Seriosuly, Wtf Does Vote Buying Even Matter?

[TonySoprano]

Obama spends 1 billion USD on his campaign, Thai politicians from the Democrat party and all the other parties go out and pay people directly for their vote. What is the difference? Each man gets a vote, if he wishes to sell his, what does it matter? Another man sees a stupid commerical with a kid sniffing a flower and votes based on that, another man votes for the candidate with the same birthday month as him, with the same religion, cause he likes his haircut, he went to the same college, etc.

People want to go and protest. That costs them money to stop working and travel. Do you really believe that a large majority of the red protestors do not agree at all with Thaskin and just want the money? Its much more likely that they both agree with the red stance and also want and need the 500 baht or whatever they get in a day.

amazing that people are so obsessed with these two issues.

[eldar1]

When you spend money on tv ads, campaign rallies, etc you are trying to get your message across to the voters and hopefully your message is attractive enough for them to vote for you. Your opponent is trying to do the same and which ever message the voter identifies closest with gets that voters vote. In this situation the decision is still with the voter and both sides have equal opportunity to swing the vote in their favor.

When you buy votes, you take the free will and equal opportunity out of the equation. Since you just gave money to the voter in exchange for their votem, the voter vote for you no matter what their actual feeling towards your policies. Your opponent also do not have a chance anymore to change that persons mind since you have already paid for it.

Democracy= Voting + free will + equal opportunity

Voting alone a democracy does not make, classic examples are middle-eastern countries (Iraq with the most famous example) and African countries (Zimbabwe again being a prime example)

On paying people to protest, well i guess the thing is that a protest is by the people and thus comes from them and the moment someone else pays people to protest it's not really from the people anymore and thus nothing more than a really big and loud marketing campaign for someone elses' ideals.

Edited April 11, 2009 by eldar1

[Steele404]

I'd say a richer man always get the upper hand....

[Priceless]

If I understand TonySoprano correctly, he argues for the auctioning out of seats in Parliament and positions in the government.

I disagree.

/ Priceless

[WinnieTheKhwai]

I think you didn't understand correctly at all, but it's unlikely anyone here is going to change your mind, so never mind.

Yellow PAD terrorists got paid just the same of course.

[Mosha]

Well looking at it as a complete cynic.

In a democracy, the voters are promised the eath, and get nothing.

Paid to vote, the voters are promised nothing but get 500 Baht.

Yep I know which one makes more sense to me.

[patklang]

the yellows got paid cos my mates wife went,and just for the money.there were buses from Pattaya

[Priceless]

I think you didn't understand correctly at all, but it's unlikely anyone here is going to change your mind, so never mind.

Yellow PAD terrorists got paid just the same of course.

I can see that I didn't make myself sufficiently clear. There will always be money involved in politics, but there are (at least) two alternatives:

Alternative 1: Use money and other resources to convince voters that your ideas, people etc are better than the others'.

Alternative 2: Use money to directly pay voters to vote for you.

Alternative 1 exists in all democracies and is, to my mind, legitimate. Alternative 2 destroys the very foundation of democracy and should be harshly punished.

I am not in any way siding with either the yellow or the red side, in fact I consider them both equally catastrophic for Thailand.

What TonySoprano said was, among other things, the following: "Obama spends 1 billion USD on his campaign, Thai politicians from the Democrat party and all the other parties go out and pay people directly for their vote. What is the difference? Each man gets a vote, if he wishes to sell his, what does it matter?"

I think it matters very much, we are talking about a difference in substance here, not a difference in degree.

/ Priceless

[canuckamuck]

Vote buying has very little effect in Thailand. Thais know they are alone at the ballot box. They can vote for whomever they choose and no one can say any different. My wife got paid, and then she went and voted for someone she had never heard of because she felt the whole thing was a sham.

If an election happened tomorrow, without any votes being paid for, The north would vote the same as it has the last three elections.

People who hate Thaksin can't imagine how anyone could vote for him without being bribed. And vote buying was the only angle they could leverage to bring a case against his mandate (he hadn't been convicted at that point). But northerners love the guy, because he is the only one who appeared to care about their issues.

round and round it goes

[sabaijai]

Vote buying has very little effect in Thailand. Thais know they are alone at the ballot box. They can vote for whomever they choose and no one can say any different. My wife got paid, and then she went and voted for someone she had never heard of because she felt the whole thing was a sham.

That's only anecdotal evidence. Academics say the patron-client structure of Thai society means that most paid voters vote the way they're paid. They want the paying party to win.

[h90]

Obama spends 1 billion USD on his campaign, Thai politicians from the Democrat party and all the other parties go out and pay people directly for their vote. What is the difference? Each man gets a vote, if he wishes to sell his, what does it matter? Another man sees a stupid commerical with a kid sniffing a flower and votes based on that, another man votes for the candidate with the same birthday month as him, with the same religion, cause he likes his haircut, he went to the same college, etc.

People want to go and protest. That costs them money to stop working and travel. Do you really believe that a large majority of the red protestors do not agree at all with Thaskin and just want the money? Its much more likely that they both agree with the red stance and also want and need the 500 baht or whatever they get in a day.

amazing that people are so obsessed with these two issues.

You won't tell us that the USA is real democracy or?

[Mosha]

The USA is not a democracy, it is a Constitutional Republic.

[monkfish]

One of my friends got paid to vote from both sides he said it was just a bit of extra pocket money.

He then voted for the party of his choice. I mean imagine somebody paid you $200 dollars to vote for them what would you do?

Tell them no thanks? no you would take the money then vote for who wanted to vote.

[flying]

You won't tell us that the USA is real democracy or?

Sorry No it is not.

If it were there would always be the third option on the ballot

.....NONE of the above.

If enough voters check it then they must again nominate.

As it stands we usually get to vote for either getting someone out or the lesser of two evils.

Lastly dont forget the whacked out civil war weighted electoral college system. Which pretty much throws

the whole thing out the window.

[sbk]

Lets do keep this Thailand related, thanks.

[eldar1]

One of my friends got paid to vote from both sides he said it was just a bit of extra pocket money.

He then voted for the party of his choice. I mean imagine somebody paid you $200 dollars to vote for them what would you do?

Tell them no thanks? no you would take the money then vote for who wanted to vote.

Not everybody is like that, most people will actually do what you pay them to do. sabaijai mentioned this aswell

[canuckamuck]

One of my friends got paid to vote from both sides he said it was just a bit of extra pocket money.

He then voted for the party of his choice. I mean imagine somebody paid you $200 dollars to vote for them what would you do?

Tell them no thanks? no you would take the money then vote for who wanted to vote.

Not everybody is like that, most people will actually do what you pay them to do. sabaijai mentioned this aswell

This idea is based on the high ethical standards we experience in Thailand, Thai nationals reputation for telling the truth no matter what, and the high respect Thais have of their governments (no matter how many prime ministers they have in a given year, through various methods. None of course resembling an intention to observe democracy or the rule of law).

[eldar1]

One of my friends got paid to vote from both sides he said it was just a bit of extra pocket money.

He then voted for the party of his choice. I mean imagine somebody paid you $200 dollars to vote for them what would you do?

Tell them no thanks? no you would take the money then vote for who wanted to vote.

Not everybody is like that, most people will actually do what you pay them to do. sabaijai mentioned this aswell

This idea is based on the high ethical standards we experience in Thailand, Thai nationals reputation for telling the truth no matter what, and the high respect Thais have of their governments (no matter how many prime ministers they have in a given year, through various methods. None of course resembling an intention to observe democracy or the rule of law).

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. i can see that you were going for sarcasm but i fail to grasp the point you are trying to make.

Vote buying happens here, people usually vote for the guy who pays them, has nothing to do with ethics, just human nature. Sure they lack respect for their government and the ideals of democracy. Thai's do lie but so does every other person.

Or are you trying to say that thai's take the money but then lie who they voted for and vote for the actual person they like and there by uphold the ideals of democracy while having no ethical qualms about taking money for their vote?

[canuckamuck]

One of my friends got paid to vote from both sides he said it was just a bit of extra pocket money.

He then voted for the party of his choice. I mean imagine somebody paid you $200 dollars to vote for them what would you do?

Tell them no thanks? no you would take the money then vote for who wanted to vote.

Not everybody is like that, most people will actually do what you pay them to do. sabaijai mentioned this aswell

This idea is based on the high ethical standards we experience in Thailand, Thai nationals reputation for telling the truth no matter what, and the high respect Thais have of their governments (no matter how many prime ministers they have in a given year, through various methods. None of course resembling an intention to observe democracy or the rule of law).

I'm not quite sure what you are trying to say. i can see that you were going for sarcasm but i fail to grasp the point you are trying to make.

Vote buying happens here, people usually vote for the guy who pays them, has nothing to do with ethics, just human nature. Sure they lack respect for their government and the ideals of democracy. Thai's do lie but so does every other person.

Or are you trying to say that thai's take the money but then lie who they voted for and vote for the actual person they like and there by uphold the ideals of democracy while having no ethical qualms about taking money for their vote?

Your name is Eldar, so I will talk slow.

Please show some proof that people feel obligated to vote for the party from whence they took the money from. From what I have gathered, If someone offers cash, the cash is taken But on Election day they will vote the way the most influential person in the family says to vote.

Why would it be any other way? Thais aren't stupid, but vote buying is.

Edited April 11, 2009 by canuckamuck

[eldar1]

Your name is Eldar, so I will talk slow.

Please show some proof that people feel obligated to vote for the party from whence they took the money from. From what I have gathered, If someone offers cash, the cash is taken But on Election day they will vote the way the most influential person in the family says to vote.

Why would it be any other way? Thais aren't stupid, but vote buying is.

Ahh yes, I’m sorry for not understanding you convoluted poor attempt at sarcasm, next time try harder, it's not that difficult.

I could turn around and place the burden of proof on you, but since that would be futile and infantile I won't. The fact is that humans do what you tell them to do, we have been raised that way and our biological herd instinct enforces it.

I'll try to keep this simple, so that you may understand. When a stranger asks you to do something, say like hold a door, tell the time etc. This is normal behavior, now add a monetary payment in the mix and people will do even more, examples like, here is a tenner could you wait 5 minutes while etc, plenty of examples. People to the weirdest things for money, hence why there are plenty of humiliating game shows and such.

Now vote buying is the norm here in Thailand, most people cannot remember an election where there hasn't been vote buying, so the ethical dilemma people face while exchanging cash for votes is either diminished or not there at all. So all that is really left for people is to think about any future bribes and the potential for adverse situations like physical violence (plenty of reports of intimidation at voting booths)

put all these things together and you get a person very willing to vote the way the person who is paying tells them to vote.

As for your influential family member, while that is certainly an issue here in Thailand, if you pay that person and they then tell their family what to do it all kind of boils down to the same thing.

So yeah vote buying matters and it does influence elections (if it didn't I doubt people will still do it).

[sbk]

Lets keep this civil please.

[JetsetBkk]

... The fact is that humans do what you tell them to do, we have been raised that way and our biological herd instinct enforces it...

Biological what?

My g/f took the money and voted for someone else.

[canuckamuck]

So yeah vote buying matters and it does influence elections (if it didn't I doubt people will still do it).

The only thing you have convinced me of is that you believe your own point of view.

Maybe we disagree because I didn't come from a herd.

Edited April 11, 2009 by canuckamuck

[TheUsernameIsAlreadyTaken]

There is vote buying also in the Philippines, same as in Thailand.

And Philippines has a (fake) democracy! - so what?

[eldar1]

So yeah vote buying matters and it does influence elections (if it didn't I doubt people will still do it).

The only thing you have convinced me of is that you believe your own point of view.

Maybe we disagree because I didn't come from a herd.

Not a mammal then, are you?

[h90]

One of my friends got paid to vote from both sides he said it was just a bit of extra pocket money.

He then voted for the party of his choice. I mean imagine somebody paid you $200 dollars to vote for them what would you do?

Tell them no thanks? no you would take the money then vote for who wanted to vote.

Not everybody is like that, most people will actually do what you pay them to do. sabaijai mentioned this aswell

This idea is based on the high ethical standards we experience in Thailand, Thai nationals reputation for telling the truth no matter what, and the high respect Thais have of their governments (no matter how many prime ministers they have in a given year, through various methods. None of course resembling an intention to observe democracy or the rule of law).

there are checks...pictures with the handycam. getting a part and the other half after the party won in your area etc etc

The beginning (easier to understand) 20 or so years ago, they gave a left shoe and after that area was won they gave the right shoe.

[Longduckdong]

1) Politicians who buy votes are stupid, but if you allow yourself to be bought then you are worse.

2) If you someone gives you money for your vote and then vote for him even if you don't wan't to, then you are just making things worse.

Some might think that accepting money from politicians and voting the other way is smart. It could be so... If you really need the cash.

But, after these politicians spend so much money every election time, what do you think they would do to replenish their political "war" coffers? On their salaries?

Yes, it does matter, for this system, although not all the time, would only spawn more corruption.

My Thai girlfriend and I pray that the Thais would learn this soon. It may take time and a lot of prayers though. Peace and enjoy the holidays. Just remember to not drink and drive. The life you save may be your own.

[BHA83]

When my wife and I were living in Ubon there was an election. Canvassers from both parties knew my wife was married to a farang but she still got money from both parties! Her mind was already made up to who she was going to vote for. She didn't need 200bt that badly but still took it! Wouldn't you? Or are you all so sqeaky clean? Oh, she voted TRT and thanked the democrat for his money!

[TonySoprano]

^^^ You must be mistaken, Democrats never engage in vote buying.

[TonySoprano]

When you spend money on tv ads, campaign rallies, etc you are trying to get your message across to the voters and hopefully your message is attractive enough for them to vote for you. Your opponent is trying to do the same and which ever message the voter identifies closest with gets that voters vote. In this situation the decision is still with the voter and both sides have equal opportunity to swing the vote in their favor.

When you buy votes, you take the free will and equal opportunity out of the equation. Since you just gave money to the voter in exchange for their votem, the voter vote for you no matter what their actual feeling towards your policies. Your opponent also do not have a chance anymore to change that persons mind since you have already paid for it.

Democracy= Voting + free will + equal opportunity

Voting alone a democracy does not make, classic examples are middle-eastern countries (Iraq with the most famous example) and African countries (Zimbabwe again being a prime example)

On paying people to protest, well i guess the thing is that a protest is by the people and thus comes from them and the moment someone else pays people to protest it's not really from the people anymore and thus nothing more than a really big and loud marketing campaign for someone elses' ideals.

1. There is no actual contract to force the person to vote for who pays them, therefore the vote has not been bought, only promised.

2. What if Obama puts out a bunch of donuts at his town hall meetings. are those donuts a gift? what is the cash value? So giving someone $6 is unethical but giving them $6 worth of donuts is OK?

3. Its been said over and over again, ask any farang here married in Isaan that the people will take money from every candidate. Perhaps this is why every candidate participates in the practice.

4. There is still no evidence that certain candidates would not have been elected if there was no vote buying. Its all speculation.