Unfortunately the bitter truth of Pakistan's Politics is that you need Electable's to win Elections. An MBA Grad of Stanford or Harvard is not going to win an election from Sheikhupura or Nankana Sb. This is a bitter pill, and IK has been late to learn it. In our Rural Areas, its the strong men who win elections. Those who own lots of lands, can get people jobs, loan them money and resolve their issues. People look unto them and vote for them, its the personalities and not the Party's ideology or the Party's Leader.
Actually,majority of PTI's MNA's and MPA's from KPK are brand new faces. Professionals in their own respective fields, wanted to work for the betterment of the country, thus joined PTI. These are people who couldn't have dreamed of winning the local counsellor election let alone MNA or MPA seat. KPK's politics is quite progressive compared to the rest of Pakistan. One has to admit it, this is why no other political party has been able to win elections twice in a row.
Bhai your two statements are contradicting each other. In the first you are saying that only influential and powerful can be elected whereas in later you say that many new faces have been elected (yes you held KPK progressive politics responsible for this). Whereas in general I do agree with you that people will elect the 'electable' for numerous reason but if the similar electable who are nothing but the representative of the status quo had to win elections for PTI then PTI must stop talking about ideology. All you need is to lure in the so-called electable and buy votes as Jahangir Tareen, Khattack, and Aleem Khan did (and an ideologue and honest Justice Wajih had to take action) and go into the parliament. However, with this lot of electable, I bet nothing will happen for corruption is in-built into their personalities, it is their nature, not second but first nature.
Rasool Alla (PBUH) has said that mount Ouhad can move form its place but not one's nature. Someone said Shah Mahmood is electable but not corrupt... I don't know what is the definition of corruption here. A bastard who instead of helping, accepts '
nazraana' from half-naked and empty stomach '
mureed' is worst kind of corrupt and callous a person. Haram khouri is flowing in his veins for generations. Do we not know who was his great grand father (Shah Mahmood) and how he colluded with British and killed Muslims? It is well known a fact that everyone who joins PTI becomes as clean and innocent as his mother has just given him birth. At any rate, the point is, PTI has to stop making mockery of itself by talking ideology because Imran is now desperate to win elections by whatever means and ideology is lost somewhere.
Now what I wrote above is depressing, I am aware of it. Am I suggesting that ideology will never win? We will remain dependent on well digged out and influential electable for success? No, there was a person called Mohammed Ali Jinnah who proved that ideology can win if people are motivated correctly. It was his sincerity, his honesty and integrity, his selflessness that made people to listen to him even though they could not understand what he was talking in English. However, it took him time, it did not happen over night. Through sheer hard work and commitment he managed to defeat Congress-Mullah alliance and won an overwhelming 90% plus majority. Jinnah was the greatest statesman and politician of his time and Imran can learn a lot from him but I know he will not. Nehru said that establishment of United India was the decision of the history but Jinnah stood in the path of the history.
----
@Jango @Donatello
Both of you are right. However MNAs and MPAs' only job is to legislate (for who? for people) only if the local bodies are in place and allowed to work. In the absence of local bodies, the voters expect (and rightly so) that the MNA or MPA they have elected will employ his/her connection and get their problems resolved. Now it is more than obvious that 365 days of the year, the MNAs and MPAs are not making laws, so they have plenty of time for
'extra curricular' activities that must be related to solving the problem of their voters at any level. Acquitting them simply by saying that this is not their job because they are law makers is theoretically correct but not practically.