Which Would Prove Better For The Country? An Election Now Or Wait Until There Is Some Global Financial Stability?

[thailandlover]

Given that the global financial crisis is far from over, do you think it would be better for Thailand to have an election now, as things stand or to wait until at least the end of the year in the hopes that things will be more stable?

Edited May 25, 2009 by sbk

[PattayaParent]

Why only those 2 options?

Why not in 2 years? 4 years?

[thailandlover]

I could ask a moderator to add 2 years to the poll but do you really think it likely that the current government would and could wait that long?

[Jingthing]

I could ask a moderator to add 2 years to the poll but do you really think it likely that the current government would and could wait that long?

I agree. You need longer out options. I didn't vote. Cheers!

[sbk]

Longer term options added per OP request

[oldsparrow]

The last one was on 23 Dec 07 so it can be around 2.5 years at the longest.

From the pol. point of view, when the Democrat feel secure of their vote and don't have to rely on Newin and Banharn groups to form government.

The TRT came after the Democrat by Mr. Chuan Leekpai dissolved parliament and lost the house to Thaksin. I think they remember this well and now will hold on to the last breath.

[bravingbangkok]

2 years but I fear even then nothing will be sorted out.

[antony77]

Given that the global financial crisis is far from over, do you think it would be better for Thailand to have an election now, as things stand or to wait until at least the end of the year in the hopes that things will be more stable?

Abhsit's popularity is high at the moment and Peua Thai is in disaray. An election now would see Abhsit back in power with a much stronger coalition and the Peua Thai would lose a lot of seats. However on the other hand it would disrupt efforts to solve the economic problems. But it should be worth it in the long run and it would weaken the red shirts who could then no longer claim that the present government is illegal.

[Orac]

I would argue that the current global economic problems make a sooner election more important than waiting for a more stable situation.

By providing a stronger mandate and longer term to make the tough decisions that may be required would hopefully be better than a government having to make short term, populist decisions to get re-elected. Thailand, along with the rest of the world, is going to go through a very difficult few years and any effective goverment would need concentrate on governing and not campaigning - better get this done now so that Thailand can start moving forwards again.

[PoorSucker]

Given that the global financial crisis is far from over, do you think it would be better for Thailand to have an election now, as things stand or to wait until at least the end of the year in the hopes that things will be more stable?

Abhsit's popularity is high at the moment and Peua Thai is in disaray. An election now would see Abhsit back in power with a much stronger coalition and the Peua Thai would lose a lot of seats. However on the other hand it would disrupt efforts to solve the economic problems. But it should be worth it in the long run and it would weaken the red shirts who could then no longer claim that the present government is illegal.

Wouldn't matter.

The Reds would claim the erection was fixed because they said it on truth today.

[Plus]

There will be no elections until constitution is fixed, in about six months. Calling elections now is impossible, so there's not point in this poll.

If const. doesn't pass the referendum, Abhisit can stay for as long as he can keep his coalition together.

If his coalition desintegrates, the new government will have exactly the same problems, minus several months to get a working government together.

Realistically - there's no one else who can make any kind of decisions to stave off the crisis. PTP si headless and Thaksin proposed Chavalit as a new party leader. How much confidence does that inspire?