Hong-Kong Protests


Mr T

Senior Member
Anyone who didn't participate and refused to recognize the result would be ostracized and considered to be pro-Beijing camp which is automatically a death sentence for anyone in the opposition camp.
If someone is unable to explain to the voters in a convicing way why they didn't want to take part in the primary, that's their problem. After all, if you're presenting yourself as a "pan democratic candidate" or something similar, it would make sense for you to take part in an open competition with similar possible candidates. You have the benefit of getting more voters on side if you win in the primary. If you don't take part and you can't explain it other than "I want to take part in the election to make myself feel good" or "I'm not as popular as X, so I'd lose", you're probably not going to win anyway.

I can see the argument that a person might prefer there not being a primary because they'd have a chance of getting elected on a heavily split vote. But that's a personal preference. If some candidates agree not to stand so support can be pooled behind one person, that's their right. The point remains that the primary was legally optional and someone can stand even if they lost in it or didn't take part. The fact they may find it difficult to convince voters to vote for them is neither here nor there.

Really, the people most annoyed by this are the DAB and the HK government because they benefit from the pan-democrats having a split vote. The pro-CCP parties know that it's unlikely they'll ever get a majority of votes in the geographical constitutencies, so they feel threatened if their opponents can coordinate effectively.

In addition, voters would be signed up to form voting block before the election. Each voting block would be told to vote for which candidate. That is pure election manipulation and violate the election laws.
There is no such thing as "block voting" in the geographical constituency elections. Everyone votes individually. Even if the primary results are useful for people who want to coordinate against the DAB, it's optional whether or not you follow it. The Opposition have no control over what happens in the voting booths. If a person wants to vote for candidate A and they're on the ballot, they can do so even if candidate B won the primary.
 

KYli

Junior Member
If someone is unable to explain to the voters in a convicing way why they didn't want to take part in the primary, that's their problem. After all, if you're presenting yourself as a "pan democratic candidate" or something similar, it would make sense for you to take part in an open competition with similar possible candidates. You have the benefit of getting more voters on side if you win in the primary. If you don't take part and you can't explain it other than "I want to take part in the election to make myself feel good" or "I'm not as popular as X, so I'd lose", you're probably not going to win anyway.

I can see the argument that a person might prefer there not being a primary because they'd have a chance of getting elected on a heavily split vote. But that's a personal preference. If some candidates agree not to stand so support can be pooled behind one person, that's their right. The point remains that the primary was legally optional and someone can stand even if they lost in it or didn't take part. The fact they may find it difficult to convince voters to vote for them is neither here nor there.
Many voters didn't participate in primary especially elderly. It is illegal due to the fact there are no such thing as primary in HK. Many moderate oppositions were threatened by the hardliners on the internet and the media would have crucified them for not participating. There are no benefits for moderates to participate since their voters don't tend to vote in primary. Many youngsters have committed voting fraud by voting multiple times as many journalists and individuals have successfully cast multiple votes by signing up with fake info.


There is no such thing as "block voting" in the geographical constituency elections. Everyone votes individually. Even if the primary results are useful for people who want to coordinate against the DAB, it's optional whether or not you follow it. The Opposition have no control over what happens in the voting booths. If a person wants to vote for candidate A and they're on the ballot, they can do so even if candidate B won the primary.
That is the most ridiculous thing that I have heard. The oppositions are attempting to systematically manipulate the election. For example, I joined TG and was assigned block A. At the election day, all block A voters would be told to vote for a particular candidate. This is a pure voting manipulation. Don't try to sugarcoat it as the oppositions don't need 100% precision but as long as majority of their voters heed their call then they would get the result they want.
 

Gatekeeper

Captain
Registered Member
Many voters didn't participate in primary especially elderly. It is illegal due to the fact there are no such thing as primary in HK. Many moderate oppositions were threatened by the hardliners on the internet and the media would have crucified them for not participating. There are no benefits for moderates to participate since their voters don't tend to vote in primary. Many youngsters have committed voting fraud by voting multiple times as many journalists and individuals have successfully cast multiple votes by signing up with fake info.




That is the most ridiculous thing that I have heard. The oppositions are attempting to systematically manipulate the election. For example, I joined TG and was assigned block A. At the election day, all block A voters would be told to vote for a particular candidate. This is a pure voting manipulation. Don't try to sugarcoat it as the oppositions don't need 100% precision but as long as majority of their voters heed their call then they would get the result they want.
There's no such thing as primary in Hong Kong. Besides primaries are normally conducted within a party. This farce is a multi-party participation, so it is a mock election. And as such lots illegal as per my previous post.

Our friend here refuse to accept other people post or even attempt to debate other people's post. Instead, he just keeps conducting mental gymnasts to manipulate the narratives to suit his agenda.

I beginning to think wolfie is right, we all should ignore the Mr Troll.
 

supersnoop

Junior Member
Registered Member
That is the most ridiculous thing that I have heard. The oppositions are attempting to systematically manipulate the election. For example, I joined TG and was assigned block A. At the election day, all block A voters would be told to vote for a particular candidate. This is a pure voting manipulation. Don't try to sugarcoat it as the oppositions don't need 100% precision but as long as majority of their voters heed their call then they would get the result they want.
I agree that "so-called" primary election is questionable tactic and could be seen as intimidation of moderate candidates. Also agree that the media is covering it with only positive news, when it really is not certifiably legitimate with no formal oversight (this is never mentioned in the news).

However, I don't agree with your second point. In Canada, that is called "Strategic Voting". It is not technically illegal manipulation unless you can prove there was some sort of coercion or inducement (i.e. A boss tells all their workers to vote for a certain candidate or he/she will fire them, or the obvious giving money for a vote). Now you can say that it is bastardization of democratic process (you should be voting for who can do the best job, not just to be against something), but it is not really illegal manipulation.
 

Gatekeeper

Captain
Registered Member
However, I don't agree with your second point. In Canada, that is called "Strategic Voting". It is not technically illegal manipulation unless you can prove there was some sort of coercion or inducement (i.e. A boss tells all their workers to vote for a certain candidate or he/she will fire them, or the obvious giving money for a vote). Now you can say that it is bastardization of democratic process (you should be voting for who can do the best job, not just to be against something), but it is not really illegal manipulation.

Yes, it's called tactical voting. BUT this is not the case here. It is blatantly organised "mock elections" with coercion from various blocks and cheating as well to create the desire outcome.

Because it is a ballot involving a number of parties.it is in fact an election. It is illegal to hold elections without the agreements of the government. Therefore the organisers have committed an illegal act.
 

Top