![https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/p480x480/375020_503877939662151_545177133_n.jpg https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/p480x480/375020_503877939662151_545177133_n.jpg](https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/p480x480/375020_503877939662151_545177133_n.jpg)
Q
I was a PA from one of the salurans in Shah Alam. I don't claim to be an expert in crunching data, but the statistics below is based on my rudimentary understanding of math and also common sense.
Just for argument's sake, I did a brief analysis on the list of voters I was given (youngest voters) and here are my findings in response to the blogger whose post "How The Malay Vote Was Lost" http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/from-around-the-blogs/56539-how-the-malay-vote-was-lost
on Malaysia Today. He hints that BN will triumph if the ethnic Malays show more enthusiasm in participating in the elections. With all due respect, I disagree. Please bear with me here as I try my best to crunch the numbers.
Observation:
*I will spare you the raw data while presenting the information in terms of percentage.
Although this sample is far from perfect for the Shah Alam Parliament seat According to Undi.info, P108 Shah Alam has a registered voter racial breakdown of: MALAY 69%, CHINESE 15%, INDIAN 14% (leaving Lain-lain with 2%). Take into account that the registered Malay electorate has actually increased from 66% in 2004 to 69% in 2013, reflecting the growing Malay population and the shrinking Non-bumi population.
The sample from my 'saluran' (of registered voters) was:
Malay 79.6%; Chinese 18%; Indians 2.3% Lain-lain 0.1%
Turnout percentage for all races are as shown below:
Malays 77.8%, Chinese 91%, Indians 71.4%, Lain-lain 100%
Result- PAS won with a 20% majority in this saluran
Analysis:
ASSUMING the extreme estimate that 90% of the non-bumi votes went to PAS, Malay votes that went to PAS still stands at 50.1%.
Analysis:
ASSUMING the extreme estimate that 90% of the non-bumi votes went to PAS, Malay votes that went to PAS still stands at 50.1%.
ASSUMING 85% of the non-bumi votes went to PAS, the party's votes from the Malays would be higher at 52.2%
(If it's worth mentioning, the middle-age salurans have results similar to this. Not so in the older electorate salurans, where PAS won by smaller margins. So if we assume that these middle-age and young voters will form the bulk of votes - including voters who will register between now and the next election - the effect will multiply.)
Judging on the premise that 90% non-bumis voted PAS, slightly more than half of the Malay electorate gave their votes to the Islamist party. Hence, based on my amateur analysis, even if the blogger gets his wish to have ALL
registered Malays out to vote, assuming that the voting pattern for Malays is roughly constant, PAS will still win albeit with a reduced majority. This is due to the even split of the Malay electorate. 50:50.
The reduced majority may be bad news for PR on the surface, but if you look ONLY at the Malay votes - 50:50, is it not safe to assume that whoever wishes to take this seat must earn at least SOME Chinese/Indian votes? If I
may, I think this shows that the electorate, from this saluran at least, rejected the hardline approach by Zulkifli Noordin and certain quarters of BN (not unlike what this blogger represents).
(If it's worth mentioning, the middle-age salurans have results similar to this. Not so in the older electorate salurans, where PAS won by smaller margins. So if we assume that these middle-age and young voters will form the bulk of votes - including voters who will register between now and the next election - the effect will multiply.)
Judging on the premise that 90% non-bumis voted PAS, slightly more than half of the Malay electorate gave their votes to the Islamist party. Hence, based on my amateur analysis, even if the blogger gets his wish to have ALL
registered Malays out to vote, assuming that the voting pattern for Malays is roughly constant, PAS will still win albeit with a reduced majority. This is due to the even split of the Malay electorate. 50:50.
The reduced majority may be bad news for PR on the surface, but if you look ONLY at the Malay votes - 50:50, is it not safe to assume that whoever wishes to take this seat must earn at least SOME Chinese/Indian votes? If I
may, I think this shows that the electorate, from this saluran at least, rejected the hardline approach by Zulkifli Noordin and certain quarters of BN (not unlike what this blogger represents).
Moderation is the key.
Although there may be other issues at play, the extreme-right stance taken would be the focus of my post. The blogger, I suggest, should focus LESS on the "divide and rule" strategy, but more on inclusiveness and better
governance should BN really want to wrest back the urban Malay-majority seat of Shah Alam. Yes, you will lose with a smaller majority if you increase Malay participation, but heck, losing by 1000 and losing by 10000 is still losing right? (Unless you're a PR candidate, whereby winning by 100 is also losing). If BN wants to WIN the seat, it might be a good idea NOT to alienate the "others" as suggested by this particular blogger.
Looking at the larger picture, if this is reflective of the voting pattern for urban seats in the Klang Valley, yours truly is of the opinion that they should step back to the middle and promote an inclusive Malaysia accepted by all while cleansing themselves of the baggage of corruption. (Fielding a candidate who's NOT-aligned to Perkasa would be a start). Perhaps only then will the urban non-bumis return to BN's fold. In other words, PR will be in trouble if BN manages to covince the people that the days of NFC and PKFZ are over. A big 'IF' indeed. Saying that it is a Chinese Tsunami (again playing up racial sentiments) isn't helping them. Although the Chinese did have the biggest and most consistent swing across the board, it is, in my honest opinion, more of an "Urban-Tsunami" if Shah Alam is anything to go by.
Off tangent:
Although there may be other issues at play, the extreme-right stance taken would be the focus of my post. The blogger, I suggest, should focus LESS on the "divide and rule" strategy, but more on inclusiveness and better
governance should BN really want to wrest back the urban Malay-majority seat of Shah Alam. Yes, you will lose with a smaller majority if you increase Malay participation, but heck, losing by 1000 and losing by 10000 is still losing right? (Unless you're a PR candidate, whereby winning by 100 is also losing). If BN wants to WIN the seat, it might be a good idea NOT to alienate the "others" as suggested by this particular blogger.
Looking at the larger picture, if this is reflective of the voting pattern for urban seats in the Klang Valley, yours truly is of the opinion that they should step back to the middle and promote an inclusive Malaysia accepted by all while cleansing themselves of the baggage of corruption. (Fielding a candidate who's NOT-aligned to Perkasa would be a start). Perhaps only then will the urban non-bumis return to BN's fold. In other words, PR will be in trouble if BN manages to covince the people that the days of NFC and PKFZ are over. A big 'IF' indeed. Saying that it is a Chinese Tsunami (again playing up racial sentiments) isn't helping them. Although the Chinese did have the biggest and most consistent swing across the board, it is, in my honest opinion, more of an "Urban-Tsunami" if Shah Alam is anything to go by.
Off tangent:
PR on the other hand, despite the overwhelming win in mostly-urban Selangor, has some soul-searching to do with regard to lower rural support. They also need to educate the foul-mouthed minority (especially the loud
Chinese supporters flooding comment sections) who aren't mature enough to understand the sensitivities of a multicultural society.
Chinese supporters flooding comment sections) who aren't mature enough to understand the sensitivities of a multicultural society.
They are an unfortunate misrepresentation of the silent majority. My hope is for the young and hot-blooded to ... 1) grow up and stop uttering racist statments no better than those uttered by Perkasa leaders and
2) cease the bullying on personalities who have different political leanings, i.e. accept that everyone has the freedom to chose who they like; it is up to us to convince those across the political divide, through civil, informed
discussions/debate, that our side is better.
2) cease the bullying on personalities who have different political leanings, i.e. accept that everyone has the freedom to chose who they like; it is up to us to convince those across the political divide, through civil, informed
discussions/debate, that our side is better.
I predict that the pent-up anger and release via anonymous comments on newsportals and websites like this will subside gradually as we mature as a society. As RPK once responded to my comment, taking me to task for not speaking out when so-called "kins" of mine stepped over the line, I have since taken it upon myself to not remain silent anymore.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.