The first is to maintain the status quo, that is, the Action Party continues to maintain the dominance of one party, confining the power of the opposition party to no more than 10 seats in Congress, as it did in previous elections. Frankly speaking, this situation cannot continue for a long time. There are special reasons for the PAP's big victory this time, especially the 50th National Day and the death of Lee Kuan Yew, which have special vote-increasing factors for the party, and these factors will no longer exist in the next election. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who is still popular both for his political achievements and personal charm, may no longer serve as Prime Minister after the next election. In fact, other candidates launched by the party do not have particularly high popularity and charisma, and are not considered very popular by voters. Strong ability. The opposition parties are also able to network with more and more outstanding talents. Although the opposition Workers' Party failed to expand its territory this time, it launched several candidates with impressive backgrounds, including university professors, lawyers, senior white-collar workers, etc. This was almost impossible to see in previous general elections. As Singapore's political control loosens and more and more people are enthusiastic about politics, it can be expected that more talents will join the opposition party. In future elections, the opposition party will win more and more seats, although in the short term It is not yet possible to form a cabinet to govern, but it can create greater checks and balances on the ruling party in Congress.
The second possibility is that as the strength of the opposition party grows, a vicious confrontation between the two parties will form in Singapore. ACT supporters and many political observers believe this would be the worst possible outcome. This situation is not unfamiliar to Asian societies. The political ecology of economies such as Thailand, the Philippines, and Taiwan has made many Singaporeans feel that they should take warning. The main manifestation of this kind of political ecology is that they fight and attack each other in order to win the election. There are endless electoral tricks and fierce or sensational language. However, they restrain each other on bills that are truly related to the national economy and people's livelihood, for fear that the other party will score points.
Opponents of the two-party system believe that this situation is the most terrifying for Singapore, because Singapore has several natural flaws that make it unable to afford such a torment. First, the country is too small, the market is too small, the population is too small, and it has almost no resources. It cannot withstand the hardships. If one or two major policies are implemented incorrectly, it may cause the country to capsize and collapse. Second, there are too few talents. If political talent resources are evenly dispersed among several parties, there may be a situation of "bad money drives out good money" in which there are few first-rate talents and are constrained by many third-rate talents.
The third possibility is a two-party system with healthy competition. When one party is in power, it will govern, and when it is in power, it will be a "loyal opposition party." Although winning the election is also the goal, it will not put this above national interests. . People who support the two-party system believe that vicious confrontations and talent shortages will not occur in Singapore, because Singapore has been rich for a long time, has advanced education, and has high-quality people, and will not tolerate politicians of low quality coming to power and making mischief. In addition, after so many years of education, Singapore now has a lot of talents. It is far from being a grassroots situation with low quality in the early days of the founding of the country. Therefore, if a two-party system emerges, both parties will have first-class talents. Furthermore, full competition between the two parties in a small country will not necessarily lead to vicious competition and national unrest. Israel, for example, also has a political system with fierce competition between the two parties, but the country's governance can be regarded as a model of good governance and democracy.