ATP Poll: Winds of Political Change in Pakistan

Posted on September 23, 2010
Filed Under >Adil Najam, ATP Poll, Politics
26 Comments
Total Views: 41967

Adil Najam

Once again it is the season of silly-talk in Pakistan. There are rumors. There is chatter. There are theories. And there is endless discussion. Supposedly ‘change’ is in the offing. But, then, change is always in the offing in Pakistan. If, indeed, change is coming, what would you prefer? What would you like to see happening?

Everyone seems convinced that some political change is coming. Politicians seem to be taking the talk seriously. And the media is having a field day concocting conspiracies spun around so-called ‘andar ki baat‘. Everyone seems to have a theory. If you have one, please let us know. But, before that, please vote in our poll and tell us what you would LIKE TO SEE happening (not, what you think will happen; but what you would like to happen)!

26 responses to “ATP Poll: Winds of Political Change in Pakistan”

  1. Talat says:

    @Watan Aziz

    Maybe you should read and hear news from Pakistan more carefully.

    The technocrat option is what got all of this discussion going 2 weeks ago with many people forwarding this idea and then PM, NS and other coming out against it.

    Anyhow, I sense you are less interesting in learning what this is about and more about making a fuss!

  2. Watan Aziz says:

    I still have not figured out the TECHNOCRAT OPTION. International community should bring in clean and competent technocrats..

    Not that I am interested in rumors of gossips. And I reject any idea to understand them. There is always a market for conspiracy theorists. And in case of Pakistan, they seem to assume greater import because they seem to project to be in the “know” and try to sell their “access” to information.

    But really what does Adil mean by “should”? And who comprises this “International community”? This is bucket load of all conspiracies.

    More shockingly, the 16% who seem to agree with him!

    What emails did they get? What do they know on this? This
    “appears” to be the second largest block and is twice the size of those who generally aspire to conspire with usurpers.

    Please someone, don’t answer this. I am working on a slow Sunday.

  3. Pakistani says:

    @Naan Haleem

    I think you are looking at the wrong numbers. The only important number to me is that only 8% want military rule. That is heartening. I would have expected that number higher in a parha likha blog like ATP since many parha likha types are actually first to call in dictators.

    I am sure the military intelligence people “keep an eye” on this blog. And i hope they will take the right lesson out of this poll!

  4. Naan Haleem says:

    Poll results suggest that the first option (no change) carried most votes and seems heavily dominating other options (with 32% at the time of this comment).

    But if you combine the votes of other options, we may infer that respondents earnestly want change.

    Even if we put the ‘internal change’ option (13%) in favour of the ruling party, 55% of voters dont want PPP to rule any more.

    And finally, if you add the 6% of ‘parliamentary change’ to support the present set up, it barely reaches up to 51%. This shows a strong confidence-deficit this parliament is facing.

    Any thoughts???

  5. Adnaan says:

    The problem is the constitution. Unless someone changes it so that it requires competent Pakistani technocrats to be Ministers instead of uneducated MNA of the leading parties, there’s no way the institutions will become strong like the Armed Forces.

    I prefer the US approach where the candidates have to go through the senate hearings to get confirmation for key posts.

    How can a MNA from a village be a Minister of Transport? Surely a technocrat with years of experience in transport sector will be much better option. Its common sense. Isn’t it? Unfortunately, common sense is not common in leadership anymore

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*