virtualtraveller

If this journalist is reporting realistically about a random sample of opinions then it's pretty telling, though I'd be interested to hear what the rural folk think.

amnesty and reconciliation are two different things, not mutually exclusive. Reconciliation could be achieved without amnesty if Thai people face up to their demons with humility

It's not over til the fat lady sings, I bet the City of Amsterdam's tourist board and a lobby of coffee shop owners will challenge this and put the brakes on, or when the notice the slump in tourist figures after a year they will allow them to re-open.

I lived briefly in Amsterdam back in '99 and attended the Cannabis Cup, the whole idea of sitting around in cool coffee shop, lounging on sofas and sharing a joint with other like minded people was all part of the cool atmosphere. It was the reason people came. Some coffee shops were really funky, and many were beyond the dodgy red light district. Sure Amsterdam has a crime problem (walk home stoned late at night and some Arabian looking fellow will try and mug you). If you want to get rid of it the decentralise the red light district.

The candidate for Chiang Mai Muang District as seen on all numerous posters (alongside Yingluck) that went up this week, looks like she's a teenager. I'm not sure who she is, nor her family ties and background but I doubt she's over 30. The thought of this 'wai-roon' representing my district in parliament just adds to the absolute farce that Thai politics and PTP in particular has become.

The candidate for Chiang Mai Muang District as seen on all numerous posters (alongside Yingluck) that went up this week, looks like she's a teenager. I'm not sure who she is, nor her family ties and background but I doubt she's over 30. The thought of this 'wai-roon' representing my district in parliament just adds to the absolute farce that Thai politics and PTP in particular has become.

/Users/andrewbond/Downloads/IMG_0008.jpg

What book was it? Is it unlawful to mention a banned book. Is it a crime to link to banned pages, especially if you can prove that the page hasn't been banned by following the correct procedures. This is the really ridiculous part of this law.

Yes, this is the crux of the election. There are several very good (and some honest) reasons why BJT would not form a coalition with PTP, the only remaining thing is for them to explain to the public 'why not', if PTP finish well ahead of the Dems.

As you Newin being ungrateful or disloyal to Thaksin; if you see PTP as nothing more then Thaksin Inc. then it's reasonable to expect factions to eventually lose patience with Thaksin's role in the party and to decide PTP comes with too much baggage. If PTP get shut out of the next government you can expect Mingwan and his faction to bolt too, and given the way Thaksin treated him, that wouldn't be surprising.

Politics should be about parties and their platforms, not individuals and their self interests, and this is what puts the Democrats ahead of the Peua Thai in the coalition negotiations.

It's been five years since the coup and how far have we got with the other 5 of these corruption charges? The problem in Thailand is that Law Enforcement is selective, the process a snail's pace, and weakly applied. I suspect that the reason the establishment have not nailed Thaksin to the cross more than just three cases is that too many of their own will be implicated.

In this sense you can understand why Thaksin is crying foul and calling it all a joke. You can bet that many people sympathetic to him have been going slow on the other cases. And when he gets back into power (indirectly) all these cases will cease to proceed any further through the courts, while other cases against his opponents will be accelerated. This really is the big problem behind the crisis.

So, Thaksin apologists have a point here, I don't think you can fault the verdict, the evidence is pretty convincing, it just seems unfair to some that Thaksin was unable to influence proceedings and that similar cases have not been finalised against others.

BUT, this should not be used as an excuse to let him off the hook. From the number of serious cases outlined above, there can be no doubt that Thaksin lacks the ethics and honesty to lead this country in any manner. The same might be said of others in the past and present, but Thailand needs to take a stand and insist on a cleaner example at the top. Regrettably, the largest number of voters will likely vote to have him back and continue down the same dodgy path, much to their detriment.

This is the silliest argument and goes back to the same tired line of innocence we get from these Red Shirt goons that they were simply peacefully protesting and the government violently evicted them and THEN also set fire to central world to blame it on the reds. As ianbaggie points out, there is plenty of evidence of Red violence. The only matter is that Suthep is calling them terrorists when that is yet to be proven in a court, but this is simply a word, he could correctly accuse them of 'terrorising' Bangkok citizens.

Come on Nattawud, you created a violent confrontation to try and discredit the government, which succeeded in some measure, and yet when someone else accuses you of being involved or implicated you cry foul!

If it's not standard (ie like in a US election), the it's the party's prerogative whether or not to agree, and if their candidate lacks the debating skills then of course they are going to decline, and of course the other side is going to continually challenge them to a debate to underscore their reluctance.

Point here is; parliamentary activity is all about debating so it's important that any future PMs display their skills prior to us selecting them. In this respect Dems have an advantage in Abhisit's experience and good debating skill, but want we really want to see his how well Yingluck can debate, and since she is a complete unknown to us all it's doubly important we get to see how she copes.

And the real issue is; we all know she's just a clone (especially Puea Thai) and that a debate will only expose their farce. I'm sure she might perform better than expected but she's going to get caught out if she has to answer on the spot without putting a call into Dubai. That is the crux of this matter and the Dems are right to continually push this point by asking again and again why she's unwilling to face a debate.

Thai businesses with British involved competitors must be dancing with glee!

I'd like clarification on weather the constitution empowers a government to simply grant an amnesty willy nilly. If so, any standing government can grant an amnesty covering those among its ranks responsible for a crime. For example, why not grant an amnesty to Vatana Asavahame (Klong Dan Waste scandal), since he can direct the Puea Pandin factions to rejoin PT, just like he did 7 years ago. I though that pardon's for sentences can only be granted by the King and only after the criminal has served part of the sentence. If it was that easy there would be an uproar all us people who expect to see law and order upheld. For example, is an amnesty for those who knowingly burnt down Bangkok appropriate, they didn't have to burn anything to make their political statement.

It's all hot air and any amnesty bill is likely to be fraught with delays, time consuming debate, resistance from the senate, bickering among the coalition, it's really an unrealistic proposal that few realise is difficult to bring to fruition, besides it really ought to be done on the results of referendum.

Cryptic clue from Newin so when it comes to negotiating he has us primed on why he made his decision on whom to partner with. He might insist she forfeit the PM seat to get him on board. Same goes for his veiled comments about Abhisit. This man knows all the cards will be in his hands, he will just need to explain to the public.

This was never going to work in a country where a taxi ride across Bangkok for an hour costs less than $10. Most people who can afford to fly can afford to pay an extra 150 baht for the convenience of a taxi. Unless you severely levy the price of a taxi from the airport (which will be strongly resisted by taxi drivers) who significantly improve the convenience of the service (ie professional ticketing staff, frequent fast trains all the way to Phya Thai station) it's never going to attract paying customers. Another white elephant associated with Suvarnabhumi!

Rather than an amnesty plan to bring about reconciliation Mr Chalerm, how about a 'justice plan' to bring about reconciliation and strengthen governance. If Peua Thai were pledging to speedily put on trial all parties involved in political misdemeanours since 2006, including the coup generals (by re-writing an article of the 2007 constitution), and sending to jail those who seized the airport 30 months ago, I'm sure you would get a lot more votes. Unfortunately he has a snivelling leader who lacks any humility, unwilling to even accept he did some criminal things, and unwilling to even spend a week in jail to facilitate his pardon.

A fresh face like this will certainly invigorate the Red camp, so you can expect a lot of excitement around her. When things have calmed down and the opposition start picking holes in her inexperience the significant number of fence sitters might find it difficult to have any confidence in her. It depends alot on what she says, what Thaksin says on her behalf and what Chalerm says on both their behalf. One slip of the square faced tongue could undermine her goodwill.

Samak was his own man with his own following. If the opposition can successfully point out that Prime Minister Yingluck is going to be fraught with problems and very detrimental to the country the moment she starts pushing through an amnesty bill, those who think before they vote might realise. An Amnesty bid will likely be long-winded, bitterly fought over and ultimately unable to bring back Thaksin in the short term.

It's a nice compliment for our present Finance minister. And the opposition keep telling us the present government isn't very economically competent

three different articles here with three different spins on the same set of statistics.

Reading between the lines...Abhisit still outscores Yingluck convincingly in every department, this is probably due to the fact that she is largely unknown by all of us therefore the I wouldn't read too much into this. Only stat that would matter would be 'confidence in political experience'.

Separately Peua Thai have a few percentage points edge on the Dems, as before, this we know based on the massive numbers among the rural poor, but the difference between the two is less than the margin of error in the survey, less than the number of undecided surveved. But, again, it's rather redundant to the actual outcome considering the spread of constituency MPs, and party list factor.

For sure, there's a bump factor when a candidate is unveiled, and certainly lots of excitement presently at the prospect of an attractive women PM with no 'history' of having to put down an insurgency from protesters (something both Abhisit and Thaksin have had to deal with). Once she's been afforded her moment in the sun, I'm sure her opponents will start coming out with all sorts of dirt on her. The point being, what sort of reliable electorate do we have that a complete newcomer and political lightweight with zero parliament time can gain such support. It's kind of like the Filipino's voting in a popular actor a few years ago, needless to say he turned out to be a disaster and had to be removed within 18 months.

Too right, justice for all. By choosing to unreasonably locate their protest at one of the busiest intersections in the city, the UDD now also have the 'right' to protest on selected dates throughout the calendar to mark various anniversaries, thus further adding economic losses to these people who frankly are not directly part of the conflict. Where do you draw the line...

let's not forget the critical details here, the Dems (and every other non TRT party just to make a convincing point) boycotted the April 2006 elections because Thaksin called it on 30 days notice with the simple intention of re-asserting his mandate in the face of massive discontent with his ethics. Such an election would simply entrench the incumbent further, since it's too short notice for the parties to raise funds, plan and undertake a campaign.

I think the army's role here is overstated. They accepted a Thaksin government gracefully once before. The army is just one of many dodgy players involved in the mess, each trying to protect their interests and avoid punishment by doing what Thai (and indeed Asian and many) politicians and business leader do; lobby. In Washington I believe it's full time occupation including well paid people lobbying on behalf of the military, foreign governments, etc.

As long as the army have not shown up in parliament with guns forcing people to stick their hands up then it's not entirely accurate to say they running the show. Ultimately the next government will be the decision of Newin and Barnharn, both of who will consider their options based on money, lucrative opportunities, their future relationship with the coalition partners and also pressure groups. The latter is important for there will certainly be groups from the so-called elite pushing them not to get into bed with Thaksin. On the flip side there will be many influential people pushing for the opposite so that they might benefit from a change at the top.

So, unless PTP beat the Dems by a convincing margin, I don't think we can really say which side will gain the right to govern, but whichever the coalition partners choose, we should respect that as part of the democratic choice. And if the PTP get the most seats marginally but are turned down, they ought to consider if it's got something to do with their stated objectives being at odds with everyone else.

Furthermore, what might likely happen is one party gains the most constituency MPs while the other gains the most votes in the party list system. Both can then legitimately claim they were the 'winner'.

If the PTP do get to form the next government I don't think the army will have a problem with that. When the PTP try to pardon Thaksin they can expect multiple hurdles from many quarters. If they pull off a blatant stunt, fiddling the law, they can expect a lot of the people on the streets. When it gets messy and the police are their usual incompetent selves, then what role does the army play?

So, in short, there will many invisible hands at play here, from the barracks, from quarters we can't mention, from Dubai, from business lobbyist, even the PAD might try their luck...that's politics for you.

Well, if her brother wants to be back by November 'to immediately solve the drug problem' she will have to get a move on in July.

If you're undecided which party would have the more competent MPs focused on building rather than destroying the country, just look at these two top twenty's; I don't see a single PAD, trouble maker, loud mouth, ex-actor etc among the Dem's list.

Peua Thai, with their list, have confirmed very clearly that they and the UDD responsible for the burning of Bangkok are one and the same. Furthermore, by placing repulsive characters like Jatuporn as high as 6th (he could have been 60th and still would win his MP immunity), shows that the 'leader' values his 'revolutionary credentials' far more than the politic experience and economic wisdom of Mingwan and others. Clearly the hawks won again in the battle for Peau Thai's direction. Don't be surprised if Mingwan prefers a constituency MP seat so he can switch sides later.

The Party List system practiced in Thailand has its merits to avert some money politics, but this demonstrates the flaw. The thought of Jatuporn and Nattawut getting a shoe-in for our future parliament, and of course immunity from justice, is just sickening. I have a little more respect for Dr Weng, a moderate, but lets hope the people of Bangkok are well aware of who's on this list before they vote Peau Thai in the party list system.

When asked about the party's plan to push for amnesty, Plodprasop stated that the practice is not easy to archive as the process involves agreement from all sides in the form of a referendum.

Sloppy editing here by the news source, 'archive' should be 'achieve'. All the same it's the first realistic statement I've heard from Plodprasod Sawasdee.

Though a referendum might be Puea Thai's way of gaining legitimacy for any moves to create an amnesty, the wording of the referendum would probably be deceptive. In any case, it's up to the parliament, senate and ultimately the courts who would probably find some legal challenge to it.

This idea that 'the masses want to see Thaksin back so let them have him pardoned' is patently flawed in a democracy with standing laws and rules.

It's all a publicity stunt for the PT and Jatuporn to get maximum sympathy mileage out of his detention.

The Democrats know Peua Thai will never put Yingluck up to a debate because their whole political platform is a farce. From the few words we've heard from Yingluck she might surprise us, but given the position she's in, she wouldn't be able to effectively debate without perhaps contradicting her brother. They're making this challenge to expose her as a puppet.

Peua Thai's response is pathetic. Here we have a complete unknown put forward with a very good chance of being our next PM and the public get no chance to know her better. Their lame reply that 'we all know about Abhisit's lacklustre performance, Yingluck will be bringing back all Thaksin's greatness'. Well then, let's just cut to the chase and have a debate with Yingluck sitting there and Thaksin answering the questions by teleconference, then the public will definitely know how ridiculous this charade is.

You can't run a country by making phone calls to Dubai a few times a day. And you can't run a country from Dubai.

Peau Thai are rightly chickening out with their usual bluster...