By Bridget Welsh
Nationally people are wondering why a widely-respected candidate such as Zaid Ibrahim lost the Hulu Selangor by-election to a MIC unknown.
Yesterday, I described part of the story – the factors shaping the BN. Below I lay out the issues that undermined Pakatan Rakyat, drawing again from the campaign messaging, logistics and political dynamics.
Due to the size of the constituency and national political firepower they faced, this election tested Pakatan like never before. It showcases some deep weaknesses within the opposition that have to be addressed in order for Pakatan to win national power.
Ultimately, the real test will be whether Pakatan learns the lessons of strengthening cooperation and adapting to the new political environment. The fact of the matter is that they held their own, but underperformed. Underperformance is something that the opposition cannot afford to do if it seeks to take over Putrajaya.
On the back foot
From the beginning of the Hulu Selangor campaign, Pakatan was on the defensive. They did not set the tone of the campaign, having to respond to attacks on Zaid’s link to drinking and gambling, the Selangor Pakatan government and more.
NONEMuch of campaign, including the visit by PAS spiritual leader Nik Aziz Nik Mat in the last days of the campaign was tied to addressing the attacks on morality waged on PKR leaders. Rarely does a defensive posture engender a positive outcome.
This was exacerbated by a slow start to the campaign. Of the three component parties in Pakatan, PKR has the weakest machinery in Hulu Selangor. It took a few days for the party to sort out a productive working relationship on the ground internally and with the component parties in the opposition coalition.
Part of this had to do with resolving the issues of multiple sovereignty – the role of the state government and the role of the parties. The slow start was further enhanced by long-standing personality differences in style and outlook within Pakatan, and the opposition had to work to address these differences.
The election showed that the parties can work together effectively as they gained ground towards the latter part of the campaign. The DAP and PAS delivered effectively and all the parties worked well together – eventually. In a tight contest, however, every day counts.
Pakatan was slow off the mark and was unable to fully bridge the gap as it gained speed towards the finish line.
Stale and splintered messaging
Listening to the ceramah and observing the campaign paraphernalia, Pakatan seems locked in a time warp. The posters followed the same model of 2008, with the slogan “Hope for Malaysia”. The messages are two years old and resonated with the party faithful, not the swing voters.
Many voters asked what was new. The fact is that as Pakatan is in power in Selangor, the call for change or even reform has less political traction. In government, it is not adequate to use an anti-incumbent campaign. The cry of “reformasi” only served to strengthen the party faithful, not to secure new voters that Pakatan needed to assure a win.
hulu selangor by-election voting day 250410 pkr posterThe campaign also lacked a central theme. While some campaigners focused on contemporary issues such as the rival candidate, P Kamalanathan, others addressed concerns with Apco and even Altantuya Shaariibuu – the issue that was prominent in the Permatang Pauh by-election in August 2008.
The messages were all over the place, and, as such, it was not clear exactly what Pakatan stood for. Multi-ethnic inclusion? Reform? Anti-Umno? New leadership? The voters lacked an anchor to identify with. For some voters, particular messages did connect, such as the poster of Teoh Beng Hock, which was particularly present in the Chinese areas. For others, it was confusing and uninspiring.
This was reinforced by the fact that the opposition was hampered in getting its message out. In Hulu Selangor, the alternative media had limited impact, particularly in Ulu Bernam. The challenge of communication exacerbated the problems of messaging as Pakatan was disadvantaged in its ability to connect with the voters.
The state newspaper, Selangorkini – with only a few thousand copies – was a drop in the bucket to reach this large constituency. Pakatan nationally has the disadvantage due to its lack of access to traditional media, and in this type of constituency – semi-rural and diverse – this disadvantage is particularly acute.
More broadly, this speaks to a real need to improve how Pakatan communicates with the public.
Burden of wearing two hats
Even more challenging is the dual roles that Pakatan has – in government and opposition. It is very difficult to wear two hats politically, especially when the roles are the exact opposite of each other.
This election provided the first real opportunity for Pakatan to showcase its record at the state level and they failed this test. One main reason involves the failure to develop new messages for the new context and move beyond March 2008. Pakatan has yet to develop a new identity that is tied to its role in state governments post-March 2008. No one person can be blamed for this since it is a matter for the entire leadership of Pakatan.
Even more difficult is showcasing the successes of the state government in a constituency where the state government has made minimal impact. Hulu Selangor was a neglected constituency. This has to do with the fact that all three representatives for the state are in BN. Pakatan did not effectively engage this area before the election, especially in the Felda areas.
This was driven home as the campaign progressed and state politicians learned firsthand that many did not even know that Pakatan was in government. Some voters lived in a ‘BN bubble’. This illustrated serious shortcomings on the part of the state government.
There were exceptions such as Selangor excos Elizabeth Wong’s work in the Orang Asli areas or Ean Yong Hian Wah’s work in the Chinese new villages, which contributed to gains for PKR in these areas, but overall, particularly in Malay areas, the state government had limited engagement and deliverables that it could showcase effectively.
hulu selangor by-election 100410 pakatan dinner ulu yam baru khalid 02While Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim was highly popular and respected, the actions of the government as a whole did not come across to the key voters.
This was compounded by the fact that many problems in this constituency were associated with land. Traditionally land is a state matter, but on the ground it was difficult to resolve these issues since the jurisdiction of issues was not so clear cut.
Many problems had occurred in the previous BN state government – housing scams, land speculations, unfair land allocations, limited land rights, shoddy development – to name but a few. They remain unresolved and require the cooperation of the private sector, federal government and state government.
Sadly, the failure of these actors to work together to resolve issues for Selangor has hurt development in the state, and in the semi-rural parts of the state in particular. In the campaign, blame was cast largely on the new Pakatan state government unfairly to address these problems.
Come next election, Pakatan will have to address the concerns over land effectively in order to secure votes, and this will require working more effectively to accommodate the different actors involved. This only points to the serious work ahead that Pakatan needs to address as a state government to win votes.
Party of defectors, not leaders
Convincing voters that it can govern effectively is vital for the opposition’s future. This starts with the leadership of the opposition. Nationally, Pakatan has to come to terms that the attacks on Anwar Ibrahim have had their impact.
The opposition leader does not have the same level of popularity of 2008. In part, this was the product of his loss of credibility over the Sept 16 affair that lingers in the minds of voters. In part, this has to do with questions associated with the Sodomy II trial, although the majority of the electorate see this as a political ploy.
NONEIt nevertheless has cast a shadow over the future direction of the leadership of Pakatan. Voters want to be assured that the coalition they vote for has clear leadership and direction.
The major issue in this campaign was the impact of the defections. People supposedly loyal to Anwar, such at Hulu Selangor’s Dr Halili Rahmat, people who were touted by Anwar to be important PKR leaders and personal friends openly joined the other side. This raises questions about Anwar’s leadership that have to be addressed in order to win the confidence of the electorate.
PKR is becoming perceived as the party of defectors, not leaders. The defections also affected campaigning as they spilled over into weakening the local machinery resulting in the party relying heavily on outsiders to run the campaign.
Are the rats leaving a sinking ship? Or is the party finding out who is willing to commit to real reforms in government and stick with the fight? While these may be true, the impact of the defections was especially damaging in Malay areas, and had broader resonance.
Pakatan needs own identity
More fundamentally, Pakatan needs to come up with a programme for the future in government. Malaysian voters are pragmatic and want direction on the part of their leaders. Nationally, Prime Minister Najib Razak has adopted economic reform as his own platform. He has usurped the position as the reformer, at least symbolically.
Pakatan has yet to showcase a new set of ideas to address the current challenges. It has yet to engage with how the Najib leadership in BN has evolved and is evolving. Personal attacks on Najib are not adequate to win votes. They need a clear programme and direction, based on being in government at the state level and as a potential government nationally. It is no longer enough to be different from BN. Pakatan needs its own identity that voters can connect to.
Pakatan may have lost in Hulu Selangor. The bigger challenge is to make sure that it has not lost its direction. The by-election showed that the opposition is learning – it gained ground towards the end – but faces challenges in communication, leadership and identity.
If it wants to win power nationally, it has to take bold steps to engage the electorate and current political conditions. To avoid getting lost and further losses, Pakatan has to avoid internal blame and recognised that voters want change to be more than symbolic.
DR BRIDGET WELSH is associate professor of political science at Singapore Management University.
PKR needs to look into their strategy and get the right leaders to lead. With the number of defections it will not augur well for them. It’s time they reorganize the leaders and Zaid should be given a bigger role on moving forward plans. PAS and DAP are able to move their election machinery effectively, PKR should learn and coordinate with them.
Are we expecting to read anlaysis after analysis after the Sibu by-e as to why PR lost like what we are doing after HS OR is it time for BN to make their post-mortem to find out why it lost?
I hate to admit it but I have a strong feeling that we are going to witness the former if PR repeats what it did in HS.
Happy labour day, enery one. Hopefully, the Sibu by-e becomes a turning point for the future of Sarawak.
DAP must restrategize to win support from non-Chinese voters if PR wants to take over the federal government in the 13th GE. One way to do it is to bring in Malay or Indian supporters to help in campaigning in constituencies where the Malay or Indian population predominates.
Henceforth, it is important that DAP takes drastic steps to boost its non-Chinese membership to get ready for the 13th GE.
A successful political party is one which is cherished and adored by all the races.
Dr. Bridget Welsh,
There are so many points I can not agree with you.
First, you mentioned Anwar’s “loyalists” deserting him. This is not due to his lack of leadership or diminishing leadership. If we understand the dynamic of power and politics, these things will continue to happen. Ask Lee Kuan Yew when he first started out how many of his men/women have deserted or turned against him. The reality is many will gravitate toward power and money. You may perceive today BN is very strong and cohesive. Let me tell you this: if BN loses the Putrajaya, over night, half of those in UMNO will join PKR or PAS or even DAP. As for MCA, MIC and other mosquito parties, they will all be dissolved and members joining one of the Pakatan parties. This is my assessment of the mentality and conviction of those presently in BN. I must say, given the circumstances Pakatan is in, they have done extremely well in holding together to face the onslaught. I must also say Anwar has shown tremendous tenacity and leadership qualities over the past decades. So also are Lim Kit Siang and Karpal. For any other person, he/she would have given up long ago. It is always easy to be a quarterback the morning after.
Then you mentioned about Pakatan’s lack of identity.
Now what exactly is lacking? Today, Pakatan should win capitalising on the misdeeds and transgressions of BN alone. Just look at BN’s performance – if you could name me one thing they have done right, please let me know and we shall debate further. Now, as to why the people have continued to vote of BN in Hulu Selangor, I have my reasons which I will post after this.
Dr. Welsh,
If you have not noticed, most of developed and “politically aware” states in Malaysia have already voted for Pakatan. What does that tell you? It tells you that when the people are informed and politically aware of what is going on, they will be angry with the abuses and transgressions of the incumbent government.
Now Hulu Selangor is one of the least developed part of Selangor. The largely rural population have been indoctrinated for years with all kinds of “philosophies”. I wouldn’t say they are naturally racists, but they have been made racists and it takes time and machinery to educate and win these people back. To largely attribute the failure to Pakatan’s to lack of logistics and ideas is unfair. If only Pakatan is given equal access to the mass media and the support of supposedly independent institutions (such as the EC and police), I believe the battle would have been more evenly fought. The mass media I am talking about is not just during the by election. You should watch the national TV broadcast each night through the years which the rural people depend on. By the way, just to draw a parallel, you should perhaps explain to me why the yellow shirts in Thailand has been able to stage the coup and overthrow the government with ease while the red shirts, despite their number and aggressiveness have so far failed to achieve much.
Finally, you alluded to Pakatan already running the state government of Selangor and therefore should not behave like an opposition. This is true only to some extent. The Malaysian constitution did not exactly demarcate the power and jurisdiction between the Federal and state governments evenly. Power, jurisdiction and money (revenue) are largely in federal’s hand. Knowing the way democracy is being practised here, you should not be surprised the Pakatan controlled states will continue to behave like in opposition. Yes the state government may be able to resolve some of the land issues (which the Pakatan Perak State government did what the BN government can not do in the last 50 years). The land issues in Hulu Selangor were left over from the BN state government and the federal government (FELDA is a Federal Agency although land is state matter).
PR must wake up fr their self-indulgent orgasmic 308 victory
PR won unexpectedly in a number of states not bcos they were strong but bcos BN was weak, led by a weak PM so often attacked by MMK n undermined by many UmnoBputras
PR was lucky at dat time bcos of certain events dat happened prior 2 308
D ecology then was different n would not b repeated in d next GE
RPK n other like-minded Malays campaigned n spoke openly against UmnoB
Even MMK asked voters 2 vote against AAB-led UmnoB n BN
Like it or not, Hindraf was there n contributed 2 d victory of PR
PR then was d opposition, but now ruler of a few states
Come GE 13, we will have a new ecology n mindset
PR, wake up, show us WHAT U HV ACHIEVED n HOW U HV SERVED D RAKYAT
Last GE, PR candidates could mock BN MPs/state-assemblymen as longkang n jamban MPs/state-assemblymen
Come GE 13, what r PR MPs/state-assemblymen? Sleepy, clueless, toads?
It is very possible Jib would win again in Bandar Sibu by splashing RM200,000,000 there as was done in Hulu Selangor. So PR should start to buck up to ensure that it is a one-to-one contest, i.e. no fruscos for PKR to spoil the fight by standing as Independents or else Jib will get to have his much-cherished 2/3 majority in Parliament
So if we know the people are willing to be bribed, it only shows the people are not ready to change. We all know by now that BN’s performance has nothing to shout about and the way they conducted themselves during GE and by elections are less than ethical. But why do we continue to vote for them? It only shows many are ignorant, greedy (or poor), or stupid. You choose one.
Pakatan lost was due to cheater,corruptor,taker and swindler by Umno/Bn and certain number of voters respectively in the recent Hulu Selangor by election aka buy election. Pakatan though lesson learned.However it’s still pretty tough for PR to win as long as Umno/BN continue to use dubious tactics and certain section of the voters remain taker and swindler. Unless PR can sweep and clean away such dirt in every constituency they contest ,then the whole nation can see certain light in the tunnel.
…Are the rats leaving a sinking ship? Or is the party finding out who is willing to commit to real reforms in government and stick with the fight?…
I think it is a natural process of detoxification of the body when it is becoming healthier.
Indeed there are lessons to be learned by the narrow loss and I am sure the PR leadership will plan their next strategy.
For a party that has gone through loss of a state government through no fault of their own, their state assemblymen being harassed, persecution of Anwar Ibrahim, etc. I would say in all fairness to their leadership that they have held their ground quite well.
If PR continue to persevere the way they did, marching into Putra Jaya is certain to be realized. I also believe that Bn has lost its mandate to rule by their excesses and many abuses of the rakyat’s trust.
///This raises questions about Anwar’s leadership that have to be addressed in order to win the confidence of the electorate/// – Bridget Welsh.
These questions pertain to Anwar’s failure as a leader to keep his generals within PKR cohesive: there are camps Khalid, Azmin, Tian Chua, and Zaid jostling for influence in coming December’s party polls if reports by The MalaysianInsider’s reporter Syed Jaymal Zahiid were to be believed – see “ Trouble brewing in PKR ahead of party polls” of May 1st and “Hulu Selangor shows PKR still Pakatan’s weak link” of April 30th.
What is a disconcerting surprise to me is what Joe Fernandez wrote in Malaysiakini Apr 30 under caption “Zaid barking up the wrong tree”.
I had thought that HINDRAF did not want to help in Hulu Selangor but if Joe were to be believed PKR did not care to coordinate its help. Excerpts from what Joe wrote: “When the dust settles on his election petition, perhaps Zaid will be able to get out of his state of denial and accept that he could have indeed won in Hulu Selangor – election offences and election fraud notwithstanding – if his campaign had been more inclusive. Hindraf and the Human Rights Party (HRP) Malaysia, in particular, were left out and that’s why he lost in the end. Hindraf alone had 300 hardcore activists ready to swing into action in Hulu Selangor on behalf of Zaid to help bring in the winning margin but they – even as stakeholders – were never deployed. Zaid should STOP listening to PKR theoreticians who SABOTAGED him in Hulu Selangor by preaching that ‘even 100 percent of the Indian support will not win you the seat, but 60 percent of Malay support will do the trick’.
60% is an impossibility as long as Umno, now bolstered by Perkasa, exists. In the end, Zaid didn’t even get the minimum 40 percent Malay support envisaged in a worst-case scenario. He had to make do with 35 percent Malay support. It was not good enough. A miss is as good as a mile. A win is a win, a loss is a loss.”
(Emphasis mine).
On the assumptions that the reports reflect reasonably accurately the state of affairs in PKR, it is natural for Bridget Welsh to raise questions of Anwar’s leadership (not of PR as coalition but PKR as its glue now turned weakest link). Bridget has been following Malaysian Politics and most would agree she is a disinterested observer.
This is something PR as a whole has to address before the next GE.
Another armchair commentator after the fact. A real bunkum. It is time Indians make up their mind who they want to support. They can play the game as what they are doing now, and for the next 50 years their socio-economic conditions would remain the same if not getting worse. Whether interested or disinterested, comments must make sense. What about the dissension and disunity within BN component parties. Are they any better? They are united because it is the money and power that glue them together. They will fall like a house of card the moment they lose power. It is so easy for you fellows to criticise and point out the shortcomings of PKR and PR leaders. The fact is none of you have not even helm a single day of the party or the coalition.
Armchair commentator after the fact and bunkums? Whether interested or disinterested, comments must make sense.
Are the comments not making sense and misrepresenting any fact?
If money and power glue BN parties in dissension together, the more the reason PKR and PR leaders should take heed of criticisms from public commentators on where they go wrong in order to find ways to forge a united front against a strong opponent.
On the question of fairness, no one is talking of dissension/power struggle within BN – though that too is going on – because that is known or perhaps commentators are not really that concerned with BN’s weakness to point it out, being more subtly tilted with greater concern towards PR (as an alternative) held to a higher expectation. Sometimes people criticise because they care than the opposite case of indifference.
The fact is none of commentators have helmed a single day of the party or the coalition is irrelevant – otherwise only politicians are qualified to comment about politics!
I am not saying you fellows cannot criticise. The fact is you fellows got it all wrong. Contrary to what you said, the leadership of PR and PKR is strong. It is the circumstances and the odds they face that are almost insurmountable. Whether you care or you actually have a secret agenda, the comments must make sense.
To get the right solution, you must identify the right problem. The problem PR and PKR face is not poor leadership. It is constant harassment and sabotage. Enhancing the leadership is not going to help much. It is confronting and fighting the harassment and unfair practices that will eventually win the day, got it sage?
I will disregard your remarks “whether you care or you actually have a secret agenda” as undeserving of a response.
On the other parts, nobody is disputing constant harassment and sabotage. There is more reason for PKR’s leadership to rise up to the occasion.
If you think that there’s nothing wrong with the PR’s leadership (which even causes PAS to complain about the way PKR led and conducted the Hulu Selangor electoral campaign) – that that area is not the right problem to be identified for a solution – well thats your only your opinion which others including Bridget Welshare is entitled not to share without at the same time being labelled bunkum or arm chair critics not having helmed “a single day of the party or the coalition”. Neither have you and yet you are commenting like no one’s business and adversely against others whose opinions you don’t share. They don’t call you bunkum or arm chair critic and other names – so why do you unless you hold your opinion as infallible and those you don’t agree must necessarily be rubbish or motivated by some agenda – is that it?
Correction – “…If you think that there’s nothing wrong with the PKR’s leadership…” (Not PR’s)
Is that it? Yes it is.
I don’t label bunkum for nothing. Every time I mentioned something, you would say as if we do not know already (but the fact is you don’t know, so don’t talk big). It is simple logic; if harassment and sabotage are the issues, then why don’t you identified and discussed them. Why must you wait for me to mention them? Also, if harassment and sabotage are the main problems, why are you preoccupied with leadership problems? You just want to support Dr. Welsh to get even – say so.
So your contention is PR and PKR have leadership problems. Can you now tell me precisely what those problems are and how come BN’s weak and corrupted leadership is able to win election?
///Can you now tell me precisely what those problems are?/// Read the reports I mentioned. You don’t have to agree though. Like what Tunku Abdul Aziz said in thread “Democratic values under Threat” “there are none so blind as those who will not see.”
Sure there’s harrassment and sabotage from BN – thats’ only expected – but the drift of the various public commentators is that in spite of these factors, a better organisation of Hulu Selangor campaign by PKR than that which happened would have yet, in spite of harrassment and sabotage and use of money, secured a victory for PR (given the margin of victory by BN being thin). Its PAS people who complain about the lateness of PKR coming into campaigning (which other observers attribute to factional rivalries between 3 parties within PKR).
To complain about harassment and sabotage or money used by BN to create unlevel playing field is unproductive because these means on BN’s part are well known. They did not happen only in Hulu Selangor, though they might be intensified given the stakes in terms of morale on both sides. Given these limitations there’s a greater the need for effective leadership to counter them.
It is least helpful to bury the head like a proverbial ostrict in the sand and blame it all to the other side’s foul play without looking inwards at own (PKR’s) shortcomings in terms of factional infighting and defections that weaken one’s own position against a strong opponent.
Why am I preoccupied with leadership problems (of PKR)? Its every one’s concern, and I believe that includes the various writers mentioned who highlighted these leadership issues.
As I said PKR is the glue binding DAP and PAS together. There are no complaints by any one of how DAP leadership or PAS’s leadership is weak whether in Hulu selangor or elsewhere. This is the not the case of PKR where observers point out weaknesses (to be addressed).
If the glue itself is unglued by its own internal infighting how can it serve as a strong glue to bind DAP and PAS together within the United front of PR to oppose BN which is a formidable opponent having national coffers as its resource and having qualms to play fair?
It is common sense that when engaged in a battle that one lost, one has to look at one’s weaknesses to plug them rather than just childishly say there’s no such problem and excusing oneself based only on the other side’s playing foul by harrassment and sabotage. Telling the other side that they indulge in harrassment and sabotage to win – is it helpful? They don’t care a hoot: if thats the way to win, then they will do more of this formula than less. One has to look at one’s own amoury to make sure there are no chinks than yjust complaining about the other combatant using unauthorised weapon, get it ?
Typo omission in 2nd last para – “having NO qualms to play fair?”
it is obvious you never read. I said earlier it is confronting and fighting the harassment and unfair practices that will eventually win the day. For you it is criticising the leadership.
So if the other side does not play fair, are we supposed to accept it and continue to allow them to do it?
It is your opinion that PKR is the glue, but to me PR is a coalition of equal. Any one of them can be the glue. PKR is not the UMNO of BN, please free your boxed in brain.
Telling the other side that they indulge in harrassment and sabotage to win – is it helpful? They don’t care a hoot: if thats the way to win, then they will do more of this formula than less. //Jeffrey
That is where you are dead wrong. All of us have inbuilt sense of justice and fair play even though we ourselves may be unjust and unfair. One of the reasons why increasingly more and more are angry with BN is their penchant for abuse. We shall see.
///So if the other side does not play fair, are we supposed to accept it and continue to allow them to do it?/// Did I advocate or say that?
I ask you why are you disparaging and dismissive of the opinions of writers like Bridget Welsh, The MalaysianInsider’s reporter Syed Jaymal Zahiid and Malaysiakini’s Joe Fernandez for highlighting factionalism and weakness of leadership in PKR – calling critics of PKR’s leadership as “bunkum or arm chair critics not having helmed a single day of the party or the coalition”???
You don’t agree – fine but do not aggrandize yourself as if you are holder of the truth. If you think you are better you can always write for and in TheMalaysiaInsider or Malaysiakini.
///It is your opinion that PKR is the glue, but to me PR is a coalition of equal. Any one of them can be the glue.PKR is not the UMNO of BN”.
Nobody says PKR is UMNO of PR. It is glue in the sense that it is the moiderator in bringing the diametrically opposed ideologies of DAP and PAS together in a working united front against BN, which playing that role of a glue does not necessary imply that it has to be bog boss like UMNo to any others like PAS or DAP.
How could you engage rational debate when you can’t see even this – saying that if someone is playing a role of glue it must imply he is boss ??? It does not imply that. Only you imply that….
Or that DAP can be glue to bring PKR and PAS together or PAS can be glue to bring PKR and DAP together?
Then you don’t know what is a glue. To be a glue of two others, then the two others must be of diametrically opposed ideologies and not compatible ideologies as PKR and DAP are, more or less!
Your statement “PR is a coalition of equal. Any one of them can be the glue” oversimplifies what qualifies a glue as if PAS can glue PKR and DAP of compatible ideologies together or they need PAS for that role. Further more to act as a glue may or may not put the glue in stronger position. Suffice to say it does not necessarily imply PKR is the boss of PR like UMNO is to BN even if the DAP gives the Opposition post to PKR’s head in spite of DAP having more MPs than PKR in parliament.
When I said “telling the other side that they indulge in harrassment and sabotage to win – is it helpful? They don’t care a hoot: if thats the way to win, then they will do more of this formula than less” I am dead wrong?
Your statement “all of us have inbuilt sense of justice and fair play even though we ourselves may be unjust and unfair. One of the reasons why increasingly more and more are angry with BN is their penchant for abuse” in context is a reference to common people / voters getting more angry over time.
That may be so but I am not talking about others. My statement is about BN – the opponent who uses probibited weaponry which is why public commentators are highlighting PKR’s leadership and factionalism problems in the interest of PKR being aware of these to sew up and mend the chinks in its own amour when fighting an opponent armed with vicious weapon. You are disparaging people who make constructive criticicms of PKR’s weakness so that these weaknesses may be addressed by PKR beneficial to PR. They don’t do the same of BN’s weaknesses because why highlight unless you want them to improve? Does your ego have no bounds that you have to criticise even something constructive raised by critics? I don’t see you citing facts to rebut their criticisms or even PAS’s criticisms of PKR in the Hulu Selangor campaign. What are your comments for? To self aggrandise???
///I said earlier it is confronting and fighting the harassment and unfair practices that will eventually win the day. For you it is criticising the leadership.///
It is trite vthat one can confront and fight the harassment and unfair practices of the opponent only if one’s own party is not torn by factionalism and defections.
Whilst rivalries and jostling for influence is universal human behaviours it is leadership’s responsibility to contain, manage and ensure that internal factionalism and defections do not get to the stage, level and extent to set back the common cause (as happened in Hulu Selangor if one reads behind the lines of what various observers/commentators on the ground said). It is leadership failure if these get out of hand. One does not observe parallel extent of this kind of problem in either DAP’s or PAS’s leadership.
To self aggrandise??? My answer: yes yes yes.
Those writers in Malaysiakini or Insider are not god – lots of opinions with no facts.
Just go back to read my post #4. I am lazy to argue with you further. It is obvious you have an agenda, whatever it may be.
RE your #26, you are talking nonsense again. You are saying all the factionalism and defections are due to weak leadership. It is confirmed you are stupid.
///Those writers in Malaysiakini or Insider are not god/// – its obvious they cannot be when you think you are! Which is why you ascribe an agenda to a messenger whenever the message cannot be refuted rationally. Only God can do that.
Strong leadership (incontrast to weak) minimises and contains factionalism and defections so that they don’t break out to the extent to shoot one’s own foot.
It is ok you think that confirms I am stupid. What I think of you in denying this is, I think, better not mentioned. Suffice to say any more flattering view from you other than stupid is cause for concern.
For I will never, if I could help it, call you stupid. I may inadvertantly offend nincompoops anywhere reading it might feel offended by such comparisons.
Oh yes, that ADUN from Kedah defected because he was not happy with PKR leadership leadership, never mind he was dropped from Kedah EXCO earlier.
Yes Dr Halili joined UMNO, never mind he was expecting to be the HULU Selangor candidate. Sometimes we think too greatly of ourselves.
Yes, that two ADUN from Perak defected because they have lost faith in Anwar, never mind they are caught for solicit bribe and sexual favour and now freed.
Yes that holier than thou MP from Kulim defected because there are too many pharaohs in PKR and PR, never mind he has his idiosyncrasy and agenda.
Yes that ADUN from Penang defected because he labelled Lim Guan Eng a communist never mind he has his failed ambition.
Let me tell you this, soon that wangsu maju MP may also defect, and I shall find you the reason once he has done that.
Stupid people deserve stupid government – and that is why Malaysia has stupid government for the past 50 years.
Strong leadership (incontrast to weak) minimises and contains factionalism and defections so that they don’t break out to the extent to shoot one’s own foot. // Jeffrey
but factionalism and defections are not due to weak leadership alone, got it stupid?
Do you accept that BN has strong leadership, just answer me Yes or NO.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA…Nice reading.
Bridget Welsh can stuff her opinions into her backside.
It is leadership failure if these get out of hand. One does not observe parallel extent of this kind of problem in either DAP’s or PAS’s leadership.//jeffrey
An analysis of a simpleton. PKR’s candidate stood for Hulu Selangor and lost, and so you said PKR leadership is weak when compared with PAS’ or DAP’s. I wonder what you fellows will say if PKR won the by election, probably Zaid and PKR has strong leadership.
I would like to look at PR as collective leadership. Each time if PR fails to win, it is the collective responsibility of all the parties within PR. It is not correct to blame it solely on PKR leadership. If PAS and DAP know all the weaknesses of PKR, why just complain. Correct it.
I sincerely hope DAP will win the Sibu by election. But if in case it loses, would you guys say it is DAP’s weak leadership again?
Personal ambitions and lure from the other side all play a part in defections. So are choice of people as confidante at the beginning, formulating and clearly explaining the party’s policies and the heirarchy making sure at the outset they conform to them. In the case of Zulkifly Nordin there were prior infractions, for example, not toeing PR’s line, taking Bar Council to task over the article 11 forum (yet disciplining was deferred and he was even engaged as his counsel in sensitive qazaf case when as counsel he was privy to privileged information on Saiful), the infractions were tolerated and not nipped at the bud. Then this thing between Azmin & Zaid leading latter to go on 6 months leave until recently when latter was reinstated and put as Hulu Selangor’s candidate to the former’s chagrin. Who he favours shifts which in turns make people to jostle more. His choice (as leader) of close confidentes/ lieutenants – whether Zul Nordin, Dr Halili or even his aide Saiful – was in hindsight wrong for they all betray him.
Anyway the writers comments were more directed as the intra party rivalries within PKR that subsist to the extent they PKR was slow to start and had been ineffectual in the Hulu Selangor campaign and not coordinating well with PAS’s campaigners.
///If PAS and DAP know all the weaknesses of PKR, why just complain. Correct it/// – ah thats the opinion of a simpleton.
///PKR’s candidate stood for Hulu Selangor and lost, and so you said PKR leadership is weak when compared with PAS’ or DAP’s///.
This is just a simplified inference without basis. Criticisms of PKR’s problems with reference to leadership have been made even before the Hulu Selangor by elections – I think by RPK and Din Merican.
Who he favours shifts which in turns make people to jostle more. His choice (as leader) of close confidentes/ lieutenants – whether Zul Nordin, Dr Halili or even his aide Saiful – was in hindsight wrong for they all betray him.//Jeffrey
Yes with hindsight, we all have perfect vision and that is why I have continued to label you fellows the best quarterback the morning after. WE should not be so sweeping and judgemental of PKR leadership. They are just too many factors that caused the problems within PKR right now in which leadership, if true, is just one.
///Another reason for the PKR’s problems is Mr Anwar’s style of leadership, and his refusal to delegate or share responsibilities. Critics say the PKR is only about Mr Anwar, who is said to be obsessed with overthrowing the BN government. Mr Anwar is also said to surround himself with weak officials and not to tolerate possible competitors for his role, such as a former law minister, Zaid Ibrahim, who joined the ranks of the PKR in 2009 after his resignation from the BN government.
Critics also claim that Mr Anwar is a bad judge of character and that he was personally responsible for the selection of PKR candidates fielded at the last general election in 2008, many of whom were former members of the United Malays National Organisation, the dominant party in the BN coalition. Moreover, these candidates were not part of the reformasi movement, which was initiated after Mr Anwar was removed from his role as deputy prime minister in 1998. Some of the candidates selected by Mr Anwar, who went on to win parliamentary and state assembly seats, have since resigned from the PKR. Mr Anwar has refused to say who would take over as leader, should he go to prison./// – Quoted from The Economist (under The Economist Intelligence Unit) under caption “Malaysia politics: Opposition setback” dated April 5th 2010. Source: ViewsWire
see the simpleton in action. it is so familiar, it sound like how mamathir and BN leaders describe Anwar.
Oh i see, it has come from the Economist, such a reputable magazine and therefore it must contain nothing but the truth.
See you have revealed your secret agenda, simpleton!
///Oh I see, it has come from the Economist, such a reputable magazine and therefore it must contain nothing but the truth./// – Lim Kam Put
I cited Economist because thats what it said. I likewise cited The MalaysiaInsider’s Syed Jaymal Zahiid and Malaysiakini’s Joe Fernandez because thats what they said about PKR’s leadership. Kit posted here Bridget Welsh’s comments which questioned about Anwar’s leadership (I don’t see you saying Kit or Bridget has secret agenda, or for that matter Din Merican or RPK.
In citing these people of Economist I don’t mean to appeal to authority to say what they say its true.
I say that they have something to say for PKR to look into.
I take exception to your raising a tirade in the first instance against these writers calling them and “you all” commentators after the fact and bunkums, arm chair critic not having helmed “a single day of the party or the coalition” – just to grandstand your difference of opinion as if you are smartest of all, without offering any substance in derisively dismissive of what these writers raised or said.
And now you said I have a “secret agenda”.
Yes it is to speak out against your nit-picking, fault-finding and criticism of a trivial nature whether of commentators here or elsewhere to grandstand and feed your oversized ego whenever there is opportunity to dop so at othyer’s expense.
When ever you think you have any truth (never mind it is a mere grain of it) you make it sound like a boulder to roll your criticisms over all and sundry fopr your agenda to grandstand and feed a sick ego, trying to fool everyone into believing your criticisms have validity, when often, they are based on distortion, misrepresentation and illogic….
I engage even if I know it is against my better judgment to argue with someone whose main motivation here is not to communicate and share with others here thoughts, congruent or otherwise, but to satisfy the inner drives of anarcissistic personality disorder seeking constant attention by hurling insults or criticisms, often without basis at others.
Relax, make love not war, peace!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axhvA8kHK9w&NR=1
Hi simpleton, please tell me something new. My comments are not just for you. It is for other readers so that they too will have an alternative view to all craps being written – views that are half baked and probably plagiarised to further destabilise PKR and PR. You go ahead do your job and I shall do mine. If one western journal or journalist gave out some sh!t, many “great writers” here will follow. That is our standard.
I wonder what you fellows will say if PKR has won the by election in hulu selangor. Let me guess – Najib’s 1 Malaysia does not work, Perkasa not effective, irreversible endemic corruption and abuse of power, it is the beginning of the end of BN, Pakatan regaining strength, all the defections do not work, Pakatan on right track, Pakatan have chosen the right candidate, the coalition was able to work together, Nik Aziz did the trick, and Kit Siang managed to increase the percentage of Chinese voters. See I can do all these effortlessly. Please don’t copy my ideas if DAP win the Sibu by election. Can you fellows try to come up with something new?
“…….all craps being written – views that are half baked and probably plagiarised to further destabilise PKR and PR….If one western journal or journalist gave out some sh!t, many “great writers” here will follow.”
Just because Bridget Welsh or The Economist Intelligence Unit raises issues about PKR leadership they are “half baked and probably plagiarised to further destabilise PKR and PR..??
And the MalaysianInsider’s reporter Syed Jaymal Zahiid and Malaysiakini’s Joe Fernandez highlighting factionalism and weakness of leadership in PKR are our local “great writers” following “one western journal or journalist”? That would include Din Merican or RPK expressing such views before even the Hulu Selangor elections?
I am amazed at your hypocrisy of pretending to offer alternative views when in actuality its a mere cover for your pyromaniac tendencies to start flames to quench the incessant thirst for attention. If I respond to that it is only to give you the therapy! Your comment about “please don’t copy my ideas if DAP win the Sibu by election” is such an example of utter irrelevance. Whether DAP wins or loses is relevant to DAP’s party leadership and dsicipline that has nothing to do with the states of affairs in PKR in contention here raised by various writers that you disparage for no apparent rational reason! Do not deflect and distract the issue and come out with hypothethicals what would everyone say if Zaid has won in Hulu Selangor or if DAP wins in Sibu etc . You’re talking in knotted twists just like Mamakthir.
To add a bit: I have specifically asked you certain points but you have chosen not to answer. So I shall ask again:
1. Does BN have better leadership than PKR or PR? BN won the by election, so are you assuming that they have better leadership?
2. Does BN have less dissension and trouble? BN seems very stable, hardly any defection or resignation at all. Are you saying it is leadership that hold them together?
3. The red shirts and the yellows shirts in Thailand, which faction has better leadership? The Yellow shirts were able to overthrow the government with ease, so what is your take?
4. Between BN and PKR or PR, who has more power and financial supports to dish out goodies? Are power and financial supports the function of leadership?
5. Between BN and PKR or PR who has more restrictions to reach out to the people? Are such restrictions due to lack of leadership ability or qualities?
Just answer these questions truthfully and honestly.
///Hi simpleton, please tell me something new/// – Lim Kam Put
Simpleton or not is relative. It is of course ‘simpleton’ when compared to the compexity of someone who distorts, misrepresents, deflects issues under the camouflage of presenting a rational alternative view, when all there is a putrescent mass of subterranean motives arising from an incessant and yet uncontrollable urge to get attention to feed a pathological ego.
#46 on whether BN have better leadership than PKR or PR or whether BN have less dissension and trouble opr whether Thai red shirts and the yellows shirts has better leadership are attempts to distract and veer me to other areas of debate that has no relevance to the immediate issue in contention here. A classic exaple of deflection I mentioned. I don’t have the luxury of time or see any need to entertain your irrelevancies. Neither do others.
A normal trick : if one can’t rationally engage on the point of contention, veer away to something tangential, irrelevant and even inconsequential so as to open another front, field and area of arguments which allow new opportunities for vindication of whats being lost out, in terms of arguments, in the first original area.
Try these cheap and common tricks with kintergarden attendees. Not here.
That is why is you are a simpleton. You should by now know sometimes I say things deliberately to irritate and also just to joke about. But I am serious with the points I have made or the position I have taken, no mistakes about that.
What do you mean not relevant? We should debate issues more specifically, and not hide in generality. You are the one who vehemently said PKR has lousy leadership and hence it has contributed to its lack of success, dissension or disarray or whatever. I just want you to substantiate what you have said and I believe I have given you enough pointers to help you. Just answer those questions – yes or no – would suffice, sage.
///You should by now know sometimes I say things deliberately to irritate and also just to joke about///
Thank you for the admission. Don’t trivialise the forum and discourse here for your sick entertainment.
i am not trivialising, no mistake about that. i am serious and you can check my records, i probably am here as long if not longer than you. i have sensed the “drift” in you, sorry, i have to say it again.
The issues of PKR leadership problems have been debated specifically. No one hides in generality. Bringing other situations in to augment debates on specific points on PKR leadership in context of Hulu Selangor is a deflection from original issues, camouflaging however as an extension of arguments on original specific issue. I have no intention of being led to another wide area of debate over the open ended meaning and coverage of what constitutes political leadership. If you want to know more, the book by Richard Milhous Nixon’s “In the Arena” (after he resigned) discusses this issue citing many world leaders from De gualle, Lee Kuan Yew to Churchill, Nehru and Eisenhower.
See u can not see your follies. Impressing me Nixon, Churchill and LKY is a distraction. I have asked you the roles of leadership in areas specially mentioned in my questions which are directly relevant to the “poor leadership” you fellows talked about within the context of Hulu Selangor by election. I know myself; I am usually very clear in my thinking and writing. Check my records again.
///I am serious and you can check my records///
Your record in archives are dismal. To quote them will not less than 50 postings of yours and what others say about you!
It suffices to quote here what one poster cto said: “I must admit that in the net sense, you are a pyromaniac and you possess the uncanning ability to start flames almost every time you write” see #22 by cto on Sunday, 28 February 2010 – thread “Speak Out for Anwar Ibrahim’s Sake” posted on Friday, 26 February 2010, 10:29 am and is filed under Anwar Ibrahim, Foreign.
For one of these comments, one has multiples of others – too many to cite here.
Why even the Moderator has problems with you as when you said: “Moderator, i see that you are acting like Malaysian Police, very fast in showing your biasness against me. Never mind, you don’t have to moderate me, i quit despite the fact that i love this blog and have been contributing probably when you were still sucking milk. It is not just the qualities of bloggers have gone down, even the moderator is also a phua tang sai (half baked in case you don’t understand). -#44 by limkamput on May 8th, 2009 21:50
Even the mild manner seldom abusive Professor Lee Wang Yen said that your nick Limkamput is appropriate in blend of cantonese/English – (‘Lyun kam’ [Cantonese] ‘put’ [English]) – meaning simply and recklessly shoot from the mouth.
Your record? Don’t make me laugh!
is
It is a record of rambling, incoherent response, constant nit-picking, fault-finding and criticism of a trivial nature just to troll and provoke attention. Anyone who has been long enough in this blog or check the archives know that what i say bears out.
Do you seriously think i can not anticipate how you would respond when I asked you to look at my records. Your response meets my expectation. But my objective is for others to take a look of all I have written over the years. They probably will have different opinions from yours.
So far, each time when we debate, I usually will have one or two supporting me. I find none for you. Again, i am stating the fact, but of course you will label those supporting me as equally incoherent or whatever. It is just too bad that my feather is too bright for some of you.
///I usually will have one or two supporting me. I find none for you…/// – Lim Kam Put.
None would because they realise the sheer futility and foolishness of trying to engage with an ostrich trying to preen its feathers as bright whilst burying its deep head in the sand trying to gobble up little stones to ease its permanent affliction of intellectual indigestion.
head deep
Calling a long retinue of self praise and criticisms of others – of which the archives here the last I checked are replete with many examples – as a “record” in this blog is like describing a plateful of putrid, stinking stale grabage of a week’s old as the best of fine cuisine dining served on the table for others to savour.
What a perversion of description calculated at either flaming responses here or worse still a pathetic attempt at self prescription and therapy of deep seated psychological insecurities.
Self praise in combination with unsubstantiated self rightous criticisms of others is of course no validation of merits or self- worth.
Indeed quite the opposite: its a recommendation that time is right for a visit to the psychiatric clinic.
admin
Shouldn’t the heading be LOSS and not LOST?