Thaksin back in Thailand on May 16th - calls for a landslide election victory to get country out of a "black hole"

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, h90 said:

So that USA is independent from Britain is not acceptable for you, right? Because that was illegal. Or France should be still a Kingdom, because the Revolution was illegal broke a lot of laws.
My point is: Things change in an imperfect way. We have to live with that.
No it was not dying, protesters were dying....we know one who lost his foot.
Companies didn't pay taxes, revenue department agreed. The South talked about splitting away from Thailand. Police and military were split inside. There were already cases in which some units blocked other units. It only need one case (or a staged case) where one policeman shoots an soldier or one army unit shoot at another and there is civil war. The dock worker labor union organized itself in a paramilitary way. Some red shirt groups did the same. Former communist fighter boosted on TV that they still have their weapons and are ready to pick them up.
Maybe some of it was just empty talk. But see what happened in Ukraine when some sniper shot at both police and demonstrators. You could have got that here as well.
And look how many coups were in Thailand....Many and always the military finally stepped back and allowed elections again.

Your examples are both of revolutions against monarchy and are both over 200 years old.  Is that the best you've got?  Do you have any examples of "good" revolutions that replace a democracy with an autocracy?

 

Regarding the protests, they were coordinated with the military in order to justify a coup:

 

"In his remarks, Suthep made it clear that as leader of the anti-government People's Democratic Reform Committee, he closely cooperated with the coup leaders well before they launched their May 22 putsch.

"Before martial law was declared, Gen Prayuth told me 'Khun Suthep and your masses of PDRC supporters are too exhausted. It's now the duty of the army to take over the task,' " Suthep was quoted by the Post as saying."  https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/06/23/324905416/thai-protest-leader-says-he-advised-army-chief-prior-to-coup

 

What was left of Suthep's protests at the time of the coup were a fraction of its earlier size and was no longer seriously impeding affairs:

 

"On the evening of 28 February, Suthep announced the closure of the rally sites at Prathum Wan, Ratchaprasong, Silom, and Asoke on 2 March 2014, and apologised to those people inconvenienced by the Bangkok occupation. The PDRC relocated to Lumphini Park, marking the end of the "Bangkok Shutdown", where the PDRC rally stage was established."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013–2014_Thai_political_crisis

 

It's worth remembering that Suthep was the Deputy PM who ordered the bloody crackdown on the 2010 protests demanding an election.  Suthep's 2013/2014 protest prevented elections, and no crackdown was ordered.   I take it you are ok with bloody repression of pro-democracy protests, but think pro-autocracy protests are legitimate and a good thing.

 

BTW:  Try defending your post with credible references.  Your recollection of events is not great.

 

 

[pomchop]

3 hours ago, JemJem said:

He is a criminal. 

 

Sad to see many of the posters supporting this guy. In the name of war against drugs, he caused the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of people. Then, there was the raid against a mosque, where many people without weapons etc got killed. And, he had been heavily corrupt. And, he caused so much division in Thailand. And, he will continue to do so, if he comes back. 

 

Seriously, why do you support him? Because he got elected by popular vote?? So did Hitler. So has Lukashenko. So has Putin. So has Erdoğan. And many others. All dictators. 

 

Come on. 

 

 

 

And a coup leader is not a criminal?  There are courts to sort that out...not generals with tanks.

[kingstonkid]

1 hour ago, kimamey said:

Maybe I'm missing something but didn't they win an election before and he never got a pardon then, so what's different now.

 

The one thing Thaksin and Prayut have in common is they were, and presumably still are, more interested in power for their own benefit than for the good of the people.

The reason he did not get a pardon was that the people protested.  Yinglucks government was defeated by protest then a coup 

[zzaa09]

1 hour ago, pomchop said:

And a coup leader is not a criminal?  There are courts to sort that out...not generals with tanks.

Yet, the courts, judges and constitution are emplaced and controlled by the military and another high influence. 

Therefore, making any ideal that such judicial decisions might be anything less than non-partisan. 

[zzaa09]

2 hours ago, kimamey said:

Maybe I'm missing something but didn't they win an election before and he never got a pardon then, so what's different now.

 

The one thing Thaksin and Prayut have in common is they were, and presumably still are, more interested in power for their own benefit than for the good of the people.

The base premise behind any political entity.

[candide]

22 hours ago, h90 said:

they were legally ousted from power.....as the winner writes the book of history and in this case they wrote that into the constitution.
But beside that: Thailand was on the brink of a civil war with already injured and death people + massive economic damage.
Specially in the coup against his sister, Prayut tried till the last minute to negotiate a peaceful solution. Which would have been the PM to visit the king and telling that she is unable to govern the country and ask for an emergency government. They hoped that than the king would call in a temporary government from bureaucracy and retired respected people which pacify the country and call for new elections.
The government rejected that. The alternative would have been civil war with all the tourism goes down to nothing. There was already talks that the complete South declares itself an independend country, under the king but not under Bangkok rule.
There was also already a tax boycott many companies didn't pay taxes anymore and revenue department did not enforce anything anymore.

Are you really buying this fairy tale?

There was no brink of civil war. Suthep's mob was spreading thin as money was getting short. He failed.

Yingluck was already ousted by the judiciary and the government was already in caretaker mode since January. New elections were scheduled by the EC for July. That was the objective of the coup: prevent the Thai people from electing a government.

The protest coup failed, the judicial coup failed (they had no ground to oust the whole government), so the only way to avoid elections was a military coup.

 

 

[h90]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Your examples are both of revolutions against monarchy and are both over 200 years old.  Is that the best you've got?  Do you have any examples of "good" revolutions that replace a democracy with an autocracy?

 

Regarding the protests, they were coordinated with the military in order to justify a coup:

 

"In his remarks, Suthep made it clear that as leader of the anti-government People's Democratic Reform Committee, he closely cooperated with the coup leaders well before they launched their May 22 putsch.

"Before martial law was declared, Gen Prayuth told me 'Khun Suthep and your masses of PDRC supporters are too exhausted. It's now the duty of the army to take over the task,' " Suthep was quoted by the Post as saying."  https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/06/23/324905416/thai-protest-leader-says-he-advised-army-chief-prior-to-coup

 

What was left of Suthep's protests at the time of the coup were a fraction of its earlier size and was no longer seriously impeding affairs:

 

"On the evening of 28 February, Suthep announced the closure of the rally sites at Prathum Wan, Ratchaprasong, Silom, and Asoke on 2 March 2014, and apologised to those people inconvenienced by the Bangkok occupation. The PDRC relocated to Lumphini Park, marking the end of the "Bangkok Shutdown", where the PDRC rally stage was established."  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013–2014_Thai_political_crisis

 

It's worth remembering that Suthep was the Deputy PM who ordered the bloody crackdown on the 2010 protests demanding an election.  Suthep's 2013/2014 protest prevented elections, and no crackdown was ordered.   I take it you are ok with bloody repression of pro-democracy protests, but think pro-autocracy protests are legitimate and a good thing.

 

BTW:  Try defending your post with credible references.  Your recollection of events is not great.

 

 

Surely you'll find plenty of revolutions that got rid of democracies in history. But what is your point. The military went back to democracy without anyone forcing them. So they got rid of a pretty evil government, put up a new constitution which was accepted and than they called an election and won the majority of votes, but not the majority of seats because their own constitution did not favor them and now they call for new elections even the polls are not that great.

I can't see any evil here.

Suthep and before Sonthi both don't like the military and always wanted reforms that change everything. Both went into jail. The obviously prefer the military over Thaksin but there is not much love.
But again what are the evil things you see from Prayut? I don't see massive corruption like under Thaksin, I don't see shootings on the street as in war against drugs. I don't see wars like sending troops to Afghanistan. I can't see made shootings with Cambodia like we had with Abhisit.
I can't see much good things Prayut did, but I can't see any bad things....it was a calm time of stability. And if the people don't like it they can vote him out. Not different than in any other western country

[h90]

5 minutes ago, candide said:

Are you really buying this fairy tale?

There was no brink of civil war. Suthep's mob was spreading thin as money was getting short. He failed.

Yingluck was already ousted by the judiciary and the government was already in caretaker mode since January. New elections were scheduled by the EC for July. That was the objective of the coup: prevent the Thai people from electing a government.

The protest coup failed, the judicial coup failed (they had no ground to oust the whole government), so the only way to avoid elections was a military coup.

 

 

His objective were preventing elections so he staged a coup and called for elections??? We had elections and we are having elections now. That makes your complete argument invalid.
If there were a coup and we would still have dictator Prayut, I would complete agree, but we had elections in 2019. That proves your "preventing election" argument invalid.....And he even got most of the votes

[h90]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

Thailand.  I was in Thailand during all that.  The military made a big deal about inviting inputs but wrote the constitution that suited the military and you-know-who. 

 

Prayuth was asked on TV?  The same Prayuth that promised there would be no coup?

 

I don't recall any commitment to return to the previous constitution, also written at the military's direction, however I double-checked to make sure:

 

"Last August they tried again. This time they made sure their amended draft would pass, by imposing a strict ban on any campaigning, so the public understood very little about it, and by warning that the only alternative was extended military rule."  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-39499485

 

Also, this "approved" constitution was amended in unknown ways almost immediately to accommodate---you know.  Unfortunately that can not be discussed here.

 

Yes, the US Constitution written by delegates appointed under the elected government operating under the Articles of Confederation, and then was approved by referendum in all 13 states.  The constitution has been in use for over 200 years, without any coups to change it.

I personally doubt that he would reinstall the previous constitution, but he did promise it. I can't judge how much the public understood of it...but there was heavy campaigning against it. And after the constitution there was election in which he won most of the votes. When you look at the map Nord and Nordeast love Thaksin. But the South really hate him and in Bangkok the middle class don't like him that gives different impressions on up to where you live.
But the discussion is pointless....your in your imagination evil dictator is calling for open elections and if people don't like him they will vote him out.
My forecast is that it will be a very mixed result and coalition government with 3-5 partner that will be moderate in every way. Nothing big will happen.

[heybruce]

22 minutes ago, candide said:

Are you really buying this fairy tale?

There was no brink of civil war. Suthep's mob was spreading thin as money was getting short. He failed.

Yingluck was already ousted by the judiciary and the government was already in caretaker mode since January. New elections were scheduled by the EC for July. That was the objective of the coup: prevent the Thai people from electing a government.

The protest coup failed, the judicial coup failed (they had no ground to oust the whole government), so the only way to avoid elections was a military coup.

A good, accurate summary of events.

[candide]

24 minutes ago, h90 said:

His objective were preventing elections so he staged a coup and called for elections??? We had elections and we are having elections now. That makes your complete argument invalid.
If there were a coup and we would still have dictator Prayut, I would complete agree, but we had elections in 2019. That proves your "preventing election" argument invalid.....And he even got most of the votes

Are you kidding? 2019-2014= 5 years. They (Prayuth was asked to make a coup, he did not decide it by himself) imposed 5 years of autocracy before elections. On top of it, the constitution they made was de facto giving the Senate (appointed by the army and the old elite) the power to chose the PM. It's still the case for the next elections. The opposition needs 375 MPs/500 to govern (provided elections are not rigged).

 

 

I forgot another reason, which was, the succession, and that's why prayuth had been appointed army chief in 2010

"The pro-Abhisit establishment and the powers that be are hunkering down for the long haul and Prayuth is their man. He could be in power for another four years – crucial in Thai politics because of the road towards the succession. The confrontation between the Reds and the Yellows is going to continue."

https://www.dw.com/en/thailands-new-army-chief-takes-office/a-6066746

 

Edited April 4, 2023 by candide

[billd766]

On 4/3/2023 at 10:32 AM, keith101 said:

He is pushing for his party to win so he and his daughter can get pardons and can return home and take power again .

Unlike Prayuth and his gang who automatically gave themselves a free pardon after the coup, made many vague unfulfilled promises after the coup, but actually did nothing.

 

Packed the senate with family, friends and cronies and politicised all the agencies that they needed to stay in power whilst ignoring the Thai people's wishes.

 

Most of the people of Thailand are now nearly 9 years further down the road to poverty, while the rich are far richer.

 

The advantage that Thaksin and the TRT had was that they cared a bit about the Thai people and as they were elected, they could also have been voted out, unlike the current mob.

 

 IMO I suspect that no matter how hard the ministry of dirty tricks try this time, and the unelected senate try to arrange it so that the current mob retains power, the Thai people will simply ignore them and the military will try for yet another coup.

 

This time it may not work out as well for them as the last election did.

[heybruce]

18 minutes ago, h90 said:

Surely you'll find plenty of revolutions that got rid of democracies in history. But what is your point. The military went back to democracy without anyone forcing them. So they got rid of a pretty evil government, put up a new constitution which was accepted and than they called an election and won the majority of votes, but not the majority of seats because their own constitution did not favor them and now they call for new elections even the polls are not that great.

I can't see any evil here.

Suthep and before Sonthi both don't like the military and always wanted reforms that change everything. Both went into jail. The obviously prefer the military over Thaksin but there is not much love.
But again what are the evil things you see from Prayut? I don't see massive corruption like under Thaksin, I don't see shootings on the street as in war against drugs. I don't see wars like sending troops to Afghanistan. I can't see made shootings with Cambodia like we had with Abhisit.
I can't see much good things Prayut did, but I can't see any bad things....it was a calm time of stability. And if the people don't like it they can vote him out. Not different than in any other western country

No, the military did not go back to democracy.  It stacked the deck in its favor in both the constitution and the election, as has been explained to you.

 

There was nothing evil about the Yingluck government, certainly not by Thai standards.  It was incompetent, a problem that could and should have been dealt with through elections.  Have you forgotten how much support Yingluck had lost by 2013?  An election might have ended the Shinawatra's influence democratically, as it should have been done.  But it would not have resulted in a government the elite's wanted, so the military didn't allow it. 

 

Whether Prayuth was "evil" is irrelevant, but I consider him to be thin-skinned, petty, and evil though constrained by timidity.  Have you forgotten the censorship?  The rule by decree (Article 44)?  Have you forgotten that being seen in public holding the book "1984" was banned, along with the Hunger Games three finger salute, assemblies of more than five people, and eating a sandwich in public "for political purposes"? 

 

Have you forgotten how Prayuth promised to clean up the RTP and insisted that the military had nothing to do with the massive people smuggling going on in the south?  Then the RTP produced the goods showing LtGen Manos was in the smuggling neck deep.  In other words, the RTP showed that it could and would bring the military down with it if there were a serious attempt to clean it up.  Prayuth backed off on his promises to clean up the RTP immediately after.

 

However it wouldn't matter if Prayuth had been fantastically clean and competent.  The Thai people want and deserve the right to choose their own leaders.  Prayuth and company denied them that.

[heybruce]

22 minutes ago, h90 said:

I personally doubt that he would reinstall the previous constitution, but he did promise it. I can't judge how much the public understood of it...but there was heavy campaigning against it. And after the constitution there was election in which he won most of the votes. When you look at the map Nord and Nordeast love Thaksin. But the South really hate him and in Bangkok the middle class don't like him that gives different impressions on up to where you live.
But the discussion is pointless....your in your imagination evil dictator is calling for open elections and if people don't like him they will vote him out.
My forecast is that it will be a very mixed result and coalition government with 3-5 partner that will be moderate in every way. Nothing big will happen.

Any campaigning against the military's constitution was forbidden and effectively prevented.I already refuted that claim using a credible source.    Prove me wrong, using a credible source. 

 

The "Nord and Nordeast"?  What?  Do you mean the north and northeast, where the majority of the population lives?  The regions that would and should have been decisive in the election?

 

Careful about using the d-word.  The post-coup censorship rules still apply.  However Prayuth held onto power as long as he could, and if he finds a way to stay in power he will.

[billd766]

On 4/3/2023 at 1:24 PM, kingstonkid said:

I am waiting now to see who is going to argue that PT should be banned as a party and removed because a convicted criminal is electioneering for them.

 

Thaksin saying this is just a way for him to gin up support from those that remember the good old days

The problem that they are going to face, though is the threat or promise of his return is going to give some of the other parties the necessary fuel to add to their fire.  Remember he was ousted by protest and a coup.  

 

There are still a lot of people that think he was/is guilty and do not remember the Thaksin days as the good ole days.

 

But there are millions more voters who do remember them as the good old days.

 

Especially after the last nearly 9 years of corruption and misery.

[billd766]

On 4/3/2023 at 1:31 PM, scorecard said:

3. Do you really think anybody will issue an order that he can come back without going to jail from the airport etc?

 

All this is really thaksin vote buying 2023. 

 

But they cannot stop him returning. He is a Thai citizen and has the absolute right to return if he so wishes.

 

They can make it very difficult for him, but he has millions of supporters who would support him.

 

IMO if the military were to have yet another coup against him, they would be outnumbered by Thaksin's supporters.

[hotandsticky]

4 minutes ago, billd766 said:

But they cannot stop him returning. He is a Thai citizen and has the absolute right to return if he so wishes.

 

They can make it very difficult for him, but he has millions of supporters who would support him.

 

IMO if the military were to have yet another coup against him, they would be outnumbered by Thaksin's supporters.

 

 

I hope he exercises that right  -  then he can do his jail time.

 

 

Then the slate is clean.

 

 

You really think Thaksin's fan club could prevent a coup? ????????

[billd766]

23 hours ago, h90 said:

they were legally ousted from power.....as the winner writes the book of history and in this case they wrote that into the constitution.
But beside that: Thailand was on the brink of a civil war with already injured and death people + massive economic damage.
Specially in the coup against his sister, Prayut tried till the last minute to negotiate a peaceful solution. Which would have been the PM to visit the king and telling that she is unable to govern the country and ask for an emergency government. They hoped that than the king would call in a temporary government from bureaucracy and retired respected people which pacify the country and call for new elections.
The government rejected that. The alternative would have been civil war with all the tourism goes down to nothing. There was already talks that the complete South declares itself an independend country, under the king but not under Bangkok rule.
There was also already a tax boycott many companies didn't pay taxes anymore and revenue department did not enforce anything anymore.

Not true at all.

 

Both Thaksin and Yingluck were BOTH deposed by a military coup.

 

If you don't believe it or cannot accept that, then do some research on the subject.

[zzaa09]

24 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Unlike Prayuth and his gang who automatically gave themselves a free pardon after the coup, made many vague unfulfilled promises after the coup, but actually did nothing.

 

Packed the senate with family, friends and cronies and politicised all the agencies that they needed to stay in power whilst ignoring the Thai people's wishes.

 

Most of the people of Thailand are now nearly 9 years further down the road to poverty, while the rich are far richer.

 

The advantage that Thaksin and the TRT had was that they cared a bit about the Thai people and as they were elected, they could also have been voted out, unlike the current mob.

 

 IMO I suspect that no matter how hard the ministry of dirty tricks try this time, and the unelected senate try to arrange it so that the current mob retains power, the Thai people will simply ignore them and the military will try for yet another coup.

 

This time it may not work out as well for them as the last election did.

From the looks of it......and such positioning going on, nothing is going to change. 

The power groups will retain anything they wish to - by hook or crook. 

[billd766]

21 hours ago, h90 said:

Which isn't in power anymore since 2019

Yes it is.

 

Even the coup leader, Prayuth is still the PM.

[h90]

15 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Not true at all.

 

Both Thaksin and Yingluck were BOTH deposed by a military coup.

 

If you don't believe it or cannot accept that, then do some research on the subject.

What is not true?
I agree that both Thaksin and Yingluck were both ousted by a coup. (in practical terms, if I remember right Yingluck wasn't premier during the coup, someone else was for a week or two. Can't remember the name, just another puppet. But it was still against her). So where I am wrong?

[h90]

11 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Yes it is.

 

Even the coup leader, Prayuth is still the PM.

yes but democratic elected....his party got the most votes and he formed a complicate coalition government.

[renaissanc]

"I'm down to my last XX billions and I need the National Budget urgently to replenish my coffers! I promise not to get revenge on the Military or to push for an amnesty or to ask my Pheu Thai mignons to pass a law allowing me to be confined to my luxury home for a while. I've reformed myself. I'm a new Thaksin. I just want to help my beloved fellow Thais."   ????

[billd766]

2 minutes ago, h90 said:

What is not true?
I agree that both Thaksin and Yingluck were both ousted by a coup. (in practical terms, if I remember right Yingluck wasn't premier during the coup, someone else was for a week or two. Can't remember the name, just another puppet. But it was still against her). So where I am wrong?

From your own post.

 

 

On 4/3/2023 at 2:05 PM, h90 said:

they were legally ousted from power.....as the winner writes the book of history and in this case they wrote that into the constitution.
But beside that: Thailand was on the brink of a civil war with already injured and death people + massive economic damage.
Specially in the coup against his sister, Prayut tried till the last minute to negotiate a peaceful solution. Which would have been the PM to visit the king and telling that she is unable to govern the country and ask for an emergency government. They hoped that than the king would call in a temporary government from bureaucracy and retired respected people which pacify the country and call for new elections.
The government rejected that. The alternative would have been civil war with all the tourism goes down to nothing. There was already talks that the complete South declares itself an independend country, under the king but not under Bangkok rule.
There was also already a tax boycott many companies didn't pay taxes anymore and revenue department did not enforce anything anymore.

 

quote "they were legally ousted from power"

 

Not so at all.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coup_d'état

 

A coup d'état (/ˌkuːdeɪˈtɑː/ (listen); French for 'stroke of state'[1]), also known as a coup or an overthrow, is a seizure and removal of a government and its powers.[2][3] Typically, it is an illegal seizure of power by a political faction, politician, cult, rebel group, military, or a dictator.[4][5] Many scholars consider a coup successful when the usurpers seize and hold power for at least seven days.[4]

[billd766]

14 minutes ago, h90 said:

yes but democratic elected....his party got the most votes and he formed a complicate coalition government.

After he had an opposition party dissolved, it leader banned for politics and 6 million plus voters disenfranchised.

[scorecard]

On 4/3/2023 at 2:05 PM, h90 said:

they were legally ousted from power.....as the winner writes the book of history and in this case they wrote that into the constitution.
But beside that: Thailand was on the brink of a civil war with already injured and death people + massive economic damage.
Specially in the coup against his sister, Prayut tried till the last minute to negotiate a peaceful solution. Which would have been the PM to visit the king and telling that she is unable to govern the country and ask for an emergency government. They hoped that than the king would call in a temporary government from bureaucracy and retired respected people which pacify the country and call for new elections.
The government rejected that. The alternative would have been civil war with all the tourism goes down to nothing. There was already talks that the complete South declares itself an independend country, under the king but not under Bangkok rule.
There was also already a tax boycott many companies didn't pay taxes anymore and revenue department did not enforce anything anymore.

I was working in Thailand during this 'era', and for the decade before.

 

I followed these events religiously with my Thai son.

 

I've never heard of half of what you wrote.

 

[scorecard]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

But they cannot stop him returning. He is a Thai citizen and has the absolute right to return if he so wishes.

 

They can make it very difficult for him, but he has millions of supporters who would support him.

 

IMO if the military were to have yet another coup against him, they would be outnumbered by Thaksin's supporters.

Your paragraph 1 no argument. I haven't seen any suggestion he is 'banned' from travelling into Thailand.

 

Paragraph 2 - Yes he has a lot of supporters,  but there's also plenty who see him as 'not the answer', and many who can easily see through his strategy:

• Make a lot of noise which amounts to nothing more than vote buying.  And if it works, get back on Thai soil and drum up an amnesty, and then weasel his way back into power / PM role and get all the charges against him dropped (more illegal activity).

 

Also relevant, Future Forward and it's offshots are growing in popularity and size and in much more professional discussions and policies and no noise about corruption or violence. I know that more and more of my Uni students are moving towards FF etc., ad they can explain good reasoning why they like <deleted> philosophies/policies etc.

 

Paragrpah 3, I don't agree. 

Edited April 4, 2023 by scorecard

[OldBird]

On 4/3/2023 at 10:32 AM, keith101 said:

He is pushing for his party to win so he and his daughter can get pardons and can return home and take power again .

Basically he is low on funds and wants to come back so he can steal more money from the Thai people.

[rabiedabruce]

On 4/3/2023 at 10:28 AM, dinsdale said:

Which ever way this goes I don't think it's going to be good. IMO a period of instabilty awaits and as usual the elephant in the room is the army and the senate.

Well, it will destabilise the baht, so silver linings and all that

[rabiedabruce]

On 4/3/2023 at 12:48 PM, BangkokReady said:

Is it something like this:

 

Pretty well describes almost every so called leader on the planet