Wider meaning: Ordinary citizens have no say in party polls but we surely follow them with great interest as the outcome does have a broader implication for our lives. — AZMAN GHANI/The Star
WHEN elections come around, it’s only natural that the media focus on the heat and emotions generated from the campaigns.
The campaigning for the PKR polls that is entering its final lap is no exception. After all, it is the personality clashes and factionalism, real or imagined, that “sell” the news stories.
The storylines always seem to be about who is aligned with whom, and who is gaining ground. However, this focus misses the big picture.
Party elections should not just be reduced to self-serving squabbles among feuding candidates.
Reporters are also often guilty of asking leading questions, like whether the contests would lead to a split in the party.
Surely they can’t expect their interviewees to say “Yes, it would lead to a disastrous divide”. They just have to play coy.
The core purpose of democratic elections is to offer meaningful choices. That is the essence of it.
Elections are fundamentally about choices, not splits, it’s that simple.
If the contenders do not handle the competition well, and reduce it to mud-slinging bickering, then it merely reflects on the immaturity or selfishness of the contender.
Incumbents, in any position, should expect to be challenged. Surely they do not believe they can stay on in their seats forever?
As with all elections, there will be winners and losers.
Elections should be a time when the electors are able to weigh competing visions, evaluate policies, and decide which leaders are best equipped to address the challenges they face.
When the narrative focuses disproportionately on who’s fighting whom, it drowns out the debates that actually matter, such as how leaders can elevate the party and set future directions, especially in attracting women and youth voters, and improving governance.
The real questions are: What are their values and visions of leadership? As one candidate rightly put it – are party leaders, those holding government posts, accessible now?
Even members of the media have asked the same questions when their calls go unanswered, in stark contrast to the days when they were wooed by these “wannabe leaders”.
Party voters should scrutinise and evaluate if their candidates, especially if they are holding government posts, are actually performing competently.
The ordinary citizens have no say in party polls but we surely follow them with great interest as the outcome does have a broader implication for our lives.
The outcome of the PKR polls will not just shape the party’s future but potentially the national political landscape.
This party election will likely put in motion the succession plan of “who after Anwar Ibrahim”.
When contenders do not know how to conduct themselves appropriately in what is essentially an internal affair, it will breed public cynicism and alienate the general public, reinforcing the perception that politics is little more than an egotistical dispute.
In doing so, it undermines trust in democratic institutions and discourages informed participation.
The media has a responsibility not just to report but to inform, so reporters need to frame the right questions, which means shifting the spotlight to the real issues at stake.
What are the candidates proposing and how will their proposals impact the party, and by extension, the country?
Are reformists principles still burning and who is re-igniting the fire if they aren’t?
What are the difficulties and obstacles faced by PKR in wanting to carry out electoral promises, now that it is in government?
How should PKR better position itself within the larger unity government, and would the partners break away from this arranged coalition in the next general election?
These may be uncomfortable questions but PKR has to deal with them, even if it is internally.
Once the PKR elections are over, the newly elected leaders will have to set their attention on the general election, which is less than two years away.
Many Malaysians often forget that the PKR is a young, multiracial party that has created history by leading the Federal Government. It has not been an easy path when race and religion still dominate national politics.
Like everything else in life, there are never any perfect choices.
But elections are about choices – whether they are party or national polls. And we decide what we get. initial projection of 5% growth for Malaysia this year no thanks to global trade tensions.
There’s also a possibility that the government will increase spending to counter headwinds from US-imposed levies, Christian De Guzman, senior vice-president at Moody’s, said, according to Bloomberg.
“If the global economic outlook were to turn very significantly and the government would perhaps take measures to offset some of that weakening in the global economy, they could perhaps delay or postpone the petrol subsidy re-targeting,” he said.
He was referring to the government’s plans to end blanket subsidies for the country’s most popular gasoline by mid-year.
“The risks to fiscal consolidation are there,” he said in the interview on Monday.
Malaysia has since 2004 enjoyed an A3 rating at Moody’s – the highest among peers in developing South-East Asia.
The report said that while our credit score has withstood the fallout from the 2008 global financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic, the blow from US tariffs clouds the country’s prospects.
Moody, in fact, changed its outlook for Thailand to negative just last week, citing potential impact from higher levies.
Singapore Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, meanwhile, mastered the geopolitical narrative effectively to win handsomely in the 2025 elections.
I am not sure if our voters would want to hear the implications of tariffs for Malaysia as an issue at ceramah gatherings. Race and religion are likely to continue to be the selling point.
What is certain is that the majority of PAS leaders are not competent enough to talk about the economy, let alone negotiate in Washington DC.
In Singapore, government leaders are often cautious and measured in their speeches, preferring to assure and comfort their people. However, during the recent campaigning, Wong framed these developments not as distant economic shifts, but as immediate national concerns.
In simple language he frightened the voters sufficiently to send the message that they have to vote for PAP as an experienced and steady party in government, and that it was not the time to be politically adventurous.
Wong went on the offensive by tying renewed US tariffs directly to Singapore’s domestic wellbeing – highlighting potential disruptions to supply chains, cost of living pressures, and long-term economic competitiveness.
More critically, he used these threats to draw a stark contrast between his administration’s seasoned leadership and what he portrayed as the untested alternatives offered by the opposition.
The key points were on Singapore’s position in an increasingly unstable world, keeping jobs, a lower economic growth, and inflation – but also how to keep Singapore economically relevant and diplomatically balanced.
The election outcome underscored the strategy’s success: the PAP increased its vote share to 65.6% – up from 61% in 2020 – and secured 87 of 97 seats. Opposition gains remained modest, with the Workers’ Party continuing to hold a small but stable minority.
In Malaysia, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has spoken widely on the tariff issues and even convened a special Dewan Rakyat meeting to address our lawmakers on financial support for small and medium enterprises.
Investment, Trade and Industries Minister Datuk Seri Tengku Zafrul Aziz must be commended for his regular video-clips on the tariff issues with simple, easy to understand narratives without the economic jargon.
