A widely circulated Reddit thread on 30 April 2025 has ignited discussion about the People’s Action Party (PAP)’s differing campaign approaches in electoral wards considered “safe” versus those facing strong opposition challenges.
The original post came from a resident who has lived in a “safe” Group Representation Constituency (GRC) for seven years. The user described a lacklustre experience with the PAP’s campaign effort, receiving only a manifesto booklet from a volunteer who briefly uttered “vote PAP” without any real engagement.
In stark contrast, social media footage and anecdotes from more competitive GRCs show PAP candidates actively canvassing, engaging in door-to-door visits, and speaking with residents—an effort perceived as far more vigorous than what “safe” wards experience.
The post struck a chord with many Redditors who shared similar experiences across multiple constituencies.
One user living in Ang Mo Kio GRC noted that they had not seen a candidate at their doorstep since “four elections ago,” recalling only a past encounter with former MP Wee Siew Kim.
Several others echoed this sentiment, citing the absence of candidates during the campaign period and minimal communication aside from flyers and loudspeaker trucks.
In a notable complaint from Tampines GRC, a user reported that residents were asked to pay S$5 to attend a “meet and mingle” session with new PAP candidate Charlene Chen, calling it inappropriate during the general election period.
“Why do residents have to pay to meet someone during GE?” the user asked, sparking further criticism from others about elitism and detachment from voters.
Another commenter, also from Tampines, lamented that while new Build-To-Order (BTO) areas were receiving visits, older estates were being neglected. “It tells you the priority is on winning over new residents rather than keeping current ones happy,” the user observed.
Cleanliness and municipal neglect also featured prominently in the discussion. Residents from areas like Ang Mo Kio Avenue 3 and parts of Tampines described poorly maintained estates, cluttered walkways, and delayed responses from town councils. Some attributed these issues to what they saw as complacency by the ruling party, especially in areas perceived as easy wins.
One user questioned whether the size of GRCs contributed to the problem, suggesting that large constituencies prevent MPs from adequately reaching all residents.
This concern was tied to alleged gerrymandering practices, with users claiming that redrawing electoral boundaries may serve to dilute opposition influence rather than ensure effective representation.
Others pointed to the sharp contrast in voter treatment as symptomatic of a deeper issue. “If they take us for granted during elections, how do you think they prioritise us the rest of the time?” one user asked rhetorically.
The frustration was not limited to opposition supporters. Several commenters, identifying as civil servants, expressed personal dissatisfaction with government policies and workplace culture.
One user shared that their policy analysis was altered before being presented in Parliament, leading them to resign in disillusionment.
“I want to erode the PAP percentage so they can see our discontent,” one user wrote, stating they would vote against the party not because the opposition won their vote, but because the PAP lost it.
Some users attempted to contextualise the disparity, pointing out that both ruling and opposition candidates might struggle to visit every household.
Others suggested that “hot” GRCs naturally attract more media attention and volunteer deployment, creating the appearance of higher activity.
Despite these more measured responses, the dominant narrative remained one of disappointment, with users voicing scepticism about the sincerity of last-minute outreach efforts and campaign showmanship.
The Reddit discussion underscores a broader sentiment: that visible, equitable engagement matters deeply to voters, regardless of political allegiance or constituency competitiveness.
In a political landscape where trust and perception are critical, the PAP’s campaign strategies in “safe” wards are being increasingly scrutinised by constituents who expect more than assumptions of loyalty.
As one user concluded, “They didn’t earn my vote this time—they assumed it.”
The post Lack of effort in PAP campaigning draws ire in ‘safe’ constituencies appeared first on The Online Citizen.
