Decline In Thaksin's Popularity

[timonase]

the good thing is.............nobody can order me to only read" The Nation"

[sabaijai]

( with regard to Ungpakorn's political stripes,I take it that you are also aware of the background of Chaturon Chaisang who is a unifying, very popular and hugely influential member of the Thaksin team)

Those of you who were here in 2006 may remember that Chaturon was acting PM for a few months when Thaksin 'stepped aside' from politics during the Temmasak/Shincorp fiasco. Of course, after being out of the limelight for a while Thaksin reminded everyone that he 'hadn't really resigned, he'd just been resting' & it was out with the acting PM and back into the driver's seat for Thaksin!

Must be the first time a Thai PM rescinded a resignation. Wonder how Chaturon felt about that at the time.

[hammered]

Intersting comments. For what it is worth I think therer has been plenty of people look at whether Thaksin was trying to use a modified Singapore model for Thailand or a Suharto style one. The idea of democracy where one party becomes utterly dominant for decades is not uncommon in Asia, but it usually needs more than the strongman to suceed. Malaysia, Indonesia in the past, Cambodia (although it wasnt so one party dominated in its early days until the coup), Japan.

Obviosuly we will never know Thaksin's real idea now, or whether ion the longer term Thais who when allowed to vote have frequently changed governments (although not always the individuals who party hop) would have accepted it, as TRT hegemony was cut short so it is all a bit theoretical. Even if Thaksin were to coem back to power tomorrow, it is likely th eparty and him would now carve a different path from that planned pre-coup which could be more or less enlightened. This possibility while not likely to happen tomorrow is still something that we may get to actually see.

[h90]

how many percent of farmers has Singapore? What is the percentage of foreigner in Sing? How many miles of road, copper, glass fiber do you need in average to connect everyone to electric, street internet in Thailand in compare to Thailand? Or how would have Sing done it if they are not on the seaside like Chang Mai?

Speak with Singaporeans about politics! Most will change the topic immediately. Maybe no punishment but everyone know "Don't touch it" In Thailand everyone never was afraid to tell their opinion. "coup-enforced rule" what do you mean with that? Suchinda?

h90, regarding your first couple of lines (the bit between "how" and "Chang Mai") I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about; farmers - who mentioned them?; foreigners - who mentioned them?; let me know the road/copper/glass fiber figures when you find out - but who mentioned them?; "on the seaside like Chang Mai"? - I guess it's late and you didn't check the map?

By "coup-enforced rule" - I mean "coup-enforced rule". What's not clear about that? You want a list of generals? Here's a few since 1971:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...19/20060919/%5D

Further back than that, you can do your own research.

sorry spoke on the phone will writting that....

I mean it is much cheaper to develop a city state than a large one, as infrastructure costs less. I wanted to write if they "wouldn't be on the seaside, like Chiang Mai" so no harbor, less trading.

Your link does not tell much. I tried to find something more clear, but didn't find much. Even Wikipedia doesn't has much. Seems from 1932 all few years everything changed.

[Publicus]

how many percent of farmers has Singapore? What is the percentage of foreigner in Sing? How many miles of road, copper, glass fiber do you need in average to connect everyone to electric, street internet in Thailand in compare to Thailand? Or how would have Sing done it if they are not on the seaside like Chang Mai?

Speak with Singaporeans about politics! Most will change the topic immediately. Maybe no punishment but everyone know "Don't touch it" In Thailand everyone never was afraid to tell their opinion. "coup-enforced rule" what do you mean with that? Suchinda?

h90, regarding your first couple of lines (the bit between "how" and "Chang Mai") I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about; farmers - who mentioned them?; foreigners - who mentioned them?; let me know the road/copper/glass fiber figures when you find out - but who mentioned them?; "on the seaside like Chang Mai"? - I guess it's late and you didn't check the map?

By "coup-enforced rule" - I mean "coup-enforced rule". What's not clear about that? You want a list of generals? Here's a few since 1971:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...19/20060919/%5D

Further back than that, you can do your own research.

sorry spoke on the phone will writting that....

I mean it is much cheaper to develop a city state than a large one, as infrastructure costs less. I wanted to write if they "wouldn't be on the seaside, like Chiang Mai" so no harbor, less trading.

Your link does not tell much. I tried to find something more clear, but didn't find much. Even Wikipedia doesn't has much. Seems from 1932 all few years everything changed.

As occasionally with most of us, your original post could have been worded better but none the less is clear enuff. I didn't find any problem understanding it.

[slimdog]

( with regard to Ungpakorn's political stripes,I take it that you are also aware of the background of Chaturon Chaisang who is a unifying, very popular and hugely influential member of the Thaksin team)

Those of you who were here in 2006 may remember that Chaturon was acting PM for a few months when Thaksin 'stepped aside' from politics during the Temmasak/Shincorp fiasco. Of course, after being out of the limelight for a while Thaksin reminded everyone that he 'hadn't really resigned, he'd just been resting' & it was out with the acting PM and back into the driver's seat for Thaksin!

Must be the first time a Thai PM rescinded a resignation. Wonder how Chaturon felt about that at the time.

I doubt if Chaturon felt anything..

At the time Thaksin "rescinded" his resignation, the Caretaker PM was Chidchai Vanasatidya. Chaturon was Caretaker Education Minister

Chaturon became Acting leader of the TRT Party in October 2006, and continued to be labelled thus until May 30th 2007 when the party was dissolved.

His position was never formally registered though, as there was a ban on all Political activities immediately after the coup until June 2007..

.

[caf]

Thailand is self-retarding in its absence of any capability to produce a leader such as Aung San Suu Kyi or a Mandella

or a Lech Walesa etc etc. Former Malaysian PM Mahathir ruled for 20 years based on one party control and among other things produced the Petronas Towers while Thaksin, as has been pointed out, has mucked up even his greatest 'successes'. Lee Kwan Yew led Singapore for 22 or so years while also effectively having a peaceful one party 'democracy'. These leaders managed one party rule without crushing civil liberties or without stealing the state blind. Thaksin's one party rule was a bull in the china shop.

We can find transformative leaders in many places who propititously came forward to successfully remake their social and political landscape peacefully and without long periods of sharp and bitter division. It is an unhappy fact that Thailand hasn't any such figures nor could Thailand produce even a one. None at all.

Thailand instead makes its path to a transformation in the most difficult and trying ways imaginable or possible.

Aung San Suu Kyi never ruled. What is so special on the Petronas Towers? Hardly anything that helps people. If you look history every of the long term leaders where mostly dictators. Of course a dictator can change everything. To the better or to the worse. Having such a leader is a great risk. Why do you think many country can elect their president just 2 terms?

If you compare Thailand with Myanmar (had strong leader), Lao (I don't know), Cambodia (had strong leader), Indonesia (had strong leader) or Philippines (had strong leader), Thailand did well. You can't compare Thailand with a single city (Singapore).

Comparing and contrasting Thaksin the Great Leader to other leaders of the region is instructive, as even when viewed by the standards of regional political cultures Thaksin is not only a dismal failure, but is a complete disaster. Of course Suu Kyi never ruled, but she was genuinely elected by a huge mandate and is a Nobel Peace Laureate. Surely Suu Kyi would have been a leader head and shoulders above them all, Thaksin especially and in particular. Where is Thailand's Suu Kyi?

Thailand did well under Thaksin's leadership? Thaksin himself is the most destablizing force Thailand has seen in many years, if not many decades. Thaksin is a divider. He polarizes. He's obsessed. Thaksin too spoke of ruling for 20 years but flamed out in a short time. Thaksin during his rule and since has harmed Thailand, perhaps irreparably.

He has not been in power since 2006. For how many years into to the future are people going to use him as a scapegoat and camouflage for the present woes. I don't support him but you need to find some better arguments to be creditable.

The recently posted corruption index showed Thailand up from 80 to 84 position since 2006. There may be many factors in this of course but it shows it's time to not overemphasise Taksin's impact.

[rixalex]

For how many years into to the future are people going to use him as a scapegoat and camouflage for the present woes.

The answer to that is for as many years as he continues to cause trouble for this country.

[Publicus]

For how many years into to the future are people going to use him as a scapegoat and camouflage for the present woes.

The answer to that is for as many years as he continues to cause trouble for this country.

Correct, as just last week Thaksin was in Cambodia lobbing grenades at Abhisit while his pal Hun Sen had been disrupting Asean then APEC. In Dubai Thaksin pronounced via the Times future plans for himself and Thailand, both in his mind being mutually inclusive. There was Songkran, Asean in Pattaya, now the coming Thaksin Rouge campaign to drive the government from office.

The guy's mad but I'd anyway suggest you might ask the question of him as he's the mover and shaker of all that's happening around us. Better yet, consider the question yourself.

[Steve2UK]

sorry spoke on the phone will writting that....

I mean it is much cheaper to develop a city state than a large one, as infrastructure costs less. I wanted to write if they "wouldn't be on the seaside, like Chiang Mai" so no harbor, less trading.

Your link does not tell much. I tried to find something more clear, but didn't find much. Even Wikipedia doesn't has much. Seems from 1932 all few years everything changed.

Better understood now and mai pen rai ...... The combination of you introducing new aspects and the way you referred to them didn't (for me) connect with the discussion - now I do see what you were getting at.

Going back to civil rights under "coup-enforced rule"....... if it really wasn't clear let me expand just a bit. The phrase is intended to describe what happens under just about any coup-installed government - i.e. almost always where the previous (usually legitimately elected) government is removed by military coup and the generals (junta) run the government they create. So, yes, Suchinda is one example for his 1991 overthrowing of the government led by (Chatichai - also a general but elected PM) and for his actions leading to Black May 1992 (though he was by then appointed PM after an election) - but there are many more. Generals do go into politics/government other than by coup (witness Sonthi now as opposed to 2006), but I was talking about generals seizing power by coup - and about what they do with that power - hence "coup-enforced rule". Thinking about it, "coup-imposed rule" is more precise.

While I think it's unlikely we'll ever agree on the PAD political views you express, kudos to you for expressing them - particularly when and because you give thought-through reasons for your views instead of just parroting others' views as so many do. I hope it also goes without saying that I don't go after people for their less than perfect use of English as their second language; I'm a Brit but also half-German and bilingual so I know better than to do that - anyway IMO it's always a cheap and shameful tactic.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

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.

Indeedy.

[Publicus]

Given that Thaksin has shown us repeatedly that his evil brain needs a post mortem examination for the good of humanity, the prospect of his returning to power would need to be prevented as the highest priority.

Careful now - you'll have some folk thinking that you'd really prefer the brain dissection to be ante mortem.

Ante or post the key word is mortem

Politically of course

Edited November 19, 2009 by Publicus

[caf]

For how many years into to the future are people going to use him as a scapegoat and camouflage for the present woes.

The answer to that is for as many years as he continues to cause trouble for this country.

Sadly, you and Publicus are absolutely right, you will keep making these posts - with or without supporting facts.

If you had been born at the time of Canute you would still be blaming him for coastal erosions.

And the increase in the corruption factor is down to Taksin too even though he left in 2006?. You ignored that comment

I do not support Taksin but some of you anti-Taksin brigade don't seem to realise that your " automatic " and non-thinking replies are actually doing your credibilty downn and playing into his supporters hands.

Blind Canute-like responses

[rixalex]

For how many years into to the future are people going to use him as a scapegoat and camouflage for the present woes.

The answer to that is for as many years as he continues to cause trouble for this country.

Sadly, you and Publicus are absolutely right, you will keep making these posts - with or without supporting facts.

The supporting facts are there week in week out for all to see.

Thaksin is by no means the only problem facing Thailand now, nor is he the biggest, but he is the problem that has been successfully distracting and derailing both the government and the citizens of this country for the last three years or so. No other problem is having this efffect. That's why dealing with him is the most pressing issue right now.

[caf]

For how many years into to the future are people going to use him as a scapegoat and camouflage for the present woes.

The answer to that is for as many years as he continues to cause trouble for this country.

Sadly, you and Publicus are absolutely right, you will keep making these posts - with or without supporting facts.

The supporting facts are there week in week out for all to see.

Thaksin is by no means the only problem facing Thailand now, nor is he the biggest, but he is the problem that has been successfully distracting and derailing both the government and the citizens of this country for the last three years or so. No other problem is having this efffect. That's why dealing with him is the most pressing issue right now.

Thanks for that reply.

My full post which you have of course not answered was:

"Sadly, you and Publicus are absolutely right, you will keep making these posts - with or without supporting facts.

If you had been born at the time of Canute you would still be blaming him for coastal erosions.

And the increase in the corruption factor is down to Taksin too even though he left in 2006?. You ignored that comment

I do not support Taksin but some of you anti-Taksin brigade don't seem to realise that your " automatic " and non-thinking replies are actually doing your credibilty downn and playing into his supporters hands.

Blind Canute-like responses"

I think Thaivisa readers who surf but maybe do not post will get the point and make their own minds up about your evasion.

[Publicus]

For how many years into to the future are people going to use him as a scapegoat and camouflage for the present woes.

The answer to that is for as many years as he continues to cause trouble for this country.

Correct, as just last week Thaksin was in Cambodia lobbing grenades at Abhisit while his pal Hun Sen had been disrupting Asean then APEC. In Dubai Thaksin pronounced via the Times future plans for himself and Thailand, both in his mind being mutually inclusive. There was Songkran, Asean in Pattaya, now the coming Thaksin Rouge campaign to drive the government from office.

The guy's mad but I'd anyway suggest you might ask the question of him as he's the mover and shaker of all that's happening around us. Better yet, consider the question yourself.

R.S.V.P.

Edited November 19, 2009 by Publicus

[rixalex]

Thanks for that reply.

My full post which you have of course not answered was:

"Sadly, you and Publicus are absolutely right, you will keep making these posts - with or without supporting facts.

If you had been born at the time of Canute you would still be blaming him for coastal erosions.

And the increase in the corruption factor is down to Taksin too even though he left in 2006?. You ignored that comment

I do not support Taksin but some of you anti-Taksin brigade don't seem to realise that your " automatic " and non-thinking replies are actually doing your credibilty downn and playing into his supporters hands.

Blind Canute-like responses"

I think Thaivisa readers who surf but maybe do not post will get the point and make their own minds up about your evasion.

Humble apologies for not replying. The only reason for not doing so was simply because i didn't think they were genuine or serious. They were? Oh, ok.

And the increase in the corruption factor is down to Taksin too even though he left in 2006?

Obviously not. Who said that?

[Steve2UK]

Given that Thaksin has shown us repeatedly that his evil brain needs a post mortem examination for the good of humanity, the prospect of his returning to power would need to be prevented as the highest priority.

Careful now - you'll have some folk thinking that you'd really prefer the brain dissection to be ante mortem.

Ante or post the key word is mortem

Politically of course

[cornerback]

For how many years into to the future are people going to use him as a scapegoat and camouflage for the present woes.

The answer to that is for as many years as he continues to cause trouble for this country.

Sadly, you and Publicus are absolutely right, you will keep making these posts

And the increase in the corruption factor is down to Taksin too even though he left in 2006?.

I think it would be expected to rise.

As he's not being held accountable for his corruption, it sends a message to those that followed him that it's ok to be corrupt.

I wonder what that corruption index would be this year if he was incarcerated and serving a 30 year prison sentence (obviously based on convictions of his other pending corruption charges).

When people see someone openly skirting the law, they are more prone to skirt the same law themselves. It's not until that person is held responsible will be people sit up and take notice that corruption is bad. It'd be terrific to see him come back and face that sort of time in jail. You'd see that corruption index drop like a rock.

[zzaa09]

The great deal of insight and informed discussion of Mr Thaksin that is being achieved on this thread is extremely refreshing to see and be a part of. I only hope that in the future the Thai people themselves will be able to reasonably discuss this man and the Pandora's box of issues that surround him. It's just simply awful for a country be polarized to such a degree that in public the only opinion you can voice about him is that he is either "good" or "bad" or that people can be either red or yellow. Thankyou to all of the posters on this thread who are building something truly democratic, informed and reasonable debate.

But you'll find that such debate and discussion angst comes primarily from Farang circles? Why would that be?

[brahmburgers]

When people see someone openly skirting the law, they are more prone to skirt the same law themselves.

Agree, particularly in regard to the Shinawatras. I've been saying for years before he made that multibillion baht sale to Singapore's Temasak - which he admitted paying no taxes on, with a smug grin.

A whole generation of young Thais have had that oh-so Asian proclivity reinforced by Thaksin's many examples - namely: It's ok to lie and cheat to get rich. It matters not how many people you have to extort or bribe or hoodwink, .....all that matters is winding up rich.

[rixalex]

I think it would be expected to rise.

As he's not being held accountable for his corruption, it sends a message to those that followed him that it's ok to be corrupt.

I wonder what that corruption index would be this year if he was incarcerated and serving a 30 year prison sentence (obviously based on convictions of his other pending corruption charges).

When people see someone openly skirting the law, they are more prone to skirt the same law themselves. It's not until that person is held responsible will be people sit up and take notice that corruption is bad. It'd be terrific to see him come back and face that sort of time in jail. You'd see that corruption index drop like a rock.

Although i don't hold Thaksin responsible for current corruption, you do make a good point, and it's the reason why i'm opposed to amnesties. What message does it send to the public when politicians and those with power are allowed to get away with crime? Everyone else in society is forced to face the consequences of their actions (well most of the time); they should be no different. In fact, there's an argument that their punishment should be even more severe, as they are the ones who should be providing the example for the rest of us.

Don't worry, just silly old me with my head in the clouds.

Edited November 19, 2009 by rixalex

[jayboy]

I wonder what that corruption index would be this year if he was incarcerated and serving a 30 year prison sentence (obviously based on convictions of his other pending corruption charges).

When people see someone openly skirting the law, they are more prone to skirt the same law themselves. It's not until that person is held responsible will be people sit up and take notice that corruption is bad. It'd be terrific to see him come back and face that sort of time in jail. You'd see that corruption index drop like a rock.

How spectacularly naive.It wouldn't make any difference of course.Corruption is pervasive in a very high degree in all aspects of Thai life including the corporate world politics, the military and the bureaucracy.A notoriously corrupt politician serves in a high position in the current government.It doesn't need Thaksin's presence to make an example of corruption.There are more than enough enough targets right here in Bangkok.The fallacy of course in the poster's comment is that corrupt though Thaksin was, this is the excuse not the real motive for the elite's hatred of him.

[zzaa09]

By "coup-enforced rule" - I mean "coup-enforced rule". What's not clear about that? You want a list of generals? Here's a few since 1971:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...19/20060919/%5D

Further back than that, you can do your own research.

Indeed it does go way back. Coups and militaristic dominance are really a way of life here. One really only needs to understand Siam/Thailand contemporary history as to view it's future. Some understand the truer reasoning and nature as to the continuous military-coup-of-the-month club.

[321niti123]

I think it would be expected to rise.

As he's not being held accountable for his corruption, it sends a message to those that followed him that it's ok to be corrupt.

I wonder what that corruption index would be this year if he was incarcerated and serving a 30 year prison sentence (obviously based on convictions of his other pending corruption charges).

When people see someone openly skirting the law, they are more prone to skirt the same law themselves. It's not until that person is held responsible will be people sit up and take notice that corruption is bad. It'd be terrific to see him come back and face that sort of time in jail. You'd see that corruption index drop like a rock.

Although i don't hold Thaksin responsible for current corruption, you do make a good point, and it's the reason why i'm opposed to amnesties. What message does it send to the public when politicians and those with power are allowed to get away with crime? Everyone else in society is forced to face the consequences of their actions (well most of the time); they should be no different. In fact, there's an argument that their punishment should be even more severe, as they are the ones who should be providing the example for the rest of us.

Don't worry, just silly old me with my head in the clouds.

Don't Worry, your heads are not in the clouds, i totally agree with you. People in power should follow the law ever more strictly because firstly-they are supposed to know it

and secondly- they are supposed to enforce it, how can someone enforce a law that they dont follow themselves.

[Steve2UK]

<snip>

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.

<snip>

Follow-up to the above and with the same health warning about polls - although this one is from Bangkok University not ABAC:

"The poll interviewed 1,121 people in Bangkok and the 3 surrounding provinces during November 21-22" and asked the question "If there was an election held in 2010, who do you support between Abhisit and Thaksin?"

1. Abhisit: 30.1%

2. Thaksin: 24.6%

3. Support neither or undecided: 45.3%"

Italics in quotes are from http://asiancorrespondent.com/bangkok-pund...short-lived.htm - thus the translation from Thai is also his. More details on the polling profile etc at that link; Thai-readers can see the full details at Bangkok University's own site http://www.ryt9.com/s/bkp/755992

Bangkok Pundit provides his own commentary about the result given where the poll was taken etc. I won't add to it other than to say that it strikes me as remarkable how Thaksin's rating has stayed so high (considering where the poll was taken) and given the Cambodia, Times Online article etc events.

"Sits back and waits" for the increasing familiar tsunami of slurry from those who see a pro-Thaksin motive in what I post...........

[Ricardo]

When people see someone openly skirting the law, they are more prone to skirt the same law themselves. It's not until that person is held responsible will be people sit up and take notice that corruption is bad. It'd be terrific to see him come back and face that sort of time in jail. You'd see that corruption index drop like a rock.

Quite. One might expect a Prime Minister, committed to reducing corruption as Thaksin used to claim to be, to display a higher standard than normal in his own business affairs, as an example. Indeed the anti-corruption law for senior politicians would also require this.

But his prosecution & conviction, in one case completed thus far, still sends the important message, that no-one is above the law. So his example still serves his country.

But you'll find that such debate and discussion angst comes primarily from Farang circles? Why would that be?

Perhaps because TV is a site primarily for farangs ?

[hammered]

<snip>

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.

<snip>

Follow-up to the above and with the same health warning about polls - although this one is from Bangkok University not ABAC:

"The poll interviewed 1,121 people in Bangkok and the 3 surrounding provinces during November 21-22" and asked the question "If there was an election held in 2010, who do you support between Abhisit and Thaksin?"

1. Abhisit: 30.1%

2. Thaksin: 24.6%

3. Support neither or undecided: 45.3%"

Italics in quotes are from http://asiancorrespondent.com/bangkok-pund...short-lived.htm - thus the translation from Thai is also his. More details on the polling profile etc at that link; Thai-readers can see the full details at Bangkok University's own site http://www.ryt9.com/s/bkp/755992

Bangkok Pundit provides his own commentary about the result given where the poll was taken etc. I won't add to it other than to say that it strikes me as remarkable how Thaksin's rating has stayed so high (considering where the poll was taken) and given the Cambodia, Times Online article etc events.

"Sits back and waits" for the increasing familiar tsunami of slurry from those who see a pro-Thaksin motive in what I post...........

Kind of predictable tio be honest. Thaksin has a base support that isnt going anywhere. Abhisit (or Dems) have a base support that isnt going anywhere. Expanding this survey to other areas would see the relative figures change a bit imho too. However both PTP(read Thaksin) and Abhsit (read Democrat party) have a large core of support. The swingers rallied behind the government in a time of crisis temporarily but now sit on the fence again. If Thaksin had been PM and had problems with Cambodia likely the same would have happened.

Now the battle is for those in the middle. Core supporters arent going anywhere.

[xminator]

If the 45% unknown votes for new politics party, we have another 4 seasons of thai soap.

[Ricardo]

Many of whom are on the lamb.

And also 'on the lam', it's tough to tell the sheep from the goats and lambs !

I wish they'd all flock off !

Edited November 30, 2009 by Ricardo