Funny News From 2018 Elections

“… its [Hun Sen’s elections] legitimacy is arguably no lesser than the other [Malaysian recent elections], because … it was a multi-party election. And it is not a sure thing that had the CNRP been allowed to participate, it would have won.”

Davan Long, 9 August 2018, Bangkok Post Opinion

“It took Malaysians over 60 years to change a government. If Cambodia were to follow their example, it still has 30 more years to go…” [sic]

Davan Long, 9 August 2018, Bangkok Post Opinion

“The general picture before and after the election, and the stance of the GDP, is that the CNRP effectively handed the National Assembly’s full 125 seats to the CPP when it urged people to boycott the elections or spoil their ballot.”

Grassroots Democratic Party (GDP) President Yang Saing Koma, 2 August 2018, The Phnom Penh Post

« អ្នកឯងហ៊ានចោទថា ប្រជាពលរដ្ឋត្រូវគេបំប៉ោង ត្រូវគេបំភិតបំភ័យ ត្រូវគេស្អីអ៊ីចេះអ៊ីចុះ។ ហ៊ានស្បថឬ អត់? បើហ៊ាន ឥឡូវបង្ហោះតាមហ្វេសប៊ុកមក។ ឥឡូវ ខ្ញុំសូមស្បថមុន ស្បថឲ្យងាប់គ្រប់ទម្រង់ ឲ្យតែយមរាជចង់ ឲ្យខ្ញុំងាប់ឡានបុកក៏ដោយ ធ្លាក់កប៉ាល់ហោះក៏ដោយ ខ្សែភ្លើងឆក់ក៏ដោយ រន្ទះបាញ់ក៏ដោយ ស្អីក៏ដោយ ប្រភេទស្អីក៏ដោយ ឲ្យតែងាប់ ។ អ្នកឯងហ៊ានទេ? រុញអ្នកឯងឲ្យដល់ ជញ្ជាំងតែម្ដង។ »

នាយករដ្ឋមន្ត្រី ហ៊ុនសែន ​ថ្ងៃទី​៧ ខែ​សីហា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៨ ភ្នំពេញប៉ុស្តិ៍

“But I have noted some pressure and fear [in the elections] too.”

Centre for Policy Studies Director Chan Sophal, 1 August 2018, Campro

Besides news and fake news, there is funny news. A Campro member defines it as the one that is hilarious if untrue.

The 2018 elections bring out many pieces of funny news. Davan Long claims twenty parties participating in the July elections are numerous enough for an election legitimacy, hence for Hun Sen’s new government. It is irrelevant that nineteen of them are feeble and must depend on one gigantic party to run the elections with pre-arranged outcomes.

Long also argues a forced absence of the only formidable party from competing the elections does not affect the legitimacy – because it is uncertain that it can win. Long decides on behalf of voters which party can or cannot win before allowing them to partake. Thus, he must believe these nineteen feeble parties can win. Who is he kidding, besides himself?

Another piece of funny news from Long is, as it takes 60 years for Malaysia to change a government, Cambodia will need another 30 years to do likewise. What Long ignores, or does not know, is that for the past 61 years, Malaysia has had seven prime ministers presiding over at least seven governments. Nevertheless, Cambodia can still match this Malaysian record if it is to have six different premiers in the next three decades.

Then there is a Khmer Rise Party in the elections. By Long’s funny criterion for competing in elections, this party must be able to win. Yet, its president Soksovann Vatthanasarapong does not put his name down as a candidate. He tells RFI listeners his reason: he wants free time and freedom to conduct election campaigns and connect with communities and voters. How amusing.

Another Long’s winnable is the GDP. But it loses; and its president puts a blame on CNRP for calling an election boycott, during which he has still predicted a 75% voter turnout and claimed a higher turnout will give his party a better chance of victory.

As it happens, the turnout is higher at 83% but only 70,587 voters favour GDP. A funny part is that a CNRP spin-off Khmer Will Party, founded merely a month before the elections, secures 212,869 votes with 65% of its candidates being former CNRP grassroot members.

Perhaps the funniest news of all is Hun Sen’s resort to a death’s oath in response to his opponents’ allegation that his elections are rigged with an inflated turnout, threats, coercions, intimidations, etc. If the allegation is proven, Hun Sen swears to die in any manner as lord of death Yama desires, including gruesome deaths. This is a real deal for those who subscribe to primitive beliefs like Hun Sen.

Does Hun Sen really mean it when claiming his re-election is clean? Either he is hallucinating in his own reality, or he is a compulsive liar. Even his staunch supporters, like Chan Sophal, admit there are pressure and fear in the elections. Still, if the oath turned effective, Long’s wish for another 30 years of Hun Sen would not come true.

Ung Bun Ang

18viii18

Fake News You Can Use

Here is a mind-your-own-business warning CPP spokesman Sok Eysan issues to all foreigners. Yes, they all ought to keep their nose out of the stinky dump and take a hike with their duty-free concessional import policies for developing nations. They are interfering in Cambodia affairs and violating Cambodia’s sovereignty – as if it has one – for making negative comments and unreasonable demands on Hun Sen’s rule.

Except for China and Vietnam, of course.

Since Hun Sen’s Cambodia has already become an honourary conjoint China-Vietnam, it is not an interference in Cambodian state affairs for China-Vietnam to fund and run the, economy, resources, elections, and other stuffs.

Cambodian top brains are rewarded so well that they serve like well-oiled robots. After all, China and Vietnam have known for at least two hundred years that those brains, including the highly educated ones, are susceptible to lucrative offices and bribes.

« ជនបរទេសមិនគួរចេះឈឺឆ្អាលរឿងកម្ពុជាទេ គិតតែប្រទេសខ្លួនឯងទៅ។ »

អ្នកនាំពាក្យគណបក្សប្រជាជនកម្ពុជា សុខ ឥសាន ​ថ្ងៃទី​ ១០ ខែ​សីហា ឆ្នាំ​២០១៨  ភ្នំពេញប៉ុស្តិ៍

Your Support is Necessary

Sign and spread around the petition that calls for investigations by Australian authorities into criminal activities of the Cambodian elite in Australia. Join the force. Details are in the following link.

https://chn.ge/2Nl5u5H

Should you wish to receive Pseng-Pseng on your screen as soon as it is released, subscribe to it at https://tinyletter.com/pseng-pseng

Pseng-Pseng is published irregularly. Previous issues are archived at pseng-pseng.blogspot.com

Dear Cambodian Professionals

“Was there cheating in the election on 29th July 2018 or not?”

Centre for Policy Studies Director Chan Sophal, 1 August 2018, Campro (Cambodian Professionals online network)

“… I personally collected the results of the election on 29th July 2018 from 82 polling stations in 6 schools in Phnom Penh. I simply used my phone to take snapshots of the result Form 1102 that was displayed on the outside polling station.”

Centre for Policy Studies Director Chan Sophal, 1 August 2018, Campro

“In my opinion based on this evidence, other anecdotes, I don't think there was cheating or cooking in this election.”

Centre for Policy Studies Director Chan Sophal, 1 August 2018, Campro

“It is important to bear in mind that the sample is not a representative one for Phnom Penh or Cambodia, but it is a large enough number of polling stations (82) in 6 schools, which can tell some meaningful statistics, I believe.”

Centre for Policy Studies Director Chan Sophal, 1 August 2018, Campro

“The key finding is that the result of this sample is not too different from the preliminary result published by NEC in terms of voter turnout rate (74% from the sample), invalid votes (15% from the sample), and the votes for CPP and other small parties.”

Centre for Policy Studies Director Chan Sophal, 1 August 2018, Campro

“This finding suggests to me that if any cheating or cooking it would not have happened at the level above the polling stations. There would be no need to cheat and change such already good results at the polling stations. So if any cheating, it would have happened at the polling stations, which I think is very very difficult to do.”

Centre for Policy Studies Director Chan Sophal, 1 August 2018, Campro

Director Chan Sophal poses a controversial question, does Hun Sen cheat in the recent elections?

In his scientific quest for the truth, the director who makes a living out of research work conducts a simple data collection. His sample size is 3.8% of all the 2,138 polling stations in Phnom Penh. He sprinkles over his research numbers “other anecdotes” though he does not specify the nature and extent of these additives. And then Voilà, Hun Sen does not cheat in Phnom Penh, and by the power of his statistical inference, anywhere. To justify this conclusion, he claims on CPP’s behalf that they do not need to cheat since they have done “tremendous work in both reforms and in pleasing their local constituencies”.

The director admits his sampling is not random. Any research professionals worth their salt know random sampling is a prerequisite for any statistically reliable and valid outcomes. He believes his sample size is large enough for “some meaningful statistics”. He does not say, however, if he calculates a confidence interval and level for his outcomes validity and reliability.

It is rather amusing the director seems excited to discover that his numbers and calculations are “not too different” from those of the NEC. He copies source numbers straight from the NEC’s published Form 1102; how could there be any material variance beyond calculation errors?

The director also believes – to support his conclusion that there is no cheating – any cheating at the poll stations will be “very very difficult to do”. No, it is not.

Here are some factors for the director who often claims to be logical to ponder if cheating is so difficult at poll stations. At every station in Phnom Penh, there are two CPP party agents making up a total of 72.6% of all party agents. Thirteen competing parties have none; six have a handful; they say they rely on the NEC’s integrity for a clean process; many are somewhat under CPP’s control or influence. All election officials are recruited by the NEC whose executive members are either CPP members or beneficiaries of a CPP patronage. Hence, a logical question is: are these minions stupid enough to deprive Hun Sen of what he wants – a high turnout that gives legitimacy of his next government? Indeed, it is inevitable they cheat; and it is up to them to sell it.

It remains unclear though why the director bastardises his sampling work. He may not have enough grasp of the technique complexity, or he just plays some 600 professionals on Campro network for a fool. Either way, the director clearly uses statistics like a drunk using a lamp post – for support rather than illumination.

It is hard to say whether the Campro professionals buy the director’s research method and conclusion. Most have held their cards close to their chest seldom saying anything at all online. Indeed, a few vocal ones will applaud them as they use the network mainly to go with the flow like a dead fish.

Ung Bun Ang

08viii18

Fake News You Can Trust

The following quote is an excerpt from a report in 1834 by Vietnamese General Troung Giang Ming to his emperor Minh Mang.

An opinion leader in the Campro network rebuts the quote pointing out his contemporaries are different from the Cambodian officials of 1834. He says they now have a much better brain with high education degrees up to PhD and beyond.

As it turns out, the only difference is that now with higher degrees of intelligence they also have developed a larger corrupt brain to deal with much bigger bribes their ancestors could never have dreamt of. They have been collectively validating General Troung research outcomes for 184 years and will likely continue do so until Vietnam completes its westward journey in Hun Sen’s peace and economic prosperity.

"After studying the [Cambodian] situation, we [Vietnamese] have decided that Cambodian officials only know how to bribe and be bribed. Offices are sold; nobody carries out orders; everyone works for his own account."

David Chandler (2008), A History of Cambodia, 4th Edition, Westview Press, Page 150

Should you wish to receive Pseng-Pseng on your screen as soon as it is released, subscribe to it at https://tinyletter.com/pseng-pseng

Pseng-Pseng is published irregularly. Previous issues are archived at pseng-pseng.blogspot.com