MrMojoRisin

2 hours ago, pacovl46 said:

???????????? nice try! 

1-0

34 minutes ago, robblok said:

So no constructive answer and the fail for comparing him with Thaksin. I should have known.

What do you think will happen to the next Thanathorn?

1. Party disbanded

2. Trumped up charges filed

3. Courts unjustly convict

4. Banned from politics

Sound familiar?

4 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Don't think so.  Check your facts.

Are you suggesting Thammanat is not a powerbroker in control of a group of 20 MPs and maintains close ties with DPM Prawit?

https://thediplomat.com/2022/02/who-is-thammanat-prompao-the-man-shaking-up-thailands-ruling-coalition/

30 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

Have you even read the article in the link you provided?

 

Everything I've stated is in that article. 

 

I got the 100 million wrong. It's been awhile since I've read that article in the Bangkok post.

 

So the land went for 2.3 billion Baht initially when it was sold by the previous owner. Then the value got reevaluated and brought down the price to 1.3 billion and Thaksin's wife bought it at "auction" for 772 million, nonetheless as the only bidder in the second round because to be eligible to bid on the land they had to pay a fee, or something along the lines of a fee, of 100 million Baht, which the two other bidders of the first round didn't have or didnt want to spend otherwise she wouldn't have been the only bidder. That's 600 million less than what the agency of the Bank of Thailand paid for it and Thaksin did sign a letter of consent to make the deal go through and since he was the defacto leader of the agency this was illegal and therefore he caught 2 years! It's all in the link you provided.

 

But I got it completely wrong! 

Indeed you did.

https://www.newmandala.org/a-response-to-vanina-sucharitkul/

4 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

Yingluck was not deposed in a coup, she as removed from office by the Constitutional Court before the coup.   

She was removed from office by the colluding constitutional court as part of the coup. You’re fooling no one but yourself.

11 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Absolutely ridiculous (and childish) thing to say. I dislike Thaksin therefore I must like the junta.  It's a very weak thing to say.

You do realise you can dislike one without liking the other?  My opinion on Thaksin is based on living here through his reign and it has nothing to do with any other political allegiance.  

The mature response, is to identify the lesser of two evils, particularly by deciding which option is most likely to lead to the best long term outcome.

It really is as simple as choosing between democracy and dictatorship.

What impact did Thaksin “reign” have on you and how is it different now under an unelected reign?

26 minutes ago, robblok said:

To compare Thanathorn with Thaksin is illogical. (comparing a crook with a good guy like Thanathorn)  Shows that you have no clue you just want to see Thaksin come back even though we known he is a corrupt crook and its been proven. I am ok with him going in jail as i said at least some are punished. I prefer that over none.

 

Until of course they change the judiciary like you said. But seems you want all the corrupt crooks to go free just so Thaksin can be free.

 

Now instead of being obstinate, what do you suggest to do in the time that the judiciary gets fixed let them all go free even though they are proven corrupt ?

 

Tell me your solution as its easy to shoot at other peoples solutions of a difficult topic.

Wait, what… Thanathorn’s a good guy?

Then why has his party been disbanded?

Why was he charged under the computer crimes act?

Why was he kicked out of parliament?

How can you not see the problem here?

Bad guys using the legal system to destroy good guys in order to maintain the status quo - you agree with this as long as at least someone (even good guys) still get punished.

Baffling!

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

Good luck i just work with what I have. Unless you see the fix of the judiciary any time soon. So right now the best is that some of the corrupt crooks get caught. Or do you prefer for them all to be set free so its FAIR.

 

They committed a crime and got caught so they should be punished not let off because the other side gets let off.

 

I agree with fixing the judiciary but in the meantime some jailtime for some of the crooks is better than nothing.

Again, incredibly illogical.

You are supporting the very method used to force Thanathorn out of politics.

Using the judiciary to eliminate political opponents only perpetuates the nonsense.

????

7 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

My personal favourite was him approving a low interest government loan to the oppressive (and globally sanctioned) military dictatorship in Burma to buy Shin Corp satellites and services.

Yep, a great leader who should be welcomed back.  

I have lived here 27 years and he is the most corrupt self serving one of all of them (and he has some competition).  Not sure why some people have rose tinted specs, my guess is they didn't live through the Thaksin years and didn't see it first hand.

Perhaps it is you, with the (yellow) tinted glasses?

2 hours ago, robblok said:

The guy is as bad as the current MOB. But he is convicted so send to him to jail. Its unfair for normal people that these government crooks escape justice all the time. Now i rather see all the other corrupt government officials in jail too. 

 

But sending him to jail is at least one, if Thailand always excuses corruption then it will never change. So he needs to do his time. Hopefully more will follow. But letting him go would send a wrong signal.

Anyone who believes the Thai courts are either fair or impartial, especially in relation to political matters, is an utter fool.

1 minute ago, worgeordie said:

More populist policies from the Shinawatras  , the man pulling the strings

and his sister knew it worked well in the past , spending the Governments

money to keep them in power , not their own .

 

It's easy saying vote for us and we will give you everything ,the money

will flow in , but I bet they could not explain where all this money is going

to come from, Golden Goose (tourism ) not in best of health , exports down,

inflation high,a large part of the population will not ask this ,would it be sustainable ,

they only believe the lies.

 

Thaksin did some very good things in the beginning , free health ,getting the civil

service to work much quicker , the poor in Issan thought he really cared about their

welfare which had never occured in the past , the only things Politicians offered before

was  200-500 Thb at elections, and he then realised no need to spend his own money,

use the Governments money in the form of populist policies , many people thought

he was using his own money,  like all politicians they will promise anything to get into

power, then use the position to enrich themselves .........

 

regards worgeordie

Just imagine if there was a way to hold politicians accountable? Something like say… regular elections.

regards common sense

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Democracy might be in theory always better. But in real life?

Some democratically elected leaders soon act like dictators. No accountability, corrupt, nepotism, and and and.

 

Democracy would be wonderful with educated well informed voters. That is unfortunately not reality in Thailand - and many other countries. 

How ridiculous!

????‍????????‍????????‍????

Democratically elected leaders might / maybe / could possibly / potentially turn into Dictators….. so let’s just forget about democracy and go straight to dictatorship.

????????????

Educated and well informed you say?

????????????

1 hour ago, BangkokReady said:

LOL.  Obviously.  The article is about the result of the poll. ????‍♂️

 

The article claims that "Most Esaan Constituents Prefer Thaksin’s Daughter For PM: Poll", this is not true as 25% of something is not most, it's 25%. ????‍♂️

 

Nobody is talking about that.  The fact that you constantly need to try to shoehorn in irrelevant details shows how wrong you are.

 

Lesson?!!  Bwahahaha!  All you have done is try to bring up a load of irrelevant drivel to try and divert from the fact that Paetongtarn doesn't have the support of most of Isaan. ????‍♂️

 

You might not like the facts, but they remain to be as such.????‍♂️

 

I'm not sure I've ever seen someone so completely wrong make so many bizarre claims at being intellectually superior, but you do you. 

You are clearly quite incapable of distinguishing the difference between “majority” and “most”.

In this article, most means a plurality, not a majority.

If you want a majority, click on the link in the article and you’ll see a majority of poll respondents (65.7%) prefer pro democracy parties.

How fascinating it is to see the inner workings of the cognitive dissonance required to reside in the “but, but Thaksin” anti democracy unreality.

????????????

9 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

She has the support of 25% of Isaan. That isn't most of Isaan.

Not 25% of Isaan, 25% of those polled.

That is the most in this poll.

Sudarat had the second most, with 20%.

????????????

Paetongtarn has a plurality in this poll.

Plurality is when the candidates receive less than 50% of the majority vote, yet the candidate who receives the most votes would have the plurality. Majority is when the candidate receives more than 50% of the vote.

Here endeth the lesson.

On 12/2/2022 at 6:50 PM, BangkokReady said:

Fascinating stuff, but still completely irrelevant.  25% remains not "most" of anything. ????‍♂️

 

I can't think of anything you can write that will change the proportion that 25% is of 100%, nor the meaning of the word most.

Johnny has 4, apples, Sarah has 3, Tom, Dick, Harry all have 2 each - who has the most apples?

In this particular poll, Paetongtarn has the most supporters (i.e. - more than any other candidate).

????????????

47 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

You keep arguing with things that @OneMoreFarang hasn't actually said.  It makes you sound unhinged.

 

We understand that you like Thaksin, but your refusal to acknowledge that some people might not like him and would prefer another alternative (instead trying to claim that they are supporting the current government) makes your comments so nonsensical that I can't imagine you winning anyone in this thread over to your side, or to really taking anything you have said seriously.

I’m not sure you understand anything.

My “like” for Thaksin is relative.

Thaksin > Prayuth

Thanathorn > Thaksin

or, put another way 

Democracy > Coups

Thaksin is not the cause of Thailands woes.

Only fools and fascists think that he is.

28 minutes ago, BangkokReady said:

People saying they will not vote for Thaksin's daughter, will never be a ringing endorsement for her.

 

There is zero logic in your comment as a rebuttal to a comment on the lack of endorsement for Thaksin's daughter.  The person you replied to did not mention "pro-democracy" parties.  (Whatever they are.)

Nobody said they would not vote for Thaksin’s daughter - you need to work on your comprehension skills a bit there old chum.
 

Those who preferred Sudarat over Paetongtarn would certainly vote for Paetongtarn over Prayuth (or whatever other fascist clown your mob offers up).

The real news coming out of the poll - is not the sensationalist, lowest common denominator Paetongtarn angle, but the very clear and very large margin favouring the pro democracy side of Thai politics.

Why does it no surprise me that you don’t know what pro democracy is.

40 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I'm sure the 500B per vote policy is a popular one...  

Couldn’t that policy be easily beaten with a 600B per vote policy?

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Thank you, your honor. No further questions.

 

Don't bother replying to this. I will block you now because I really don't need to see more of your ignorance.

Stay in the bubble, reality is not for you.

26 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

And just in case you want an honest government then look for honest alternatives. I know that is difficult in Thailand. But just voting again for the same corrupt people will not change anything.

So unless the elected government is perfect - it’s better to have the unelected, corrupt criminals in government?

How ridiculous.

Which path has the best chance of installing a government that is halfway honest - coups or elections?

The answer is obvious.

16 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Do you want corruption? Do you want criminals running the country.

Is there corruption now?

Are criminals running the country now?

What planet are you on?