Archive for May, 2013

Electoral Fraud

May 30, 2013

PKR golden boy Rafizi Ramli recently revealed what he called election fraud where 8 voters found their votes had already been cast when they presented themselves to vote at their respective polling stations. You can read about it here .

What I’d like you, the reader, to do is to think, really think, about what kind of fraud that BN could have perpetrated that would have resulted in this scenario. I can only think of one:

They picked the names of real voters, forged their ICs and sent phantoms to vote in their names first thing on the morning of May 5th. Despite doing this for the many thousands of times it was needed to have even the smallest effect on the election, only these 8 cases (perhaps a few more) were discovered, none of these phantom voters caught and none of these fake ICs found.

Does this sound even remotely plausible to you? Even more plausible than the possiblity that perhaps the officer at the polling centre simply made a mistake?

Here is an excerpt from an article about voters being wrongly fined for not voting in Australia (where voting is mandatory):

A spokesman for the Electoral Commission yesterday acknowledged there could be human error in the process.
“We understand that if someone has voted, or feels they have voted, that sets of all sorts of alarms,” the spokesman said.
“Sometimes the wrong name is marked off, or the one above or below is. It’s a manual process that is done on the day sometimes under pressure.”

In the case of these 8 voters, couldn’t the officer have read out and crossed off the wrong name when someone else voted earlier? Remember there were more than 10 million voters to process and even if the probabilty of this kind of error were 1,000,000 to 1, you’d still expect at least a few of them happening.

If Rafizi could not accept that people do make mistakes in elections, then how does he explain what happened at the recent DAP CEC election? Was it not a “mistake” that led to the results being drastically overhauled? As I recall, there were a lot less than 10 million voters in that one.

Update 7 Aug, 2013:

I’ve updated the link to the news article above to an article from FMT, because it seems that The Star has changed the article from my original link and removed any reference to the 8 voters.

Advertisements

Chinese Tsunami?

May 27, 2013

Of course it was. Here’s why.

Image

The above scatter diagram is derived from voting data of the 11 Kuala Lumpur parliamentary constituencies. The x-axis is the percentage of Chinese registered voters in each constituency. The y-axis is the percentage of the total vote garnered by Pakatan in said constituencies.

One could immediately see a correlation between the proportion of Chinese voters and votes for Pakatan. In fact, the linear best fit line shown has an R-squared value of 0.98, which means the correlation is very strong indeed. The formula for the line allows us to estimate how many of the Chinese voted for Pakatan:
Setting x = 100 gives us the percentage of Chinese voters that voted for Pakatan. 0.5381*100 + 35.074 = 89 %
Setting x = 0 gives us the percentage of non-Chinese voters that voted Pakatan. 0.5381*0 + 35.074 = 35 %

So, in KL, approximately 89% of Chinese voters chose Pakatan while only 35% of everyone else did the same.

If everyone across the country voted in the same way as KL voters have, we should expect the number for the country as a whole to be somewhere close to this line. If, as claimed by some, more urban Malays and Indians voted for Pakatan as compared to their rural counterparts, we would expect the national number to be significantly below the line.

Let’s do a quick calculation. According to the SPR, the percentage of total registered voters that are Chinese is 30%. Plug this figure into the formula (0.5381 * 30 + 35.074) and we get 51%. Remember, this is the % of the popular vote we would expect Pakatan to get if the different races voted across the country as they did in KL. What was the actual number? Also 51%.

So, the rural urban divide is a myth. Urban Malays voted in pretty much the same way as rural Malays. The same goes for the Chinese, Indians and everyone else. The predominant factor determining how people voted in GE 13 was their race, not where they lived. The only reason why Pakatan won more urban seats is because there are more Chinese living in urban areas.

Edit 12 pm 31/05/2013:

It seems someone has beaten me to the punch 🙂

You can find similar analysis, only much more comprehensive, by Sdr DAH Ikhwan at his excellent blog here.

Why the Silence, Ambiga?

May 14, 2013

On March 23rd of this year, Bersih launched the “Reject Political Violence” campaign. You can read the press release here. Amongst other things, the release states:
“BERSIH 2.0 is appalled that political leaders are condoning the violence by making excuses for the perpetrators or by staying silent.”

As many know, polling day was marred by scenes of violence perhaps never seen in previous Malaysian elections. The incident involving Rameish Raman (highlighted in my recent posting here) was but one of many that occurred across the country. Vigilantes harassed and intimidated voters for appearing to be “not Malaysian enough”. Some voters were turned away without fulfilling their duty to vote. Others were physically assaulted. In one case in Terengganu, a group of ethnic Indian voters were threatened with parangs held to their necks.

Yet more than a week after these appalling incidents, we have not heard a word from either Ambiga or Bersih. By staying silent, does Ambiga condone these acts of violence? Or do they only count if they were perpetrated by supporters of BN?

A Prediction Fulfilled

May 9, 2013

So it has come to pass. As predicted, the Chinese have completely deserted BN. Though why Najib seems quite so shocked, I honestly don’t know. You could smell the Chinese Tsunami coming from a mile away.

So now Najib is angry with them. He shouldn’t be. It is their right to vote for whoever they wish. And it should not reflect badly on them that they “betrayed” him. They did what they felt was best for them. And so too must he now do what he feels is best for him.

Najib must remember that he is first and foremost the president of UMNO. It is by virtue of holding that position is he the Prime Minister of Malaysia. UMNO’s struggle is first and foremost for the Malays and Bumiputras. He must never forget that. His actions as Prime Minister must ultimately be for the benefit of the Malays. If it is in their best interest that he abandon the Chinese to their own fate, then that is what he must do.

This election has shown that BN can survive without the Chinese. It must now decide whether it wants to do so.

The Ugly Malaysian

May 7, 2013

No, not the man in the white shirt, but the baying hordes surrounding him.

This video shows the cruel harassment of a Malaysian citizen whose only “crime” was to exercise his right to vote.

Accused of being a phantom voter, he persevered and was eventually able to cast his ballot despite the intimidation. Take a bow, Mr. Rameish Raman. You have my respect.

Edit 2.30pm, May 7th:

It seems there are some still questioning whether Mr Rameish is indeed Malaysian even after clarification from JPN that he was. After all, JPN, being a part of Government, is not to be trusted.

By all accounts, this incident occurred at the Taman Segar polling centre under the P.123 Cheras constituency. This is a formidable DAP fortress with the Chinese making up 84% of voters. In 2008, the incumbent Tan Kok Wai won this seat by a whopping 28,300 majority. So, it begs the question: If he were indeed a phantom voter, why would BN send him to a place like this? What could it possibly hope to achieve?