Roy Ngerng and the “swing voters”

In Uncategorized on 12/09/2014 at 5:02 am

Without agreeing that I’m a despicable worm (I readily admit I’m smug), this TRE’s poster goes on to explain why Roy is a dangerous distraction: swing voters will be turned off by his antics.

Market operator:
August 2, 2014 at 8:05 pm (Quote)
@trust et al @ rotten papayas
I agree with you guys – CI is a smug, despicable worm. But don’t let your emotions abt Roy get the better of you. We need to differentiate Roy the catalyst or beacon for rousing public sentiments over the CPF issue from Roy the loose cannon. He has done very well in the former, all kudos and deservedly so. But it is the latter that is undoing the former. Pat him on the shoulder for the “revelations” from the govt past few weeks but think carefully what has the govt really revealed. They r just throwing crumbs to assuage public emotions but has said nothing really important. They have been throwing smoke – we can see that but isn’t this what you would do if someone ask you a question lacking in substance. You just brush it off with a brief, nonsensical answer right?

Call me a PAP IB if you wish – that’s your right but I am not. However ask a lousy question, get a lousy answer. Bring foolish assertions like Roy’s 55k median CPF balance as evidence most members are so far from meeting the ms, you get no answer or worst show yourself to be lacking substance. Now think about those swing voters, I won’t be so arrogant to think them ignorant but they r not swayed by this kind of rhetoric. The last thing u want is to close your minds to alternative opinions even if they don’t fit into your existing beliefs.

Much gd it did him calling me a worm. Guy got cursed and reviled too.

Btw, TRE ranters who accuse me of character assassination of Roy point out that a lot more people read him that me. I happily concede that he has a lot more readers but they never stood up to be counted when he asked or $, unlike the members of CHC who happily funds the defence of those the state accuses of  stealing from them. On the issue of character assassination, all I did was to point things that Roy said that they didn’t want to hear or others said about him

Happily for the PAP and sadly for those of us who want an end to a de facto one-party state, ,Jeremiah 5:21 says it all, ‘Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding; which have eyes, and see not; which have ears, and hear not’

With people like Roy’s ultra supporters as opponents, the PAP’s hegemony is safe.  They only rant anonymously, not even bothering to turn up at his gigs, or even supporting TRE with funds (It has raised $17,000 out of the $50,000 it claims to need for 12 months; and $10,000 came from one donor). Let’s see how many turn up at his wake, memorial service candlelight vigil. on 17th September

“It is not through through fantasy, dreaming, imagining or studying that you learn but through observing, working and struggling” Luis de Camoens. Something that WP Low and his team are doing. And the SDP does fitfully.


  1. Dude, have got to admit you are one smug fellow at times. But at least you got a sense of realpolitik, and reality.

    Minimum sum increasing to 161K, and 20% might be allowed to be withdrawn at age 65 in future. Flexibility to the lease buyback scheme.

    With this in mind, how “effective” has Roy been? Sure, gahmen is making a lot more explanation on CPF nowadays, but of course they have to lah. When you know there is one guy out there spreading what you deem to be half truths, you will come out and explain things more right? But because of the polarising figure he is, they know they don’t have to follow everything he says. Not that Roy has plenty of solutions for the CPF scheme anyway. All he has is plenty of “unearthing of heart truths”, like “oh, I’ve proven that GIC invests in CPF!” To which I wonder how many ordinary Singaporeans will really find that that is the crux of matter.

    But let me give credit to Roy. He made me think about CPF. Trouble is, after thinking through, I agree with only half of what he wrote on this topic. And I agree with none of his antics at all.

    • Thanks for the insight that Roy got you (and I’m sure others) thinking about the CPF system. If he got you (and others thinking) then it’s no bad thing. Will be less critical of him.

      • No problem, as I said, although Roy makes me think, I can’t even agree with most of what he says/does.

        But feel free to continue your criticism of TRE ranters. Your judgement of them to be “all rant, no action/conviction” is spot on. Call me a smug bastard as well, but that is one group of people I think I too have very little respect for. I’d take the average papaya minister over any of those fellows any day.

  2. By the way, you don’t really need to feel bad if you doubt Roy also. Most other bloggers I read have their reservations about the guy as well.

    The only ones that die die worship him, I so far can only find Uncle Red Bean & Phillip Ang.

  3. You are quite mistaken there. I don’t expect perfection or anything even remotely in that direction by Roy. They are like shots in the dark. The dark being PAP opaqueness and stonewalling of legitimate concerns by Roy and a whole country of Singaporeans about THEIR CPF. Roy’s tactics (what you refer to as antics) IMO fits the scenario. The ministers are not idiots, so how does one account for their hollow and vacuous no-answers about the CPF to date?

    • Not sure about Cynical Investor, but while I for one am not a fan of Roy’s tactics (I prefer the Roy of 2012-13, not now), I’m happy to see if what he does will bear fruit.

      But as Cynical Investor has repeatedly pointed out, we see plenty of “support” online for Roy’s tactics online, where people laud him as some sort of patriot and saviour, but never show up at any of his rallies.

      Similarly, I was also at TRE recently, where it is lauded for being the bastion of alternative media, but it can’t get the required amount of donation to date to keep it afloat till next year.

      So, maybe Singaporeans are a simply ungrateful, or slimy lot, who would let these activists do the dirty work while they hide behind online anonymity?

      If I am mistaken, I don’t mind being proven wrong, and seeing some real results from what Roy is doing. But what has his “tactics” achieved in terms of crowd pull, policy change, etc? Yeah, there is a huge nationwide hoo hah on CPF right now, but how many of these discussions involve the guy himself? He is still restricted to his paltry attendances at Hong Lim Park, and jokes like holding a candle light vigil for him will not exactly be a crowd puller either.

      But as I said, Roy made me think. I believe he made the nation think as well. Trouble is, having done the all important step of making people think, what do the rest of his tactics/antics hope to achieve?

  4. Hey averagedude, aren’t you guilty of the same thing you accused others of? You lament
    about online Roy supporters not materialising at HLP while you yourself sounded like a
    hotel guest expecting Roy to ‘perform’ for you. There are any number of reasons why
    online supporters do not always find the need or time to go to HLP. It is no indicator of
    any contradiction. Some mentioned that only about a 1,000 donated to Roy’s call for his
    legal cost funding. But the whole point is he more than met the target amount, in fact it
    exceeded the target by some 50%.

    It is already a foregone conclusion by many that the court would eventually mete out a
    penalty that would make Roy a bankrupt (not that Roy at this very moment has much to
    his name in terms of cash or property in any case) and LHL a villian and a bully (in spite of the judgement being in his favour) that would prevent citizen Roy from contesting in the GE, a la what happened to Dr Chee Soon Juan.

    The moment of truth regarding whether Roy’s ‘backers’ have any backbone in them is when they come forward to crowd-fund the penalty imposed by the court. It would be with great pleasure and a great moment of truth and a great moral victory for Singaporeans when they are given that opportunity to COLLECTIVELY DELIVER A BIG SLAP ON PM LEE’S FACE BY UNDERWRITING ROY’S LIABILITY AS A RESULT OF THE COURT’S DECISION. IMO, in the event, that would send the PAP’s in a tailspin regarding its prospects in the coming GE. And of course with each passing day, we can see how Lee and his party is trying their level best to thwart this eventuality by installing ‘instant citizens’ (like Lee’s senior instant trees that were readily blew down in a storm and whose roots were the bane of HDB car park management), bribing the ‘pioneer generation’, stage managing so many photo opportunities for LHL to appear in the news like a caring approachable leader (wayang), etc.

  5. Let’s see. While I don’t mind being proven wrong, I don’t expect Roy to “perform” for my benefit. I’m not a fan of his anyway. That is why I never bothered donating, nor attending any HLP protests myself.

    You might think that it is alright for people to not show up at HLP. A lot of cyberwarriors offer their justification for it as well. But the fact of the matter is, when Roy and gang organize an event there, do you think they don’t expect people to show up? Why organize a physical event when there is no chance to have a big crowd, lots noise, fanfare, and presence? I can’t imagine that Roy and his group are not disappointed that the attendance has dropped after the first time. I also can’t imagine TRE editors are not disappointed that they have not yet raised the amount of money needed to keep them going. And no, 1000 people donating to Roy is really not a big number, when you consider the number of people who have reason to.

    It’s very typical of online ranters. I’m not sure if you are one, but you sure talk like one. (Especially the using of CAPS, like as though it makes a huge difference to your points). But its very typical of online ranters, that they like to talk about oppression, a big slap in the face, wayang by the PAP, loss of freedom, etc. Very typical. But when there is actually something that can be done, like showing up or paying up, they do very little. Its as though they think all they need to do is to gather on blogs and forums posting their nasty little comments, and somehow, PAP will disappear as though by magic. And when the numbers are poor, they make excuses for it.

    Maybe I should add on to what Cynical Investor mentioned. I think online ranters maybe are the most deserving of the PAP government.

Leave a Reply to Qiao Zhi Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: