Several thoughts did come to mind throughout the first nine days of September when campaigning was going on. Everyone is entitled to their informed opinion (as opposed to 'everyone is entitled to their opinion'), so I did make it a point to read the more prominent parties' manifestos online or when they left the handouts in my residential mailbox.
I even went for one of the parties' rally, since it was really convenient for me and I'd wanted to hear what the speaker would say and also feel the all-rounded voting "experience" for myself as a first-time voter.
Thoughts:
1. Rallies seemed to be designed to rile up negative emotions towards The Other Party RATHER than focus on the essence of The Party's capability.
The different parties' rallies (including the one that I support) which I watched on Youtube, Facebook, as well as the one I was present at, did not seem to address what was in the manifestos. That's fine, since yes, I can read the manifestos for myself. However, a strange phenomenon I observed was that each party seemed to spend rally time throwing "personal attacks" at The Other Party's candidate, or cut down what The Other Party said, without really emphasising on the reasons why a voter should vote for The Party itself.
I mean, it went a bit like "vote me because, according to me, he sucks", rather than "vote me because I am good". Unfortunately, perception is reality. Even if it wasn't the intention, that's all I got from the rallies.
If rallies are supposed to be like that, then I don't think I'd want to attend any of these heated shouting sessions at all. It seemed like if I heard none of the rallies or watched none of the videos, and just read the manifestos of the parties contesting my area, I would have made a more "informed" decision without all the emotions involved.
2. Neither party seemed to target the young-adult (21-35 year old) graduate audience.
There weren't any notable promises that directly addressed this audience. Housing, as a general topic, does affect couples planning to get married... However, I believe that most graduate couples with dual-income of at least $4,800 (assuming $2,400 x 2)* would be able to afford a flat (and/or attain loan financing), and hence this audience technically goes untouched by either parties' policies.
Realistically speaking, if none of the parties actually champion major plans for a supposed group (in this case, the graduate young-adult group), the entire group can simply find no reason to vote for either party and find ways to, ahem, spoil their vote, since none seem like they're doing anything for them anyway.
I mean, spoiling votes are not ideal, but I believe some people are "objective" like that and prescriptive action and/or promises of an immediate benefit are necessary to win their vote. Singaporeans are pragmatic like that.
*I speak from personal experience since I have purchased a flat and have a decent working knowledge of how a BTO flat application and loan financing for the flat works.
3. Some voters were frighteningly heck-care and voted based on this premise: "I do not like A, hence I will vote B" or "Since I do not like B, I will vote C".
I mean, come on, is this high school? I'd much rather you spoil your vote than vote for a team that you don't even believe in. Enough said.
***
All in all, my first voting experience was very smooth process-wise, and it was really interesting from the point of view of a young newbie voter. I don't claim to be knowledgeable about any political topics although I do keep up with current affairs when I can.
Kudos to all the volunteers and people who helped out throughout the arduous affair on Friday, and made the process and queueing smooth and orderly (as we Singaporeans like it haha).
May all the promises made in GE2015 not just wither away over time, but come to pass.
No comments:
Post a Comment