What they want: past, present and future (UPDATED with analysis of Indian votes)

What they want: past, present and future (UPDATED with analysis of Indian votes)

NO HOLDS BARRED

Tuesday, 27 April 2010

Even 100% of the Indian votes cannot give us the government. However, 60% of the Malay votes can. So we need to know why we did not still get 50% of the Malay votes last Sunday. That was what killed Zaid Ibrahim.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There has been a bit too much Indian bashing in Malaysia Today since last Sunday. Readers comment about how great the Chinese are and that the Chinese voters have principles, not like their Malay or Indian comrades.

Oh yes? Then why would the Chinese still vote for a president who was caught with his pants down? It is not only on video but he also called a press conference to admit that it was he in the video. He never said: “It looks like me, it sounds like me, but he’s too fat and ugly so it can’t be me,” like how a smart Indian would say. Instead, he said: “Before you ask me, let me admit it. Yes it’s me, and I am proud that it is me.”

Bodoh punya Cina. Belum tanya dah mengaku. Nafilah dulu. Mana ada bukti it is you? Macam kes Vijandran, PDRM boleh bakar video dan umum: evidence has been destroyed on orders of higher authority.

90% of the Indians used to vote government for almost 50 years. Only 10% voted opposition. In 2008, it was the other way around, 10:90. In Hulu Selangor last Sunday, how many Indians voted government as opposed to those who voted Pakatan Rakyat? Was it 90:10 like during the 50 years before the 2008 Tsunami? Was it 10:90 like on 8 March 2008? Or was it neither of the above?

I do not have the detailed figures yet. But let us say it was 50:50. Is 50:50 so bad? It may not have been 90:10 (opposition to ruling party) like on 8 March 2008. But it is still far better than 10:90 like in the 50 years before March 2008. Why are we not grateful for that? Why all this Indian bashing?

Is 50:50 so bad? The Malays were 50:50 in 1999. They were also 50:50 in 2008. And we shouted how great the Malays are even when it was only 50:50. But in the Hulu Selangor by-election on Sunday it dropped to one-third for the opposition and two-thirds for the ruling party. As I said, I have not seen the detailed breakdown yet but it could even be that a higher percentage of Indians voted opposition compared to Malays, although in absolute numbers there were more Malays mainly because the Malays were more than 50% of the voters while the Indians were less than 20%.

If the Indians voted 50:50 then they have not let us down. It was the Malays who let us down. The Malays abandoned the opposition cause in spite of Pakatan Rakyat being the state government. Why? And PAS went all out and did its best and yet we failed to win the support of the Malays. What happened?

Can we analyse this instead of whacking the Indians? There are no Indian-majority seats anywhere in Malaysia. But there are many Malay-majority seats where in some places the Malays make up more than 90% of the voters. So the Malay vote is critical. The Indian votes are critical only as far as the kingmaker role is concerned.

Even 100% of the Indian votes cannot give us the government. However, 60% of the Malay votes can. So we need to know why we did not still get 50% of the Malay votes last Sunday. That was what killed Zaid Ibrahim.

The Indians want Hindraf. The Malays want overdraft. And the Chinese want bank draft.

The Indians live for the present. The Malays live in the past. The Chinese worry about the future.

Each race has its needs.

The Indians want a better deal, NOW, not promises about the future. They waited more than 50 years. They are not prepared to wait any longer.

The Malays want to restore their glory of days gone by when they were once the supreme lords of this land. The Malays want to bring Malaysia back to the days when they were lords of this land and when they controlled both the politics and the economy before the non-Malays came to this country.

The Chinese are very concerned about their children’s future and the state of the economy and whether in future they will still have a thriving business and large stashes of cash in the bank.

The Malays voted ruling party because they believe the rhetoric and propaganda that the non-Malays are a threat to the special position of the Malays and that Pakatan Rakyat has sold out to the Chinese.

The Indians voted ruling party because they believe that a change of government on 8 March 2008 has not changed the lot of the Indians and whether Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat rules the Indians would still get a raw deal -- so better vote ruling party which at least controls the federal government and can do more for the Indians, today.

The Chinese voted opposition because they worry that Barisan Nasional is promoting a Malay-first-Chinese-last discrimination policy and that the Chinese may soon see an Indonesian situation emerge in Malaysia.

So, to the Malays it is about the past. To the Indians it is about the present. And to the Chinese it is about the future.

And it was the Malays who gave Pakatan Rakyat that defeat in Hulu Selangor last Sunday, not the Indians, although the Indians did help in this defeat to a certain degree, but not to a large degree.

ADDENDUM

Indian vote still for Pakatan

The media reported that 60% to 70% of the Indians in Hulu Selangor voted for BN and some alternative media hinted that the Indian voters are back to BN. The mainstream media jumped in jubilation claiming that the Indians are backing BN. The only exception was Ibrahim Ali who denied that the Indians supported BN. Further, the Hindraf's relevance for Pakatan was advocated by some.

I have attempted to analyse the votes from Indians in five areas where they are concentrated according to the voting list. They are Ladang Lima Belas, Ladang Chankat Asa, Ladang Kerling, Ladang Nigel Gardner and Taman Bukit Teratai.

This is a micro-analysis of the voting pattern in the rural Indian setting. The total number of votes cast in 2008 was 3,193 and in 2010 it was 3,236.

In 2008, a total of 1,495 voted for PKR and 1,698 voted for BN whereas in 2010 a total 1,406 voted for PKR and 1.830 voted for BN. In terms percentages, PKR gained 46.8 percent of the Indian votes in 2008 and 43.5 per cent in 2010. A decrease of 3.4 per cent.

The total number of votes increased from 3,193 to 3,236 in 2010, an increase of 43 votes. The decrease in the number of votes for PKR is 89. If the additional 43 votes are discounted, the relative decrease for PKR is 46 votes.

Based on the above, the following inference can be made.

There was no significant swing of Indians votes in the five rural areas where the Indians are concentrated. Indians in these areas are still voting in favour of BN as 53.2 percent voted for BN in 2008 and 56.5% in 2010.

The net vote loss for PKR was only 89. If new voters are discounted, it is only 46 votes.

There were complaints that substantial pro-PKR voters were removed form Taman Teratai to Selayang and substituted with pro-BN voters from Sungei Buaya. In Taman Teratai the shift in BN votes increased by 131 votes, a significant 22 percent increase in favour of BN.

Given the traditional voting pattern of the Indians, the transfer of voters and other by-election abuses, the Indian vote is still for Pakatan if not improved.

In a closely fought battle, every vote is vital. Even a single one is too many to lose. However, the media's claim on the drifting of the Indian vote away from Pakatan is flawed, inaccurate and is intended to create a mass appeal for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and BN.

In fact, given the circumstances, the Indians vote at worst has remained at the status-quo if not improved in favour of Pakatan. -- (Malaysiakini)

Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2010/04/blog-post_9308.html