HK) & 44) tiredsingaporean

This is why I have always said that it is by knowing the enemy that we can prepare for war. Indeed, even though the opposition knows it is in a very disadvantageous position it does not mean that it should give up the fight even before it begins.

If it has to be David vs Golliath – so be it. The opposition must identify ways and work around the disadvantage.

They must also know the battleground well. The battleground here is the vote that each voter possesses. The same vote its mighty opponent is clamouring for.

And although disadvantaged by the lack of weaponries it must realised that it has the edge over voters who are ready to support them, if only they could show some reasons why they should be given a chance.