Hong Kong has only had a brief history. At least, this is what the current administration will argue since it is so close to China. Donald Tsang has virtually no critical thinking skills, but first, let's look at Tsang's predecessor, Tung Chee-Hwa.

Tung was massively unpopular because he basically did nothing. This is shocking considering the corrupt officials he had, specifically former Financial Secretary Antony Leung, who used taxpayer money to get a luxury car for himself and his family, former Secretary for Security Regina Ip (who introduced the immensely unpopular Article 23 National Security legislation; for some reason, this legislation has already been implemented in Macau, the former Portuguese enclave) and former Director of Health Margaret Chan (who for some reason was elevated to Director-General of the WORLD Health Organization after being heavily criticized for not taking care of HONG KONG during the SARS outbreak; THERE IS NO LOGICAL EXPLANATION FOR THAT). This set the tone for what was to come: an even more stubborn and dogmatic Donald Tsang.

Enter Donald Tsang. Tsang's legacy will forever be defined by his relationship with opposition lawmakers, which is icy. Come on. Even former President Bush who left office with a 26% approval rating invited House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to the White House for a lunch after the Democrats won control of Capitol Hill for the first time since 1994 in the 2006 mid-term elections as a goodwill gesture, but it's unfathomable that Tsang will ever do that given his personality. There could not be a more vivid example of this than in 2005 when Democrats vetoed his political reform package. THIS CAUSED A POLITICAL STORM AND JUSTIFIABLY SO. According to Wikipedia, under "Political Reform", "On 21 December, the Legislative Council vetoed his reform proposal as the government failed to get support from two-thirds (of the Legislative) councillors. Some lawyers in Beijing said that if the problem can't be solved Donald Tsang has the power to dissolve Legco under the Basic Law" and Donald Tsang basically did this (after his next duty visit after that referendum he came back and announced that democracy in 2012 had also been ruled out). This is a huge reason why the Tsang government is so massively unpopular right now and it seems like they won't change and so we will be locked in a political stalemate until 2012. This isn't hard to imagine. Donald Tsang basically tried to shove his reform package down our throats. How popular can someone be if he only says something like 'Here's my proposal' and then goes off on his favorite "duty visits" and comes back only to jam that idea down our throats? Despite what Tsang is always claiming, a lot of people don't want to talk to him anymore because when he talks, opposition is strictly censored. At his side were a number of controversial officials, some of whom have resigned (Michael Tien & Arthur Li), but the most controversial official is still around: Secretary for Constitutional and MAINLAND Affairs Stephen Lam who always seems to be on Tsang's side whenever announcements to delay universal suffrage are made. Previously, Lam was the "Secretary for Constitutional Affairs". Mr. Chief Executive, we know you LOVE the mainland, so you don't have to stick the word "Mainland" into people's job titles/descriptions. That's the political side. On the economic side even when there are 7 or 8 bad indicators and stocks are plunging, Donald Tsang is still talking about 'Mainland pride'. Part of the reason for this may be because he either stays in Hong Kong or goes to Beijing (i.e. he has never been to any foreign countries). This is disgraceful. On top of that, government civil servants are overpaid and underworked. The government has secretaries, undersecretaries and political assistants. OK secretaries need help so appointing undersecretaries is legitimate, but what is the point in hiring more political assistants when undersecretaries are in fact political assistants themselves? Oh and staff at all 3 of these levels make around HK$200000 per month. It should be the other way around (i.e. people in the private sector should be rewarded if they are in a position that encourages innovation and creativity). THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD BE BUT THIS ISN'T THE CASE IN HONG KONG. Most secretaries and clerks in Hong Kong can barely make ends meet earning between HK$4000 and HK$8000/month in most cases. Tsang simply doesn't care about the clerks and secretaries in the private sector who are making around HK$3000-HK$6000 per month. The bottom line on Tsang is: if you rule by brute force, how popular does he expect to be? And Hong Kong still has 3+ years of Donald Tsang before Leung Chun-ying, a member of the DAB, takes over. And since Leung is a member of Donald Tsang's inner circle (the Executive Council) we can only wait and see what he does, but this is still 4 years away. So we have 4 (more) years of Tsang (this sounds like rhetoric about Bush) and 4 years of Leung Chun-ying before we can hopefully get full democracy. Then there are his infamous statements on the economy: "Once the dust settles, Hong Kong will be the first to rebound" because of China and "No matter what happens the central government will always give strong backing to us". So EVERYTHING is about China. Now we're in the middle of a swine flu pandemic and what has Tsang said about that? NOTHING AS USUAL because HE IS A COMMUNIST. Health Secretary York Chow is doing all the work.