Decline In Thaksin's Popularity

[webfact]

CAMBODIA CRISIS IMPACT

Pheu Thai Party remains unfazed

By Somroutai Sapsomboon

Kornchanok Raksaseri

The Nation

Published on November 18, 2009

Pheu Thai Party remains unfazed

Decline in Thaksin's popularity not worrisome because no polls ahead

It is clear that fugitive ex-PM Thaksin Shinawatra's recent actions seem to be bringing him and Pheu Thai Party down in the popularity stakes, because he is widely being seen as the main factor behind worsening ties between Thailand and Cambodia.

Though many key Pheu Thai members conceded that most people did not approve of their boss's friendship with Cambodian PM Hun Sen, they don't seem to be worried and are not looking for any methods to rebuild this sagging popularity. Many of the followers seem to think it does not matter if there are no elections coming up.

"When it comes to an election, the voters would consider the government's achievements. But the election is far away because this government is likely to stay until the end or until the House is dissolved," a Pheu Thai source, who asked not to be named, said. "Thais forget easily. They will forget this soon."

In the scheme of things, the source said, Thaksin did not really lose. At least, he has a safe haven where the government cannot hound him.

Another key Pheu Thai member said the party did not need to adjust any of its strategies because there were no elections coming up.

"We have to see who in the long run gains or loses this game," he said.

"At least, the reasons Hun Sen gave for not extraditing Thaksin to Thailand have attracted attention from the international community. No one had said that before. Hun Sen is the leader of a country with a shared border with Thailand, his words should have some credibility," the source said.

Still, he thinks Thaksin did not choose the right time for these moves.

"We were surprised when Thaksin took those steps unexpectedly. But frankly, he owns the party and has the right to do anything. Nobody can stop him. Nobody dare criticise him. We didn't even discuss the issue at the party meeting," the source said.

Caretaker leader of the now-defunct Thai Rak Thai Party, Chaturon Chaisang, who lost his voting rights just like Thaksin and many others, said the former PM might have made a mistake.

"We have to accept that the Democrat-led government took the chance of provoking patriotism and this affected Thaksin, Pheu Thai and the red shirts," Chaturon said.

Pheu Thai deputy leader Panpree Pahitthanukorn said the party's MPs acknowledged the adverse effect, but were not worried because elections were not due soon. Moreover, the party does not want a diplomatic row and hopes the relations would soon return to normal because there is not much point in neighbours fighting.

A Democrat source, who asked not to be named, said though Pheu Thai and Thaksin seem to be dropping in popularity in the short term, it is uncertain what will happen in the long run.

Pheu Thai and Thaksin were making a desperate "do-or-die" attempt to stage a comeback, the source said, and even though their approval ratings are sagging, Pheu Thai is quite happy to take the risk as long as they can topple the Democrat government.

However, it is clear that Thaksin remains very influential in the party, the source said.

"Popularity levels fluctuate greatly when a country is in crisis," the source said. "If the country enters a war or the House is dissolved, people will soon forget where the problems started."

Pheu Thai's "do-or-die" measures include affecting international relations, questioning the judicial system, humiliating the government on the international platform and obstructing Parliament, the Democrat source said.

-- The Nation 2009/11/18

[newsfooter][/newsfooter]

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Really good and article, and so objective, honest and factual!

Edited November 18, 2009 by WinnieTheKhwai

[Hardback]

Really good and article, and so objective, honest and factual!

Of course it is, it comes from the The Nation.

The Nation wants to make out that the reds are all about Thaksin, this stifles debate. There is much more to the reds than just one man.

[animatic]

"We have to accept that the Democrat-led government took the chance of provoking patriotism and this affected Thaksin, Pheu Thai and the red shirts," Chaturon said.

Lovely line this, does he really think patriotism is provoked?

At least PTP is clearly admitting that:

via Chaturon's words: Thaksin 'Owns the party."

They think they can't win right now, partly because of Thaksin's bad moves,

so try and push that off and say it doesn't matter.

That PTP thinks that the Dems can last their whole term.

That it is a COME BACK, do or die.

They think the next election issues will ONLY be about the Governments record,

and not all the trouble and heart ache Thaksin and crew have caused the average Thai Somchai.

In other words they are really way behind in most measures except Dr. T.'s PR efforts.

Edited November 18, 2009 by animatic

[Dpolenz]

I'm not on any side,yellow nor reds,but i do think Thaksin is a bit of a lunatic.

[hammered]

Its always interesting to hear gossip from inside parties. Obviosuly it reamins at that level. Interesting that both parites seem to think come an election this will not have an affect.

[Steve2UK]

Well, The Nation does what The Nation does........ FWIW, with the exception of Chang Noi's pieces, I think just about all their coverage should come with a health warning - and certainly anything properly regarded as political "news" reporting. From what I see, just one "source" is actually named - so I read the rest with that in mind. Did they say in as many words what The Nation says they did? Then again, as we're reminded so often on TVF, there's no shortage of brain-not-engaged-before-mouth-opens characters in Pheu Thai - so it doesn't seem difficult to garner the "quotes" in this piece.

On the subject of popularity, I think it's worth looking at a chart of ABAC poll results (and comments about them) at http://www.tumblerblog.com/2009/11/snapsho...its-popularity/ which compares Abhisit v. Thaksin numbers in six polls March-November this year. Health warnings for this: it's a blog quoting/translating results reported in The Manager's article about ABAC polls - and maybe that's enough for many to ignore it for their choice of reason (my main problem, discussed elsewhere, is having much confidence in what ABAC do - but we have to work with what we've got).

As the accompanying text notes, when Abhisit looks strong (Songkran and Cambodia) he gets a rating boost - and Thaksin the reverse. Too early now to know what happens as and when the Cambodia fuss subsides - but post-Songkran Abhisit's figures slumped again while Thaksin's at least recovered and actually went significantly higher than pre-Songkran. An echo, maybe, of the anonymous "Thais forget easily. They will forget this soon." comment cited in the article. The text also quotes Democrat Korbsak Sabhavasu admitting on Twitter that "emotional popularity is short lived".

With that in mind, it seems reasonable to suppose that a] Thaksin takes a stoical long view of his popularity and may well regard the dips as short-lived "blips" (if only through wishful thinking) and b] Abhisit doesn't have that much reason to feel reliably secure. Abhisit can maintain the strong man/alpha male stance for a while (probably playing all the nationalist cards he can find), but there comes a point when those expected to "do" (i.e. govern) must actually get on with doing (i.e. sort out and solve problems). Easy for those on the sidelines - PAD and Pheu Thai - to just make noise; governments are expected to achieve more than that.

Note to animatic: I'm no Thai linguist any more than much of The Nation's writing shows them to be English linguists - but the original Thai word used very possibly connotes "invoke" rather than "provoke". Frankly, I don't think it makes much sense to pounce gleefully on one word when what was said in Thai has gone through The Nation's conversion mill. You're not in Kansas anymore.......

[Wolfie]

There is much more to the reds than just one man.

Are you sure about that? Seems to me that the reds are totaly about that one man...

[hammered]

Well, The Nation does what The Nation does........ FWIW, with the exception of Chang Noi's pieces, I think just about all their coverage should come with a health warning - and certainly anything properly regarded as political "news" reporting. From what I see, just one "source" is actually named - so I read the rest with that in mind. Did they say in as many words what The Nation says they did? Then again, as we're reminded so often on TVF, there's no shortage of brain-not-engaged-before-mouth-opens characters in Pheu Thai - so it doesn't seem difficult to garner the "quotes" in this piece.

On the subject of popularity, I think it's worth looking at a chart of ABAC poll results (and comments about them) at http://www.tumblerblog.com/2009/11/snapsho...its-popularity/ which compares Abhisit v. Thaksin numbers in six polls March-November this year. Health warnings for this: it's a blog quoting/translating results reported in The Manager's article about ABAC polls - and maybe that's enough for many to ignore it for their choice of reason (my main problem, discussed elsewhere, is having much confidence in what ABAC do - but we have to work with what we've got).

As the accompanying text notes, when Abhisit looks strong (Songkran and Cambodia) he gets a rating boost - and Thaksin the reverse. Too early now to know what happens as and when the Cambodia fuss subsides - but post-Songkran Abhisit's figures slumped again while Thaksin's at least recovered and actually went significantly higher than pre-Songkran. An echo, maybe, of the anonymous "Thais forget easily. They will forget this soon." comment cited in the article. The text also quotes Democrat Korbsak Sabhavasu admitting on Twitter that "emotional popularity is short lived".

With that in mind, it seems reasonable to suppose that a] Thaksin takes a stoical long view of his popularity and may well regard the dips as short-lived "blips" (if only through wishful thinking) and b] Abhisit doesn't have that much reason to feel reliably secure. Abhisit can maintain the strong man/alpha male stance for a while (probably playing all the nationalist cards he can find), but there comes a point when those expected to "do" (i.e. govern) must actually get on with doing (i.e. sort out and solve problems). Easy for those on the sidelines - PAD and Pheu Thai - to just make noise; governments are expected to achieve more than that.

Note to animatic: I'm no Thai linguist any more than much of The Nation's writing shows them to be English linguists - but the original Thai word used very possibly connotes "invoke" rather than "provoke". Frankly, I don't think it makes much sense to pounce gleefully on one word when what was said in Thai has gone through The Nation's conversion mill. You're not in Kansas anymore.......

Dont want to comment on polls as they bore me However, whether or not Abhisit can maintain ther strong man/alpha male image is also dependent on what his opponents do. I think we can fairly assume there is some opinion within the PTP hierarchy that Thaksin has tossed a few too many bones the last few days. However, why would anyone assume the same will continue. You need your opponent to at least do soemthing provocatuve before you can run in and play the hard man. To do so with no provocation justs leads to you being seen a bully.

Sits back and awaits to be proven utterly wrong with a repeat of the Songkhran incident this coming weekend;)

[WinnieTheKhwai]

On the subject of popularity, I think it's worth looking at a chart of ABAC poll results (and comments about them) at http://www.tumblerblog.com/2009/11/snapsho...its-popularity/ which compares Abhisit v. Thaksin numbers in six polls March-November this year. Health warnings for this: it's a blog quoting/translating results reported in The Manager's article about ABAC polls - and maybe that's enough for many to ignore it for their choice of reason (my main problem, discussed elsewhere, is having much confidence in what ABAC do - but we have to work with what we've got).

ABAC seem to intentionally put a leading question just before the main question. Like they would ask first "Did you know that Thaksin visited Hun Sen at a time the Cambodian army shot at Thai troops at the border." And then right after that they ask the question on how much the respondent likes Thaksin, having framed it into the context of this event. You can and do skew polls that way. Plus quite often they don't bother to ask anyone outside of the Greater Bangkok area. That makes a poll pretty meaningless, too. (other than on the opinion in that particular area)

Abhisit can maintain the strong man/alpha male stance for a while (probably playing all the nationalist cards he can find), but there comes a point when those expected to "do" (i.e. govern) must actually get on with doing (i.e. sort out and solve problems). Easy for those on the sidelines - PAD and Pheu Thai - to just make noise; governments are expected to achieve more than that.

Very true. And, when was the last time we saw an article on Abhisit actually doing something that's somewhat related to running the country?

[KhaoNiaw]

The Nation wants to make out that the reds are all about Thaksin, this stifles debate. There is much more to the reds than just one man.

It depends on which reds you talk to. The fact that for some reds it is only about Thaksin stifles what could be a more potent movement.

You don't see the reds mobilising at local level in support of the low-key small-scale demonstrations that occur locally and come to Bangkok. There was no attempt to carry the red momentum into the recent local elections. The reds just get mobilised to show support for Thaksin. Hopefully something that can genuinely offer more to the people will eventually emerge.

Edited November 18, 2009 by KhaoNiaw

[Insight]

Abhisit can maintain the strong man/alpha male stance for a while (probably playing all the nationalist cards he can find), but there comes a point when those expected to "do" (i.e. govern) must actually get on with doing (i.e. sort out and solve problems). Easy for those on the sidelines - PAD and Pheu Thai - to just make noise; governments are expected to achieve more than that.

Very true. And, when was the last time we saw an article on Abhisit actually doing something that's somewhat related to running the country?

Antagonistic comment.

Thaksin has made every effort to keep himself in the English language newspapers and keep the government busy in recent weeks, and there are complaints about the government not actually serving the country during this period?

Turn on the breakfast news on Ch 3 of a morning and you'll see plenty of other goings on.

[Steve2UK]

Dont want to comment on polls as they bore me However, whether or not Abhisit can maintain ther strong man/alpha male image is also dependent on what his opponents do. I think we can fairly assume there is some opinion within the PTP hierarchy that Thaksin has tossed a few too many bones the last few days. However, why would anyone assume the same will continue. You need your opponent to at least do soemthing provocatuve before you can run in and play the hard man. To do so with no provocation justs leads to you being seen a bully.

Sits back and awaits to be proven utterly wrong with a repeat of the Songkhran incident this coming weekend;)

Largely agree and logic suggests that PTP would do better to just maintain steady pressure (but basically behave themselves i.e. nothing too provocative or disruptive) - and just sit back while the present coalition weakens further by itself. But logic and Thai politicians? They seem to be very distant cousins.

Regarding strong man acts without provocation, I think Abhisit could still do that for a while and the "bully" aspect wouldn't be a bother to him in the short term - little chance of the boys in green objecting nor PAD if the acts are wrapped in the flag and have three-core-pillars branding. But my point earlier is that it's a] not enough because b] by itself it solves nothing long-term - and more people will eventually start asking "So, where's the reconciliation and an end to all this turmoil so I can get on with making a few baht?". It also distracts from the "what we have achieved for you" message that's surely essential to ("re-")election for a Democrat-led coalition.

To WinnieTheKwai and Insight...... Plainly Abhisit & Co have done much more than take a well-guarded helicopter ride to hand a long-overdue cheque to a granny and largely copy/augment much of Thaksin's earlier project (particularly as part of the stimulus packages), but I think the message about those worthy actions is getting drowned out far too often by their reactions to anything and everything that Thaksin does. Fine, of course Thaksin does all he can to stay in the news - but does the government really have to do quite so much to amplify his importance and thereby do so much of Thaksin's work for him?

[oswaldbkk]

Really good and article, and so objective, honest and factual!

Does anybody see and problems with border crossings between Thailand and Cambodia in the near future due to this diplomatic row?

[Wolfie]

Does anybody see and problems with border crossings between Thailand and Cambodia in the near future due to this diplomatic row?

If your Thaksin then yes, but for now the borders remain open to everyone else

[virtualtraveller]

regardless of the Nation's standpoint, let's call a spade a spade here: if Thaksin had pulled this stunt in any sane and mature democracy it would have sunk him and his party at an imminent or future election but not here in Thailand, where a blatant trouble maker and insulter of Thai pride still gets to make a comeback at the polls. How sad.

It's not so much what Thaksin has done well during his premiership, it's the damage he's done since then that really should be a measure of the man. Regardless of the coup circumstances he's played very dirty and selfishly for a man who wants to apparently lead this country to unity and prosperity.

[geriatrickid]

Is it me being naive, but it seems if Mr. Thaksin shut his yap for a bit, kept a low profile and only offered platitudes, his popularity might grow with time?

If one looks at past history with world leaders, it seems to work. Recent examples are Richard Nixon. A true guttersnipe, yet with time people many people forgave him or forgot what he did. Edward Heath's fiascos were forgiven, Francois Mitterand's cosying up to African despots ignored and of course Ronald Reagan, the man that gave the USA its biggest deficits and set the path to the current economic crisis is now lauded as a great man. Perhaps with time, Mr. Thaksin too will be adored. However, he needs to hush first.

[Publicus]

The Nation wants to make out that the reds are all about Thaksin, this stifles debate. There is much more to the reds than just one man.

It depends on which reds you talk to. The fact that for some reds it is only about Thaksin stifles what could be a more potent movement.

You don't see the reds mobilising at local level in support of the low-key small-scale demonstrations that occur locally and come to Bangkok. There was no attempt to carry the red momentum into the recent local elections. The reds just get mobilised to show support for Thaksin. Hopefully something that can genuinely offer more to the people will eventually emerge.

The reds aren't going to go away because, apart from the concern for Thaksin that so many have, people from the North and Northeast in general do have more than enuff historically legitimate concerns to press against the elites of Thai society the PAD represents. The long established Thai elites not only haven't any concern for the peasantry north and east of Bangkok, they haven't any concern for the poor and uneducated of Thailand in general.

However, the poor and neglected of Thailand will get nowhere unless and until they decidedly and clearly separate themselves from Thaksin. Thaksin is eternally divisive. He's a dangerous strongman who is the antithesis to the more ligitimate democracy the peasants claim they seek. Thaksin has served their purposes. The fact has been true for some time already. Thaksin back in power would resemble the immediate aftermath of the French Revolution.

[Lunar]

Well, that is a wishful-thinking article if I ever saw one. But I have been told repeatedly on this board not to be so dam_n naiive...all media everywhere is biased in one direction or the other. I could parse this article and come up with any number of bias-loaded references, ie the use of the word 'boss', etc., but never mind.

The two references however, that struck me as being most at odds with reality were:

> Someone from the Pheu Thai being quoted as suggesting an election is far off. I read yesterday in another Domestic media source that the UDD is planning a humongous rally in BKK at the end of the month. They are expecting over 1-million to turn out with the express purpose of finally eliminating this non-representative Government. Doesn't sound to me that elections are a distant thing.

>suggesting that recent actions somehow has affected Mr. Thaksin detrimentally. That is not the impression I get. Quite the opposite, it is the recent actions of the powers-that-be which show a degree of desparation. Everyone knows that the staged explosion at the PAD/Democrat Party rally and this fabricated kefuffle with Cambodia is all geared to generate the notion of external enemies and internal crisis. This age-old tactic by insecure Govts. is well known and no-one is fooled this time.......unless you are the PAD...they are true believers and follow this line of reasoning with enthusiasm. But they are the only ones and they are the minority.

I was amused by the travails of a local politician embroiled in all this stuff. There is a large UDD rally planned for this area this weekend, as there are in many other places, gearing up for the trek to BKK. As you know, successful Politicians are those who find the biggest crowd and get in front of it. That is easy to do in this largely non-ideological political world. This guy is in one of the splinter groups. I think Newin's, but I'm not sure. He really wants to participate in this local UDD rally and has been invited on stage. He knows it is the biggest crowd for the future. But he also doesn't want to shit on the bed where he now lies. Poor guy is between a rock and a hard place.

And before any of you jump all over this notion of politicians getting in front of the biggest crowd, suggesting that Thaksin is doing the same thing, keep in mind this IS his crowd. He created it. These are the people who gave him all those electoral pluralities. People are just trying to take it away from him with this orchestrated demonization campaign. Trying to get at him with this recent Nationalism effort just doesn't fly with this crowd. They see through it clearly.

And because this is my only post of the day, let me also anticipate a challenge to my reference to the non-representative nature of the Govt. I have read some of you defend the process that happened. And I agree in part, that technically speaking, there was an air of legitimacy to the parliamentary procedures which created the current situation. But lets kid our friends, but not each other.....everyone knows that behind the scenes the 'books were cooked' extensively, and covered with this thin veneer of parliamentary procedures. Bottom line....this is a non-representative Govt., and until they win an election, that will remain the case.

Awright, enough of this drivel...again. I'm outta here.

[hammered]

Well, that is a wishful-thinking article if I ever saw one. But I have been told repeatedly on this board not to be so dam_n naiive...all media everywhere is biased in one direction or the other. I could parse this article and come up with any number of bias-loaded references, ie the use of the word 'boss', etc., but never mind.

The two references however, that struck me as being most at odds with reality were:

> Someone from the Pheu Thai being quoted as suggesting an election is far off. I read yesterday in another Domestic media source that the UDD is planning a humongous rally in BKK at the end of the month. They are expecting over 1-million to turn out with the express purpose of finally eliminating this non-representative Government. Doesn't sound to me that elections are a distant thing.

>suggesting that recent actions somehow has affected Mr. Thaksin detrimentally. That is not the impression I get. Quite the opposite, it is the recent actions of the powers-that-be which show a degree of desparation. Everyone knows that the staged explosion at the PAD/Democrat Party rally and this fabricated kefuffle with Cambodia is all geared to generate the notion of external enemies and internal crisis. This age-old tactic by insecure Govts. is well known and no-one is fooled this time.......unless you are the PAD...they are true believers and follow this line of reasoning with enthusiasm. But they are the only ones and they are the minority.

I was amused by the travails of a local politician embroiled in all this stuff. There is a large UDD rally planned for this area this weekend, as there are in many other places, gearing up for the trek to BKK. As you know, successful Politicians are those who find the biggest crowd and get in front of it. That is easy to do in this largely non-ideological political world. This guy is in one of the splinter groups. I think Newin's, but I'm not sure. He really wants to participate in this local UDD rally and has been invited on stage. He knows it is the biggest crowd for the future. But he also doesn't want to shit on the bed where he now lies. Poor guy is between a rock and a hard place.

And before any of you jump all over this notion of politicians getting in front of the biggest crowd, suggesting that Thaksin is doing the same thing, keep in mind this IS his crowd. He created it. These are the people who gave him all those electoral pluralities. People are just trying to take it away from him with this orchestrated demonization campaign. Trying to get at him with this recent Nationalism effort just doesn't fly with this crowd. They see through it clearly.

And because this is my only post of the day, let me also anticipate a challenge to my reference to the non-representative nature of the Govt. I have read some of you defend the process that happened. And I agree in part, that technically speaking, there was an air of legitimacy to the parliamentary procedures which created the current situation. But lets kid our friends, but not each other.....everyone knows that behind the scenes the 'books were cooked' extensively, and covered with this thin veneer of parliamentary procedures. Bottom line....this is a non-representative Govt., and until they win an election, that will remain the case.

Awright, enough of this drivel...again. I'm outta here.

Interesting comment actually. Why only post one a day? I dont agree with all of it but I dont disagree with all of it either.

[rixalex]

Is it me being naive, but it seems if Mr. Thaksin shut his yap for a bit, kept a low profile and only offered platitudes, his popularity might grow with time?

I think had Thaksin done just this from the get go (by that i mean from the time of his ousting), his popularity right now would be very big.

How hard would it have been to keep his mouth shut and enjoy his wealth, which even if diminished would be significantly more than any of us could dream of? Not hard at all i would have thought, but he just doesn't seem to be capable of lying low. Guess that's what being the top dog for such a long time does to people. Going back to being just another Joe Bloggs just doesn't cut the mustard.

[Samuian]

snip------>.........Abhisit doesn't have that much reason to feel reliably secure. Abhisit can maintain the strong man/alpha male stance for a while (probably playing all the nationalist cards he can find), but there comes a point when those expected to "do" (i.e. govern) must actually get on with doing (i.e. sort out and solve problems)...............<-----snip

Interesting act you've written..."Alpha Male" always thought these were the one's who carry the shield around where Thaksin is standing on...Samak, Chalerm, Nattawut, the "Northeastern Rambo", Noppadon the "Chief Denier", I mean there are many, many people around the Thaksin Circus which fit the "alpha male" role way more perfect then Abhisit and his team and now the sabre rattling eEx-Khmer Rouge Hun Sen with is incredible record for being one of the "best and most honest world leaders" ...I found your 'cris-cross-design" a quite interesting concept tries to sell the adverse for real.... it's a well known red shirt tactic and therefor far from honest, objective or unbiased!

[Samuian]

Is it me being naive, but it seems if Mr. Thaksin shut his yap for a bit, kept a low profile and only offered platitudes, his popularity might grow with time?

I think had Thaksin done just this from the get go (by that i mean from the time of his ousting), his popularity right now would be very big.

How hard would it have been to keep his mouth shut and enjoy his wealth, which even if diminished would be significantly more than any of us could dream of? Not hard at all i would have thought, but he just doesn't seem to be capable of lying low. Guess that's what being the top dog for such a long time does to people. Going back to being just another Joe Bloggs just doesn't cut the mustard.

He want's his revenge, it's his nature, how he sued each and everyone for the smallest glitch, the FEER Story is a very good example that this guy has lost it long time ago, lost it in the vast foggy swamps of his mega - ego!

"Don't dare to oppose me"!

There is every possible reason to believe that he thinks that this is all a giant conspiracy against him!

His move into Hun Sens arms....is a desperate one, he can't sit and wait, this man wants results, his "life savings" back, his face restored fast, if the story with the prostrate cancer is true.... the danger emitted by this mans deeds can easily be spelled in red capitol letters!

He seeks the confrontation on all fronts.... and he won't stop at nothing soon, unless he is stopped!

His moves will get ever more desperate, because time DOES work against him....!

Thais not only forget and forgive easy in day to day matters, but also once "famous" characters, however a return after all, would

turn Thanom into a fairy tale soldier...

He would turn upside down, once and for all, he wouldn't make the same mistake again!

"I am the proper democratically elected Prime Minister, I am the legitimate prime Minister, I am the Prime Minister elected by the people...!"

yeah' yeah' yeah....

Yes, elected with bought votes, with thoroughly rigged elections, rigged to a point that the Dem's saw no chance to have a fair competition in the elections - that is why they boycotted them!

Thaksin and TRT "knew" before, that they will have an uncompromisable majority and this made many people lift their eyebrows and have a closer look into the populist moves....no vote of confidence, no petition could have ever ousted is government as the Spokesman doesn't make it a secret that the Peua Thai is "his party"!

As more time passes, more and more insight will be possible, the charades will fade!

He want's Thailand to be "his country" as much as it is his Party and it's members are his subordinates, where do all the other "rumors" all of a sudden come from?

Not out of thin air, that is as sure as the sun rises every mornin'!

Edited November 18, 2009 by Samuian

[Steve2UK]

The reds aren't going to go away because, apart from the concern for Thaksin that so many have, people from the North and Northeast in general do have more than enuff historically legitimate concerns to press against the elites of Thai society the PAD represents. The long established Thai elites not only haven't any concern for the peasantry north and east of Bangkok, they haven't any concern for the poor and uneducated of Thailand in general.

However, the poor and neglected of Thailand will get nowhere unless and until they decidedly and clearly separate themselves from Thaksin. Thaksin is eternally divisive. He's a dangerous strongman who is the antithesis to the more ligitimate democracy the peasants claim they seek. Thaksin has served their purposes. The fact has been true for some time already. Thaksin back in power would resemble the immediate aftermath of the French Revolution.

Excellent summary. If I differ at all, it's only* that I do see the poor and neglected getting there - but more slowly until/unless they make the split rather than never. That said, past precedent e.g. Assembly of the Poor etc doesn't reassure - pretty much all of the previous rural/poor movements eventually got stitched up by those with the power (including Thaksin). I could add that I think they're less interested in democracy than at long last getting a fair shake (share, if you like).

*Oh - and Thaksin back in power more like the early Napoleonic (no - not as emperor) phase than Robespierre & Co.

[Steve2UK]

snip------>.........Abhisit doesn't have that much reason to feel reliably secure. Abhisit can maintain the strong man/alpha male stance for a while (probably playing all the nationalist cards he can find), but there comes a point when those expected to "do" (i.e. govern) must actually get on with doing (i.e. sort out and solve problems)...............<-----snip

Interesting act you've written..."Alpha Male" always thought these were the one's who carry the shield around where Thaksin is standing on...Samak, Chalerm, Nattawut, the "Northeastern Rambo", Noppadon the "Chief Denier", I mean there are many, many people around the Thaksin Circus which fit the "alpha male" role way more perfect then Abhisit and his team and now the sabre rattling eEx-Khmer Rouge Hun Sen with is incredible record for being one of the "best and most honest world leaders" ...I found your 'cris-cross-design" a quite interesting concept tries to sell the adverse for real.... it's a well known red shirt tactic and therefor far from honest, objective or unbiased!

Sorry Samuian, try as I might I can't fathom what you're talking about or getting at. Happy to respond if you choose to clarify.

[SpoliaOpima]

Really good and article, and so objective, honest and factual!

Of course it is, it comes from the The Nation.

The Nation wants to make out that the reds are all about Thaksin, this stifles debate. There is much more to the reds than just one man.

Yeah that's why whenever they demonstrate they carry portraits and banners of beloved Chairman Thaksin.

[Hardback]

The Nation wants to make out that the reds are all about Thaksin, this stifles debate. There is much more to the reds than just one man.

It depends on which reds you talk to. The fact that for some reds it is only about Thaksin stifles what could be a more potent movement.

You don't see the reds mobilising at local level in support of the low-key small-scale demonstrations that occur locally and come to Bangkok. There was no attempt to carry the red momentum into the recent local elections. The reds just get mobilised to show support for Thaksin. Hopefully something that can genuinely offer more to the people will eventually emerge.

I totally agree. For some, the Thaksin issue detracts from their very real concerns regarding disenfranchisement and military interference in the democratic process. Outspoken (and now fugitive) former Chulalongkorn University professor Giles Ungpakorn is one "red" who has no love for Thaksin and is in fact a very loud critic of him.

[SpoliaOpima]

Is it me being naive, but it seems if Mr. Thaksin shut his yap for a bit, kept a low profile and only offered platitudes, his popularity might grow with time?

If one looks at past history with world leaders, it seems to work. Recent examples are Richard Nixon. A true guttersnipe, yet with time people many people forgave him or forgot what he did. Edward Heath's fiascos were forgiven, Francois Mitterand's cosying up to African despots ignored and of course Ronald Reagan, the man that gave the USA its biggest deficits and set the path to the current economic crisis is now lauded as a great man. Perhaps with time, Mr. Thaksin too will be adored. However, he needs to hush first.

Impossible. As he himself has admitted on occasion, his worst enemy is his own mouth.

Lacking character, breeding and bearing, he always falls flat on his face even after rigging his biggest successes. Where discretion is the better part of valour, he has none.

On the other hand the more he becomes the underdog, the more chance he has to pull himself up. Poor guy, I noticed recently he has slipped in the Forbes rankings and is now only the 14th richest Thai citizen.

Do any among the Red-leaning members here really think he has the guts lead a Red March from Cambodia through Isan, as recently promised?

[rixalex]

For some, the Thaksin issue detracts from their very real concerns regarding disenfranchisement and military interference in the democratic process.

Do you really think that the issue of military interference is the concern for most of these people?

Suppose that tomorrow the military interfered to oust Abhisit and install Thaksin as the PM. Would their protests continue do you suppose?

[SpoliaOpima]

The Nation wants to make out that the reds are all about Thaksin, this stifles debate. There is much more to the reds than just one man.

It depends on which reds you talk to. The fact that for some reds it is only about Thaksin stifles what could be a more potent movement.

You don't see the reds mobilising at local level in support of the low-key small-scale demonstrations that occur locally and come to Bangkok. There was no attempt to carry the red momentum into the recent local elections. The reds just get mobilised to show support for Thaksin. Hopefully something that can genuinely offer more to the people will eventually emerge.

I totally agree. For some, the Thaksin issue detracts from their very real concerns regarding disenfranchisement and military interference in the democratic process. Outspoken (and now fugitive) former Chulalongkorn University professor Giles Ungpakorn is one "red" who has no love for Thaksin and is in fact a very loud critic of him.

Ji also diverges from the majority of the Reds in his Trotskyist political orientation, his membership in the International Socialist Tendency (IST, led by the Socialist Workers Party) and his outspoken opposition to the Thai monarchy.

Hardly a unifying figure among the Reds' rank and file, I would think.

http://www.istendency.net/