atans1

The only marginal seats in S’pore

In Political governance on 02/05/2017 at 5:53 am

There’s no official definition of a marginal seat but people often look at constituencies where the majority – the gap between the first and second placed parties – is under 10%.
BBC

In S’pore only Ajunied GRC fits that description. LOL.

In S’pore “marginal” is a gap of about 15 points it seems. What do u think?

Update at 10.39am: An honest mistake. A 14 -year kid pointed out that Punngol East is also a marginal seat. Must be from RI. But then what’s an RI boy doing reading and posting at this time?

Update at 10.55am: Somehow I don’t think Punggol East is going to be WP’s in next GE. The PAP had to kick up a fuss to get back PE money from WP town council.

Advertisements
  1. 15% is a safe seat by any other definition. In SG maybe there are “less” marginal seat and “more” marginal seat.

  2. Did you forget about Punggol east?
    the gap there is only 3 points and Singapore is blatantly gerrymandered, that fact is obvious to anyone capable of doing basic maths

  3. […] via The only marginal seats in S’pore — Thoughts of a Cynical Investor […]

  4. Anyway, if anybody’s interested I made a google spreadsheet documenting the distortive effects of the GRC system and showing how Singapore’s parliament would look like if it used a PR system or MMP system.
    here’s an article summarising the results: https://sgplblog.com/2017/04/05/singapores-parliament-without-gerrymandering/
    and here’s the raw_data:https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-mGv0ILQDN5ZlNUZERuYnZyeWs/view

  5. There is the impetus for the incumbent to choose their battleground. However, I would disagree that gerrymandering is blatant in Singapore. For an example of blatant, check out the States (http://harvardpolitics.com/united-states/redrawing-america-gerrymandering-matters/). Ditto for seats in the UK where places can be ultra safe for the incumbent. I used to be in Wiltshire, and my vote would only be equivalent to 0.486 vote.

    • I mean some* of it is because of the inherent features of the FPTP system we use, but the GRC system greatly amplifies the down-sides of its system because winning 51- 49 doesn’t just give you 1 seat, It gives equate seats greatly increasing the distortion caused by FPTP. that isn’t to say that other places but a system where a party that wins 69% of the vote receives 89% of the seats are quite unfair.

      There’s a super-easy fix for the problem which involves simply turning GRC’s from a winner-take-all system to an MMP system but it’s unlikely to happen. The UK and we both have the problem with gerrymandering of their own but their size prevent’s it from being as distortive as in Singapore. The tories won 37% of the vote during the last election and 52% of the seats meaning they are overrepresented by about 14%, in contrast, the PAP is overrepresented by 20%.

      Until Singapore,Uk and United states adopts either an MMP system or PR system, there’s always going to be problems with over-representation and under-representation but trying to equse Singapore gerrymandering because other countries do it, is just being whataboutistic

      • Told Terry’s Online Channel and SgDaily about yr blog. Will also tell FB influence Chris K Unless u object will also tell TRE. Hopefully u’ll get the visability u deserve, Like Boarding School piece.

  6. Thank you, I greatly appreciate that

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: