Then why do you keep bugging me to answer a (hypothetical) question?

Edited April 18, 200917 yr by Ulysses G.

l

The democrats need some time to throw a few crumbs to the Issan farmers. Abhisit could make the farmers forget Thaksin by paying some attention that poorest group of people in Thailand. Unfortunately, I'm not sure the rich elite would allow that. The political plan is to keep the farmers ignorant, poor and manipulated to allow the rich to get even richer.

Agree. He does need time. He had only a few cards to play with when he was hoisted in. Some masters to appease initially before he can play the part where he can call his own game. I think the Isaan farmers will get only crumbs for the rest of the year with the biggest influence from the world recession. However that does not mean they will starve while there are frogs in the ditch, rice in the bowl, fish sauce and chilli on the table and the rich farang employing at ฿150, ice water and fish for dinner, per day, wants his trees planted . And some sort of social programming to improve that side of things does not need to bust the kitty. If he can get them through the rest of this year then they are starting to look at recovery with export sales. He needs to push for at least one and half years continued governance. If he can get to there in the direction he is currently heading then the Democrats may get over the 50% needed either by themselves or with some other parties that they have mutual trust with. Completely unlike the current messy garbage in Thailand. We have the same system here in Kiwiland. Here there are two main parties who generally rule and they have to appease 2 or 3 other parties to have governance. We seem to survive OK. As do some of the best democracies within Europe and especially the Scandinavian countries.

The poll result was about what I expected. The PAD and UDD might get more than 5% each but will not influence the Democrats governance. The mob rule mentality carry on by the UDD element of the Reds has cost them a lot of support. And people are seeing the 'good for the goose is the same for the gander' in regard to PAD.

Edited cause my spelling was not 100%

Edited April 18, 200917 yr by Roadman

Question: Then why do you keep bugging me to answer a (hypothetical) question?

Answer: Because i was interested in your answer. (And you accuse me of asking STUPID questions?! )

Did you see how that worked? You asked me a question, i gave you an answer.

Your STUPID question made no sense in the context of our "conversation". No reason to answer it.

Edited April 18, 200917 yr by Ulysses G.

Your STUPID question made no sense in the context of our "conversation". No reason to answer it.

Continually repeating that a question is STUPID doesn't make it true.

I won't waste any time rephrasing the question as i know you are incapable of responding with a simple and direct answer. Instead, i'll just restate the point that i was making:

It's very easy to "listen" and take-on-board the opinion of "respected" Thai businessmen, when they are simply echoing and substantiating your own thoughts. I put it to you that the only reason you respect these people; the only reason you "listen" to them; and the only reason you take-on-board their opinion and come on here to tell us all about it, is simply because they echo the opinion that you have already formed.

To imply that you sat, listened and absorbed the nuggets of wisdom these sage businessmen passed your way before forming your own opinion is plain old bull in my humble opinion. You just listened to them and when they repeated all the things you already believed in you lapped it up like a puppy dog and came rushing on here, tail wagging, to tell us all what you had "learned" and to tell us all wisely that we should all go out and speak to "respected" Thai people before forming our own opinion as you had done.

You're selling crap and i just ain't buying.

There is only one problem. I could normally care less about Thai politics, but I do enjoy hearing about them from the perspective of intelligent local people with real insights into the way things work here. In other words, I did not have an opinion to have them "echo", so your question is just plain dumb.

You can continue to deny it and try to twist the truth as per usual, but I have been honest about my opinions and you are just playing kids games. I am rubber, you are glue...

There is only one problem. I could normally care less about Thai politics, but I do enjoy hearing about them from the perspective of intelligent local people with real insights into the way things work here. In other words, I did not have an opinion to have them "echo", so your question is just plain dumb.

How about that! The one time when i don't ask you a question, you give an answer! Amazing!

It's a shame you hadn't presented such a reasoned and sensible response the first time i posed the question.

I have to say that i do find it difficult to believe that an educated and informed person could have possibly taken in all that has been going on around him/her and yet not formed some sort of an opinion of their own. But if that's what you're telling me, i'll take your word for it.

I had already said all of this before, but you denied that I was telling the truth.

As far as forming my own opinion goes, I find the information that is published in English to be so sketchy and so dishonest that I rather rely on Thai people who I trust to fill in the missing parts of the story.

By the way, I have formed my opinions over a period of time.

Edited April 19, 200917 yr by Ulysses G.

With every major newspaper in the country, both Thai and English-language, strongly condemning Thaksin, the redshirt movment and the political parties that represent them, there is no way the PT can win an election anytime soon.

Edited April 19, 200917 yr by wayfarer108

Err.... if I could gently guide the protagonists back to the original post: these polls are a waste of time, most of the responders vote for what they think SHOULD happen rather than what common sense tells them will.

If Abhisit/Suthep thought an election was winnable the Thais would be lining up to vote tomorrow.

Edit: The rural Thais that support Thaksin don't read major newspapers. If they read a newspaper at all they read the local rag which always promotes the Thaksin line.

Edited April 19, 200917 yr by sceadugenga

I find the newspapers overseas to look much more kindly on the red movement than the yellows.

Edited April 19, 200917 yr by Ulysses G.

There is only one problem. I could normally care less about Thai politics, but I do enjoy hearing about them from the perspective of intelligent local people with real insights into the way things work here. In other words, I did not have an opinion to have them "echo", so your question is just plain dumb.

You can continue to deny it and try to twist the truth as per usual, but I have been honest about my opinions and you are just playing kids games. I am rubber, you are glue...

A question asked from genuine interest and without hostility:

Why do (some) Americans say "I could care less" when they appear to mean "I couldn't care less"?

Some expressions are just what you hear and repeat when you are young. When I hear "I couldn't care less", it sounds "wrong" to me.

I find the newspapers overseas to look much more kindly on the red movement than the yellows.

This is the sketchy and dishonest publishing you spoke of i take it?

It is largely irrelevant this western democracy style of thinking, there will be no landslide for anybody. It's not like the UK (Conservative vs Labour) or the USA (Democrats vs Republicans) in Thailand there are a whole raft of parties with no particular allegiance to anyone or anything. The only thing they crave is a share of the spoils of power and they will dance with the devils to get their slice of pie. It's not like any party publishes any manifesto of any substance so they are free to slide around as they see fit the only goal being to get to the table. Parties are born, dissolved and reformed much like flocks of starlings swooping in the evening sun there is no long term shape to the formations just ever changing patterns against the sky.

Hit the nail on the head.

At the end of the day people, supporters of each of the warring factions I'm sure can come up with a plausible reason for supporting their party but what I find incomprehensible is that some think it is going to change for the better real soon, to those I say, "wake up and smell the coffee" and one other thing,poster on here may even be able to run this country better than or should I say fairerthan the crooks that have been in charge for the last 20yrs, and at the end of the day no one in Thai politics gives a <deleted>> about farangs and their opinions, the british government put out a statement that there were 40,000 brits registered living in the kingdom plus of course the other nationals, think of the money going into the economy, but we still do not count.

Really, we're only here for the argument aren't we?

It won't make any difference to any of us.

Why do (some) Americans say "I could care less" when they appear to mean "I couldn't care less"?

"I couldn't care less" is a statement in itself, whereas "I could care less..." has an implied "but"-clause at the end - "I could care less(, but I don't)". I suspect it's of Jewish origin - imagine Billy Crystal saying it, emphasis on could and with a shrug at the end.

I sometimes use this form and finish it off with something like "I could care less, but the effort would kill me"

With every major newspaper in the country, both Thai and English-language, strongly condemning Thaksin, the redshirt movment and the political parties that represent them, there is no way the PT can win an election anytime soon.

I think you are probably right here however, what seems to be happenning is the 'rural masses' are gradually getting more involved which will make the next few years very interesting. If there was a vote today then the current government would probably win BECAUSE of the recent troubles and therefore have the mandate it may need to carry it through the next few years without to many protests. If it doesn't though the recent events will quickly fade from the minds of those who matter (voters) and unless they do something to win some support in the northern provinces they will be storing up a huge problem for the future when Thaksin can no longer be used as an excuse.

Why do (some) Americans say "I could care less" when they appear to mean "I couldn't care less"?

"I couldn't care less" is a statement in itself, whereas "I could care less..." has an implied "but"-clause at the end - "I could care less(, but I don't)". I suspect it's of Jewish origin - imagine Billy Crystal saying it, emphasis on could and with a shrug at the end.

I sometimes use this form and finish it off with something like "I could care less, but the effort would kill me"

So the American meaning really is opposite to the English, then?

When I say, "I couldn't care less," I mean, "I care about this not at all so that it would be impossible for me to care less than that," whereas, from what you say, the American expression means that the speaker actually does care about the subject, but just not very much.

Thank you for the clarification.

I find the newspapers overseas to look much more kindly on the red movement than the yellows.

This is the sketchy and dishonest publishing you spoke of i take it?

No, that would be the Thai based papers.

Why do (some) Americans say "I could care less" when they appear to mean "I couldn't care less"?

"I couldn't care less" is a statement in itself, whereas "I could care less..." has an implied "but"-clause at the end - "I could care less(, but I don't)". I suspect it's of Jewish origin - imagine Billy Crystal saying it, emphasis on could and with a shrug at the end.

I sometimes use this form and finish it off with something like "I could care less, but the effort would kill me"

So the American meaning really is opposite to the English, then?

When I say, "I couldn't care less," I mean, "I care about this not at all so that it would be impossible for me to care less than that," whereas, from what you say, the American expression means that the speaker actually does care about the subject, but just not very much.

Thank you for the clarification.

My interpretation is that the American meaning is pretty much the same as the British one. As our hosts say, you think too much!

Err.... if I could gently guide the protagonists back to the original post: these polls are a waste of time, most of the responders vote for what they think SHOULD happen rather than what common sense tells them will.

If Abhisit/Suthep thought an election was winnable the Thais would be lining up to vote tomorrow.

Edit: The rural Thais that support Thaksin don't read major newspapers. If they read a newspaper at all they read the local rag which always promotes the Thaksin line.

Wrong. Where's your evidence supporting this fantasy? The two most widely read Thai newspapers nationwide, Daily News and Thai Rath, both have strongly condemned Thaksin and the redshirt movement. Second of all, public opinion polls surveying a cross section of the population throughout Thailand also indicate that if elections were held now, the Demos would dominate even further than they did during the last parliamentary shuffle.

Or are you suggesting that most remaining Thaksin supporters are illiterate?

Why do (some) Americans say "I could care less" when they appear to mean "I couldn't care less"?

"I couldn't care less" is a statement in itself, whereas "I could care less..." has an implied "but"-clause at the end - "I could care less(, but I don't)". I suspect it's of Jewish origin - imagine Billy Crystal saying it, emphasis on could and with a shrug at the end.

I sometimes use this form and finish it off with something like "I could care less, but the effort would kill me"

So the American meaning really is opposite to the English, then?

When I say, "I couldn't care less," I mean, "I care about this not at all so that it would be impossible for me to care less than that," whereas, from what you say, the American expression means that the speaker actually does care about the subject, but just not very much.

Thank you for the clarification.

My interpretation is that the American meaning is pretty much the same as the British one. As our hosts say, you think too much!

I have to plead guilty. Try as I may, I just cannot help saying what I mean instead of the opposite of what I mean.