Singapore Presidential Election : Evaluation

Singaporeans woke up this morning to a new President, Tony Tan, who was also the ex-deputy PM of Singapore.

The battle of the 4 Tans ended with 2 ex-long serving-PAP men fighting neck-to-neck for the highest post of the land.  Eventually, the ex-deputy PM (prime minister) won over the ex-MP (member of parliament). Basically what does this tell us about Singaporean in general?

If you are an optimist, you will feel pleased that Singaporeans were wise enough to have voted with their head and picked the most qualified person to lead Singapore in the midst of a hostile global environment.  If you are a pessimist, then you will probably feel disappointed and conclude that Singaporeans are still very "kia su" (afraid of losing), "kia si" (afraid of dying) & "kia jing hu" (afraid of government).

So, what are the factors that were in Tony's favor?  Obviously, being the ruling party's preferred choice, he already had the die-hard PAP supporters in his pocket.    The ruling party was smart not to officially endorse Tony so as not to portray him as a PAP man, but the messages conveyed to Singapore prior to the election was clear ie. elect the best man who can help Singapore through the current global uncertainties.  We cannot afford a president that may cause a paralysis in working of our government machinery.  This was a very powerful message especially in the current global environment.   Creating this "siege mentality" ie. that Singapore is going to fall part if we do not do this or that..etc. is a typical PAP strategy that has worked well since it came into power in the 1960s.  This is likely to have won him many votes, especially among the elites & upper income earners.

However, the slim margin of victory should be of grave concern to the ruling party & the elected president.  The 35% votes is a far cry from the total votes of 60% garnered by PAP in the last election.  It suggests that Singaporeans are prepared to vote for a creditable alternative that is seen to be independent from the PAP.  The question remains whether the elected president with only 35% votes really has the mandate & endorsement to run the highest office of Singapore.

Cheng Bock was the natural choice for the moderate who does not like the ruling party's supreme control over the government  (Tony is seen as part of the ruling party).  His track records of speaking out & even voting against PAP in parliament when he was a PAP MP convinced many of his ability to engage the government.  If Kin Lian or Jee Say did not stand for the election, he would have probably won.


Jee Say unfortunately started on the wrong footing by being very out spoken and confrontational.  He was quick to change tack at the tail end of the campaign to assure Singaporeans that he will work closely with the government.  But it was a case of "too little too late".  If the campaign period is longer, he would have been able to do more.  However, time is certainly on his side.  He has established a very good foundation from this campaign.  If he continues to work the ground and present the right persona that Singaporeans expect of a president, he is certainly the man to watch in 6 years time.

Kin Lian got his strategy all wrong.  He wanted to be the voice for the people, but he was creating a lot of voices that were obviously not credible.  While Cheng Bock followed by Jee Say were quick to change strategy when it became obvious that confronting the government and promising changes were not going down well with Singaporeans, he was still vocal and promising to increase NS pay (that is not a president's job!).  His attempt to talk down on his opponents during the election broadcast would probably not go down well with the voters.

The Singapore Presidential Election has drawn to a close after an eventful 9 days of campaigning. So, did the best Tan win?  We will know in 6 years time.  The real evaluation has only just begun........