Exit Poll Results Show PPP Wins

[ando]

A temporary bipartisan coalition of Members representing the people to sort things out would be a much more democratic way of getting the country together, rather than waiting for unelected military dictators to come in with guns and tanks and force their own rules on the people. The military have certainly shown that they are absolutely hopeless at political management.

The first thing to go would have to amnesty for treasonable offences such as overthrowing democratically elected governments. And that would mean a new constitution for starters.

A coup by the elected representatives of the people that makes the rules and puts the military on a short leash. Wouldn't that be a real turn around for Thailand.

[Plus]

This thread is getting a bit more personal than it should be - with references to posters dining places, social circles, Nana plaza or their legal status.

Some are fighting strawmen of their own making - I don't see anyone who opposes PPP's attempts to form the government or advocates revoking poor's voting rights, though many propose some kind of test before granting them.

Can we all step back a little and actually read what people are saying?

>>>

There's another point about democracy that I like - people elect their servants, not their masters. This concept hasn't caught on in feudal Thailand yet.

Overall, if democracy falters, there's little harm in propping it up through non-democratic means. First it saves the country from immediate disaster, second it asserts that certain values should stay above "democracy", especially one that is superficial, that doesn't really represent the people, values that should always be respected, no matter who comes to power.

>>>

PPP-Democrat alliance would certainly look like reconciliation, and they probably CAN work together for a while, but I don't see Thaksin letting PPP go after investing in it so heavily. Let's see what excuse PPP will present to the public when pressed for answers. Thaksin has mentioned it himself not long time ago, would be tought owriggle of that one.

[soundman]

This thread is getting a bit more personal than it should be - with references to posters dining places, social circles, Nana plaza or their legal status.

Some are fighting strawmen of their own making - I don't see anyone who opposes PPP's attempts to form the government or advocates revoking poor's voting rights, though many propose some kind of test before granting them.

Can we all step back a little and actually read what people are saying?

>>>

There's another point about democracy that I like - people elect their servants, not their masters. This concept hasn't caught on in feudal Thailand yet.

Overall, if democracy falters, there's little harm in propping it up through non-democratic means. First it saves the country from immediate disaster, second it asserts that certain values should stay above "democracy", especially one that is superficial, that doesn't really represent the people, values that should always be respected, no matter who comes to power.

>>>

PPP-Democrat alliance would certainly look like reconciliation, and they probably CAN work together for a while, but I don't see Thaksin letting PPP go after investing in it so heavily. Let's see what excuse PPP will present to the public when pressed for answers. Thaksin has mentioned it himself not long time ago, would be tought owriggle of that one.

I just don't see it happening. A democrat & PPP coalition is like trying to mix oil with water.

If at all plausable, Democrats will ask for conditions that the PPP cannot agree to. Namely, deliver taxin to face the courts without any political interference.

BTW - Good first paragraph.

Soundman.

[blaze]

Overall, if democracy falters, there's little harm in propping it up through non-democratic means. First it saves the country from immediate disaster, second it asserts that certain values should stay above "democracy", especially one that is superficial, that doesn't really represent the people, values that should always be respected, no matter who comes to power.

Who decides when democracy has 'faltered' to the extent that 'non-democratic' means are used to prop it up?- who decides what is the difference between propping it up and erasing it, albei with intent to start again with a clean slate? Who decides on the nature of the props? And above all, who decides which particular group in society is to be entrusted with this 'propping up'? Who decides when a democracy 'represents the people'? And who decides which values are to be respected no matter who comes to power. Who ensures that the propping up doesn't just happen to enrich the proppers? Who ensures that the proppers don't insinuate themselves into the governing aparatus in such a way as to ensure their influence after democracy has returned?

As far as testing people, political acumen before enfranchising them- two years ago one of the English papers (curiously, during the heat of the PAD rallies) published a report by a UN agency which found that the level of political awareness in Thailand was highest in the North East. (I have looked for the link but can't find it- perhaps some other posters remember that rather stunning bit of news).

I can tell you that very few people in my country- even know which powers are provinical and which are federal. Even less could discuss the 'macroeconomic' policies of the various parties. Why should only Thais be tested? And if we are going to test- who writes the test? Should we perhaps draw the line at people with graduate work in political science (a math degree doesn't guarantee political awareness).

What is required is a philosophical committment to the fundamental principles of democracy- that democracy is not simply a means by which nations prosper- it is at core a moral statement: that each citizen enjoys the same right to control the destiny of the nation as the next. And that sentiment is sadly lacking.

[Plus]

I don't see anyone in PPP fit to be in the government. Maybe Mingkwan and Thanong, if he agrees, but only for the capabilities, not ideological stand. Democrats can put ideological differences aside for a moment, they don't matter much in the current situation, in fact they can produce a lively and educational debates on many important issues, but I don't see PPP agreeing to drop Thaksin from its agenda. He'd be furious if he tries. Maybe that's why Pojamarn is here - to remind PPP who their boss is.

[aaaaaa]

according to Nation - it looks like Samak will back off from PM-ship

and that Banharn will become PM instead !

Pojaman tests the water for Thaksin

Published on January 9, 2008

Her first order of business, according to one political observer, is to discourage Samak Sundaravej, the leader of the People Power Party, from taking over as prime minister because a Samak premiership would further deepen political divisions.

Ousted PM Thaksin Shinawatra has already talked it over with Chart Thai leader Banharn Silapa-archa over the phone. It appears there is a possibility of People Power agreeing to take a step backwards to let Banharn assume the premiership in order to cool the political temperature.....

Between 2001 and 2006, while Thaksin was holding power, Pojaman played a key behind-the-scenes role in all major political decisions of her husband. She had the final screening of the Cabinet list and most other major appointments.

"The negotiations between the People Power Party and other political allies has been completed. Pojaman will play a major role in deciding the Cabinet line-up," one political source said....

A high-ranking source from the Democrats said Pojaman's return had been well planned.

She has come back in order to boost the confidence of People Power members and those still hesitant over whether to join the government so that everybody gets the message that there is nothing to stop People Power from forming the government, said the source....

Now, if Thaksin is bashed all around as corrupt - then get ready for Banharn !

[soundman]

As far as testing people, political acumen before enfranchising them- two years ago one of the English papers (curiously, during the heat of the PAD rallies) published a report by a UN agency which found that the level of political awareness in Thailand was highest in the North East. (I have looked for the link but can't find it- perhaps some other posters remember that rather stunning bit of news).

I can tell you that very few people in my country- even know which powers are provinical and which are federal. Even less could discuss the 'macroeconomic' policies of the various parties. Why should only Thais be tested? And if we are going to test- who writes the test? Should we perhaps draw the line at people with graduate work in political science (a math degree doesn't guarantee political awareness).

What is required is a philosophical committment to the fundamental principles of democracy- that democracy is not simply a means by which nations prosper- it is at core a moral statement: that each citizen enjoys the same right to control the destiny of the nation as the next. And that sentiment is sadly lacking.

Maybe just having the individual voter sign a statement at the voter registration booth declaring that they or anyone on their behalf have not accepted any cash, goods or services in exchange for their vote & if found guilty of making a false statement - five years in gaol & 50,000B fine.

Soundman.

[meemiathai]

Actually - and this may come as a surprise to some - the position in the UK is the same as in Thailand.Officers in the British armed forces owe their loyalty to the crown.This is not some anachronistic waffle but deeply felt by British officers.Thus their prime loyalty is to the throne not to Parliament or to the Prime Minister.I suppose the main difference with Thailand is that the players have a very clear idea what the rules of the game are, and that the military in particular understand they are under the direction of the elected government.If however the British crown was threatened by an elected government, I do not think it would be easy to predict the armed forces reaction.

Younghusband, may I just say, I think you're spot-on, with this analysis.

It also explains why, when Prem lectured new officers about their primary loyalty to King & country, at the college a couple of years ago, Thaksin got so upset with him about it.

Thaksin got upset? You mean you felt the steam? You mean thaksin was upset about people being loyal to the King?

[Plus]

Who decides when democracy has 'faltered' to the extent that 'non-democratic' means are used to prop it up?- who decides what is the difference between propping it up and erasing it...

That would depend on each individual country's situation. In Sierra Leone the Brits interevened themselves. In Iraq it's the Americans now, before that all questions were to Saddam. In Pakistan they bet on Musharaff to keep law and order. In Palestine it was Arafat.

Interventions to restore/reset/improve democracy are quite common in the third world. Thais just didn't invite the Westerners or even consulted with them. Perhaps that had put them in the bad books.

As far as testing people..

I have no position on testing, don't address me on this.

[soundman]

In Pakistan they bet on Musharaff to keep law and order.

Not exactly excelling at his job recently.

[aaaaaa]

Thai "stealth coup" threatens pro-Thaksin victory

only dreamers expected something else.

Supreme Court has overruled results of previous April (or May?) 2006 elections

and there is no any reasons why it can't and won't do the same this time !

and BTW as someone has already mentioned it here (I think hammered) - the same thing actually happened in USA when their Supreme Court has decided that it would be G. Bush who wins the elections... Thailand perhaps has merely adopted the same tactic - to drag such matters to Thai Supreme Court and .... have all the results neatly re-adjusted and re-played according to the wishes of those who actually decide who can or can't be an "elected" PM.

In 2000, I didn’t care that the Supreme Court, in a five to four vote, chose George W. Bush to be our next president even though he didn’t win the popular vote in Florida. I had faith in my Supreme Court’s decision knowing full well that their action was unconstitutional and that a majority of African American votes were totally ignored.

I had faith as a loyal American that the appointed president would do his job right and serve the American people by upholding and protecting our Constitution. Seven years later after 9/11... our country is on the verge of collapse

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/...articleID=27536

so, this sh1t happens even in world's leading country, self-proclaimed "champions of Democracy"

what to say about such a backwater place as Thailand? Thailand has always been just too good at following the example of their superiors. they've simply adopted the same tactic: if the "majority" (= poor folks, ban nork, farmers ets) elects someone they like, surely the results of such votes will be over-ruled by hook or crook sooner or later.

Bush was elected to the Presidency in 2000 as the Republican candidate

in a close and controversial contest, in which he lost the nationwide popular vote, but won the electoral vote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

United States presidential election, 2000

Bush narrowly won the November 7 election, with 271 electoral votes to Gore's 266.

In the American system of presidential elections, the electoral vote system determines the winner, and Bush won this count, although Gore received more popular votes. It was the third time in American history that a candidate won the vote in the Electoral College without receiving a plurality of the popular vote...

United States Supreme Court decision that the Florida Supreme Court's scheme for recounting ballots was unconstitutional, as well as a 5-4 United States Supreme Court decision that ended the Florida recounts and allowed Florida to certify its vote. The vote was certified by Katherine Harris, the Republican Secretary of State who had been the Florida co-chair of Bush's own campaign[38]. Because Bush's younger brother, Jeb Bush, was the governor of Florida, there were allegations that Harris and Bush had somehow manipulated the election to favor the governor's brother.

... the 2000 presidential campaign has become one of the most controversial, and disputed, elections in American history ...

On January 6, 2001, a joint-session of Congress met to certify the electoral vote. Twenty members of the House of Representatives, most of them Democratic members of the Congressional Black Caucus, rose one-by-one to file objections to the electoral votes of Florida. However, according to an 1877 law, any such objection had to be sponsored by both a representative and a senator, and no senator would co-sponsor these objections. Therefore, Gore, who was presiding in his capacity as President of the Senate, ruled each of these objections out of order.

Though Gore came in second in the electoral vote, he received 543,816 more individual votes than Bush.

oops ! piece about Jeb Bush - sounds familiar to the Thai common practice, huh?

here in Thailand and on TV PPP (and formerly TRT) are blamed for vote buying or manipulations of vote results !

it is on very primitive level and on much lesser scale !

so, who cares about the "majority's choice" ?

Democracy anyway is NOT the freedom. many consider it rather the worst form of government and in fact a "slavery" - the rule of "majority". and those who are elite and well-to-do will never allow the "majority" to win ! it just varies from country to country in HOW it is achieved, this prevention of "majority's rule". in US the opinions of blacks were / are ignored, in Thailand opinions of Isaan and Northerners....

"Democracy" is a joke anyway! ALL of the parties, including "Democrats" are more or less equally corrupt and uncaring about the common folks' opinions and desires - but more about opinions and desires of those who has more money and influence.

"from 100 people on the street 99 will say to you that America supposed to be a Democracy. BUT THAT'S A LIE ! it's an illusion. the word 'Democracy' is not in Constitution, in the Bill of Rights, in the Declaration of Independence. Founding father HATED the idea of democracy, it's the WORST form of government there is, and I agree with them ... "

from: Aaron Russo's take on Democracy

(also http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5420753830426590918)

American republicanism ... was established to preserve individual liberty. America was not conceived as a democracy – majority rule was never the intent here... In a democracy, majorities get to decide what is up for grabs. In a republic, where the central government has limited and clearly enumerated functions, majorities merely determine who is to be elected.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38279

and even though it WAS conceived as republic - it is neither a Republic anymore at all, but entirely something else !

Is America a Democracy, a Republic, OR something different?

Neither a ‘Democracy or Republic’ exists...

The 'Constitution' has been amended so many times that it ceased to exist many years ago as a credible document....

No one 'owns' anything, not even their own homes.....

The country was SOLD years ago…

Unfortunately; people/sheeple are 'working units'...paying taxes, and consumers, walking the straight line, and programmed by myths which dissolved quite awhile ago.

There is also, no example of a Democracy anywhere in the world.

The 'majority' never rule anything. It's not allowed... but that's a secret.

What does exist now 'defacto' is a compartmentalization of peoples...divided and conquered.

Don't you just love words like Democracy and Republic...and don't you just hate it when this happens.

Self delusion from WORDS?

so, the elite or whoever holds the real reigns of power (magnates, bankers, "hi-so" etc) - they only USE the popular word "Democracy" to control the masses, to give them an illusion that their opinion matters.

therefore - all this nonsense of "elections" (and not only in Thailand - but rather pretty much everywhere around the world !) is ridiculous ! and more so when anyway Supreme Court always decides against the unwanted candidate.

Edited January 9, 2008 by aaaaaa

[John K]

I have to agree with plus here that some posts are attempting to get personal and some trolling from the usual bunch. I know that some of the other sections of the forum have a different standard than this section, so for the posters that seem to forget that.....

[sbk]

And please use the report button to report such posts so that they can be dealt with, thanks

[Prakanong]

Actually - and this may come as a surprise to some - the position in the UK is the same as in Thailand.Officers in the British armed forces owe their loyalty to the crown.This is not some anachronistic waffle but deeply felt by British officers.Thus their prime loyalty is to the throne not to Parliament or to the Prime Minister.I suppose the main difference with Thailand is that the players have a very clear idea what the rules of the game are, and that the military in particular understand they are under the direction of the elected government.If however the British crown was threatened by an elected government, I do not think it would be easy to predict the armed forces reaction.

Younghusband, may I just say, I think you're spot-on, with this analysis.

It also explains why, when Prem lectured new officers about their primary loyalty to King & country, at the college a couple of years ago, Thaksin got so upset with him about it.

Thaksin got upset? You mean you felt the steam? You mean thaksin was upset about people being loyal to the King?

Ricardo might have a statement or two somewhere about this as it happened in the past.

Some other posters on here seem to have a crystal ball or reckon they can see inside his mind right now all his future plans - they are thinking more moves ahead for Thaksin than a Grand Master would identify at chess - hilarious.

I wonder what will happen if the object of their irrational paranoid hatred just quietly dissapears from public life if he returns to Thailand - it might drive them a little loopy as they will have nothing to do, no focus for irrational thought's etc?

What did they do before Thaksin - there must have been some transference onto him from somewhere else?

Just what do they imagine he did to them personally and how doesx he affect their life in Thailand - it must be something major as they get all worked up over him while saying nothing about a society where policeman shott tourists, corruption was there from top to bottom before Thaksin and will be there after him?

Surely it can not all be about early closing of go go bar's can it?

[Plus]

I don't know what happens in Yongyuth is red carded - he is PPP executive, there must be some form of punishment for the party.

Why oh why these morons are so openly corrupt that you cannot ignore their behaviour?

Why do they have to promise money in exchange for votes on VIDEO???? What do they expect from the EC and the courts?

It looks like TRT/PPP hasn't learned anything from 2006 debacle and deserves to be dissolved, against the wishes of nearly the whole country.

I wonder if Thaksin would bother sponsoring another TRT reincarnation.

[Plus]

Some other posters on here seem to have a crystal ball...

Could you please leave other posters alone and focus on the topic instead? What do they do, what do they think, are they loopy? If someone responds to questions like this the thread will surely degenerate and possibly get closed. So far there's been no reason to hit the report button, why play with the fire?

[John K]

And please use the report button to report such posts so that they can be dealt with, thanks

Actually embarrassing them for all eternity with their own posts on the Internet or until Thai Visa ceases to exist is another great deterrent as long as the post is not too far off base.

[Ricardo]

Actually - and this may come as a surprise to some - the position in the UK is the same as in Thailand.Officers in the British armed forces owe their loyalty to the crown.This is not some anachronistic waffle but deeply felt by British officers.Thus their prime loyalty is to the throne not to Parliament or to the Prime Minister.I suppose the main difference with Thailand is that the players have a very clear idea what the rules of the game are, and that the military in particular understand they are under the direction of the elected government.If however the British crown was threatened by an elected government, I do not think it would be easy to predict the armed forces reaction.

Younghusband, may I just say, I think you're spot-on, with this analysis.

It also explains why, when Prem lectured new officers about their primary loyalty to King & country, at the college a couple of years ago, Thaksin got so upset with him about it.

Thaksin got upset? You mean you felt the steam? You mean thaksin was upset about people being loyal to the King?

That's not at all what I said. Thaksin got upset at things Prem was saying, for example his lecture to 950 cadets at Chulachomklao Royal Military College on 14th July 2006

[blaze]

And please use the report button to report such posts so that they can be dealt with, thanks

Actually embarrassing them for all eternity with their own posts on the Internet or until Thai Visa ceases to exist is another great deterrent as long as the post is not too far off base.

As one of the people you might be referring to, I ask that you report me and let the mods decide.

[cclub75]

So what are the alternatives and are they better:

A PPP government buoyed up by the whore parties and if we are really unlucky with Banharn at the helm. With the military and bureacracy paranoid and chomping at the bit to overthrow them complete with continuing and probably worsening polarisation.

A very weak and fractious Dem led government after a a bunch of red cards to reduce to the PPP with the country even more polarised and the PPP launching wave after wave of attacks on a totally unviable coalition until it collapses.

A Dem led government after the PPP is disolved and a bunch of by elections (230ish) have been held leaving the country even more polarised and maybe dangerously so and interantionally seen as a joke.

Another coup. Enough said.

Hear ! Hear !

Bravo Hammered. Enough of those stupid rants ("Thaksin is a crook, no it's the junta").

Your list is interesting. It shows clearly that the so called alternatives are very bad. I mean more than a government led by PPP (+ other parties into the coalition) after general elections that were clean (with a few exceptions).

[John K]

And please use the report button to report such posts so that they can be dealt with, thanks

Actually embarrassing them for all eternity with their own posts on the Internet or until Thai Visa ceases to exist is another great deterrent as long as the post is not too far off base.

As one of the people you might be referring to, I ask that you report me and let the mods decide.

Actually no particular poster, just a simple reminder about open Internet forums like this. Someday when some of the posters children grow up and get a good look at how their parent(s) acted, that could be a very interesting day indeed.

[aaaaaa]

I wonder what will happen if the object of their irrational paranoid hatred just quietly dissapears from public life if he returns to Thailand - it might drive them a little loopy as they will have nothing to do, no focus for irrational thought's etc?

What did they do before Thaksin - there must have been some transference onto him from somewhere else?

man, give it up! you can't stop this. people just LOVE the Thaksin bashing and will go on doing it.

as for what they did b4 Thaksin?

I think TV wasn't started yet before his PM-ship.

in "General Topics" the earliest post I can see is dated 2002-11-27

in "Thailand Travel Forum" - 2003-01-18

in "Thai visas, residency and work permits" - 2002-11-22

and on the main page of TV (scroll to the very bottom) can be seen that indeed it has been started in 2002:

Thailand Expat Forum | © 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 Thai Visa - thaivisa.com All rights reserved.

so, you see, ALL the TV members, including those who is here since very beginning (see http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?act=members then sort them out by Join Date) - ALL of them had no ANY other then Thaksin to talk about since very beginning of TV.

unless of course they've been participating in such other, older Forums and had a chance to talk there about former PMs - and then later were "transfered" here as you put it.

I bet that even IF Thaksin "quietly dissapears from public life" - they will still manage to find the way to relate ALL or at least the most of problems in Thailand to him

[Prakanong]

I wonder what will happen if the object of their irrational paranoid hatred just quietly dissapears from public life if he returns to Thailand - it might drive them a little loopy as they will have nothing to do, no focus for irrational thought's etc?

What did they do before Thaksin - there must have been some transference onto him from somewhere else?

man, give it up! you can't stop this. people just LOVE the Thaksin bashing and will go on doing it.

as for what they did b4 Thaksin?

I think TV wasn't started yet before his PM-ship.

in "General Topics" the earliest post I can see is dated 2002-11-27

in "Thailand Travel Forum" - 2003-01-18

in "Thai visas, residency and work permits" - 2002-11-22

and on the main page of TV (scroll to the very bottom) can be seen that indeed it has been started in 2002:

Thailand Expat Forum | © 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 Thai Visa - thaivisa.com All rights reserved.

so, you see, ALL the TV members, including those who is here since very beginning (see http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?act=members then sort them out by Join Date) - ALL of them had no ANY other then Thaksin to talk about since very beginning of TV.

unless of course they've been participating in such other, older Forums and had a chance to talk there about former PMs - and then later were "transfered" here as you put it.

I bet that even IF Thaksin "quietly dissapears from public life" - they will still manage to find the way to relate ALL or at least the most of problems in Thailand to him

I do find it peculiar the obsession but that is by the by.

I am not a fully paid up member of his fan club but there has been a lot worse in Thailand than him before and there will be again.

If he is convicted and found guilty he will have to face whatever consequences but TiT and puu yai getting their come uppance is very rare and dead, lynched, raped and mutilated students were seen on the streets of Bangkok but nothing was done.

I can imagine outrage at the likes of Mugabe, the human rights abuses in Burma and genocide in Rwanda and Serbia but girly hysterics over just another corrupt Thai politician is beyond me.

The farang anti-Thaksin hysteria did start with the social order campaign though and the early closure of bar's then continued when visa's for the semi-legal were made harder with some people believing it was all directed at them I suppose

[aaaaaa]

... dead, lynched, raped and mutilated students were seen on the streets of Bangkok but nothing was done....

and about quite recent (only 1 year old) bombings in Bkkk !

but ....

you can neither read much (or any) posts in here on TV about those students.

it is simply not popular to talk about it.

so, Thaksin-bashing will go on.

and you can either join the chorus of "cheer-leaders" or get labeled as pro-Thaksin

as if there is NOTHING else to talk about !

BUA MAK MAK !

Edited January 9, 2008 by aaaaaa

[Old Man River]

A democrat & PPP coalition is like trying to mix oil with water.

If at all plausable, Democrats will ask for conditions that the PPP cannot agree to. Namely, deliver taxin to face the courts without any political interference.

Soundman.

Your oil and water analogy is a good one. Several years ago Thaksin made it known that he wanted to enter politics. In conversation I mentioned to a senior Demo official that perhaps the Demos should consider him. The laughter was deafening. While times change they haven't changed that much. The PPP is Thaksin's party and the only way a PPP/Demo alliance could ever happen is if the so-called invisible hand got involved.

[sriracha john]

People Power Party Deputy Leader Yongyuth Tiyapairat calls a press conference on Wednesday where he claims he was framed up in the Election Commission allegation of electoral fraud against him. His party could be dissolved if he is found guilty.

The Nation

[sriracha john]

FIRST BY-ELECTION

PPP men reckon Korat is in the bag

People Power candidates confident despite getting yellow cards

The People Power Party (PPP) says it's confident of a victory in a Nakhon Ratchasima by-election for three house seats this Sunday, while its ally Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana is ready to step aside.

Democrat candidates are still looking on the bright side despite a slim chance of winning.

Constituency 3 was the first election result to be nullified by the Election Commission. The winners who received yellow cards were PPP candidates Boonlert Krutkhunthod, Linda Cherdchai and Prasert Janruangthong.

The three denied taking part in vote-buying although police found Bt10,700 in a PPP canvasser's house in Phra Thongkham district. Banknotes of Bt200, Bt300 and Bt500 were also found in envelopes attached with lists of voters, the three candidates' names and some signed PPP member registration forms.

Four of the five EC members agreed to issue yellow cards against them. But Boonlert said the group welcomed another chance to prove themselves in the by-election and that the party's policies and the candidates' achievements in the past would bring them victory again.

Prasert said: "People already want us to form the government, so in this by-election I believe we will get even more votes."

They would also grab the "sympathy vote", he claimed, as people didn't believe the three would have cheated in the ballot. However, he admitted the turnout might be lower as voters had gone back to work.

Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana candidate Wisit Pittayaporn, who ranked fourth in the December 23 election, said he had not done anything special aside from door-to-door campaigning.

People tended to vote for the same candidate the second time around, he said, so he did not have much hope of winning the ballot. PPP was very popular, and that was difficult to challenge, he said.

Northeastern people still liked former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, and campaigning to be part of a coalition party did not compare to a "100 per cent government", he said.

Democrat Triphet Promnitipan, who received 20,257 votes and ranked eighth in the December 23 election, said people were expected to vote for his party, as they were disappointed by the Democrats' loss in the first round. They also wanted to see Abhisit as prime minister.

Voters were "too confident" in Abhisit's victory last time, so they did not vote for the Democrats, Triphet claimed. Voters did not want to support cheaters, either, and at least 50 per cent of votes that went to PPP last time would now go to the Democrats, he said.

People Power Party's winning candidates received from 80,000 to 110,000 votes on December 23.

"Ruam Jai Thai Chart Pattana and Matchima Thipataya candidates who got more votes than the Democrats last time will be taking the PPP's side. That means the PPP will have to share its votes so Democrats voters will have more chance of winning," he reasoned.

- The Nation

[John K]

For the PPP it may be the buy election.

[sriracha john]

People Power Party faces dissolution

The Election Commission will today simultaneously rule on an electoral fraud case involving People Power Party (PPP) Deputy Leader Yongyuth Tiyapairat and on whether to disband the PPP, EC Chairman Apichart Sukhagganond said on Wednesday.

Apichart defended that the complaint to dissolve the PPP and the electoral complaints against Yongyuth had been filed much longer so it was justified that the EC investigated the two legal issues at the same time.

He was responpding to criticism that the EC may have adopted double standards for not taking action to dissolve Matchima Thipataya Party even though its Deputy Party Leader Sunthorn Wilawan was disqualified on grounds of vote buying yesterday.

Apichart admitted that should Yongyuth be found to have committed wrongdoings in his capacity as Deputy Leader could trigger litigation in the Constitution Court that could end with the PPP being disbanded, he said.

The EC will hear the testimony of a final defence witness before passing judgement.

The gist of the charges concerns Yongyuth's involvement in offering monetary rewards to village headmen and kamnans in Chiang Rai to sway votes for him and his party.

Under new electoral rules, a political party is accountable for any electoral offence involving party executives.

- The Nation

[Prakanong]

Maybe we supporters of democracy (well the attempt at 1 man 1 vote) in Thaiand have got it all wrong and our anaylysis is from a western liberal viewpoint.

Ian Buruma argued yesterday in the Straits Times that the Chinese model might offer alternatives for a developing country. Where a one party state uses a mixed model of state ownership and private enterprise to grow.

The people then enter into a Faustian social contract where in exchange for economic growth and increased wealth they give up certain rights and freedoms.

Seems to work in Singapore too - although foreign ownership is over 90% of the economy there are a lot of state owned strategic industries.

Vietnam is growing 10%++ per year and this is projected for the4 next decade.

It is said democracy is holding back India and its efforts at building the infrastructure.

Maybe this is what Thailand needs - a one party state that directs economic growth and wealth creation in exchange for a social contract limiting freedom.

Was Thaksin attempting this?

Which party in Thailand could deliver this - Democrats?

Its obvious the military and their technocrats can not - they have had a few goes at it now