PM Abhisit Announces Next Election Will Be Held On Nov 14

[jcbangkok]

a reasonable person would expect to see the proposals in writing, go through them, develop questions and rebuttals, and then go through back-channels to express their concerns. Most negotiations are not done under the spectre of the tv camera.

I think you missed the part about there will be no more negotiating with red shirts ... they lost that option after showing their true color.

I will suggest that you show a somewhat limited knowledge of the process of negotiation. Public posturing is just that: posturing. It's part of negotiating. Do you think that Mr Abhisit went on the air to tell the public his proposal without first notifying the red shirt leaders through intermediaries? In that way, insanity lies. And the PM is far from being insane. He's showed himself to be a skilled negotiator - and a patient one - resulting in a small number of deaths (though it can be argued that one is one too many). The other option was to crush the rebellion, at the cost of many thousands of lives. Negotiations saved many, many lives. That's what defines a successful negotiation in this kind of situation.

Cut through the rhetoric, and look behind the glass tube into what has taken place outside the view of the public.

The PM is not talking with folks in the red mob anymore and he certainly didn't negotiate with them to come up with this deal. They had their chance to negotiate. If this came from negotiations then the reds would be on their way home now and not saying they will not have a reply until Wednesday. And by they way, their reply will be meaningless. The red mob has no voice anymore and we can thank the PM for that including giving them just enough rope to hang themselves.

[deadsnoopy]

Reply to deadsnoopy.

Thailand has had democracy for many years, the basis being 'one man one vote'. Just because some people choose to sell their right to democracy to the highest bidder is not the fault of democracy. It is the fault of the seller of their right of a democratic vote.

Cheers, Rick

I keep reading about the "vote buying". How sure are you anyways that people will vote for this or that candidate after receiving the money? Nobody in Thailand follows you to the ballot box when you cast your vote. On the contrary, you're required to go alone. So I could take 500 Baht from the chicken party and tell them I'll vote for them, then vote for the peanuts party and nobody would know.

Sounds plausible?

OH please! Stop making excuses. At very least, just try pretend to deny that votes were bought rather then making stupid excuses.

Didn't find a more constructive answer to counter my argument, huh?

[CrossBones]

Sounds fair enough to me.

[jcbangkok]

Reply to deadsnoopy.

Thailand has had democracy for many years, the basis being 'one man one vote'. Just because some people choose to sell their right to democracy to the highest bidder is not the fault of democracy. It is the fault of the seller of their right of a democratic vote.

Cheers, Rick

I think the ignore feature will provide better results.

[JohnLeech]

Reply to deadsnoopy.

Thailand has had democracy for many years, the basis being 'one man one vote'. Just because some people choose to sell their right to democracy to the highest bidder is not the fault of democracy. It is the fault of the seller of their right of a democratic vote.

Cheers, Rick

Agreed - "one man one vote" (or one man/woman, to be strictly accurate). Unfortunately the PAD/yellows stated aim was very clearly to amend this by allowing for "one man one vote" but also giving the lawyers, bankers, company directors, doctors, commisssioned officers, etc, etc, another vote (or votes) so that while 30% of the government was elected democratically the remaining 70% would be "chosen". While Abhisit did not support this, he did voice support for a 50/50 split in government seats. "Democracy"? Somehow I don't recognise it.

[bangkokrick]

Reply to deadsnoopy.

Thailand has had democracy for many years, the basis being 'one man one vote'. Just because some people choose to sell their right to democracy to the highest bidder is not the fault of democracy. It is the fault of the seller of their right of a democratic vote.

Cheers, Rick

I keep reading about the "vote buying". How sure are you anyways that people will vote for this or that candidate after receiving the money? Nobody in Thailand follows you to the ballot box when you cast your vote. On the contrary, you're required to go alone. So I could take 500 Baht from the chicken party and tell them I'll vote for them, then vote for the peanuts party and nobody would know.

Sounds plausible?

Dunno how long you have been in Thailand but I guess not so long. My wife's family who are from the NE of Thailand did just the same thing that you are describing. Took the money and voted for a different candidate.

The whole of her moo baan were given a small fish farm, which was part of the deal. Surprise surprise my wife's family are the only ones on her soi that did not get the fish farm. Get real man.

Cheers, Rick

[deadsnoopy]

Reply to deadsnoopy.

Thailand has had democracy for many years, the basis being 'one man one vote'. Just because some people choose to sell their right to democracy to the highest bidder is not the fault of democracy. It is the fault of the seller of their right of a democratic vote.

Cheers, Rick

I think the ignore feature will provide better results.

If you can't counter an argument, just ignore it. It will probably go away. But not really, as we've seen with the PM ignoring the issues of the rural poor. Ignoring works on ThaiVisa, but not in real life.

[snaggletooth]

Can't see the red leaders getting Amnesty the PM has been firm on this he wants people charged and investigations to continue.

I think Abhisit is the one that will be looking for amnesty. Remember the Democrats face dissolution and by the time the next election comes in November, Abhisit will likely be banned from politics for 5 years for election fraud.

The dissolution move by the electoral commission has nothing to do with election fraud. Read the news before you spout off your ill-informed opinion.

It's for not reporting a major campaign contribution. Not the same thing at all.

I did read the issue, and it is electoral fraud. In the last election, the Democrats received 259 million Baht in illegal donations, that they then used in the election. Abhisit was the chairman of the Democrats at the time the donations were received, so he knew everything about it. That's why the Democrats face dissolution and Abhisit faces a 5 year ban from politics. There are the facts, just for you

Electoral fraud is rigging an election. The Election Commission recommend the dissolution of the ruling Democrat Party for receiving an illegal 258 million baht donation and the alleged misuse of a 29 million baht political development fund provided by the EC.

[JohnLeech]

a reasonable person would expect to see the proposals in writing, go through them, develop questions and rebuttals, and then go through back-channels to express their concerns. Most negotiations are not done under the spectre of the tv camera.

I think you missed the part about there will be no more negotiating with red shirts ... they lost that option after showing their true color.

I will suggest that you show a somewhat limited knowledge of the process of negotiation. Public posturing is just that: posturing. It's part of negotiating. Do you think that Mr Abhisit went on the air to tell the public his proposal without first notifying the red shirt leaders through intermediaries? In that way, insanity lies. And the PM is far from being insane. He's showed himself to be a skilled negotiator - and a patient one - resulting in a small number of deaths (though it can be argued that one is one too many). The other option was to crush the rebellion, at the cost of many thousands of lives. Negotiations saved many, many lives. That's what defines a successful negotiation in this kind of situation.

Cut through the rhetoric, and look behind the glass tube into what has taken place outside the view of the public.

"The other option"? You appear to imagine that he only had two. He had several, he just chose to ignore the others.

[gl9999]

Reply to deadsnoopy.

Thailand has had democracy for many years, the basis being 'one man one vote'. Just because some people choose to sell their right to democracy to the highest bidder is not the fault of democracy. It is the fault of the seller of their right of a democratic vote.

Cheers, Rick

I keep reading about the "vote buying". How sure are you anyways that people will vote for this or that candidate after receiving the money? Nobody in Thailand follows you to the ballot box when you cast your vote. On the contrary, you're required to go alone. So I could take 500 Baht from the chicken party and tell them I'll vote for them, then vote for the peanuts party and nobody would know.

Sounds plausible?

OH please! Stop making excuses. At very least, just try pretend to deny that votes were bought rather then making stupid excuses.

Didn't find a more constructive answer to counter my argument, huh?

There's nothing to counter. Vote buying exists, not only here but in a lot of countries. If your 'argument' is that people can take the money and not vote for the person he took the money from, then you might as well say election fraud doesn't exist. Haha

[noahvail]

a reasonable person would expect to see the proposals in writing, go through them, develop questions and rebuttals, and then go through back-channels to express their concerns. Most negotiations are not done under the spectre of the tv camera.

I think you missed the part about there will be no more negotiating with red shirts ... they lost that option after showing their true color.

I will suggest that you show a somewhat limited knowledge of the process of negotiation. Public posturing is just that: posturing. It's part of negotiating. Do you think that Mr Abhisit went on the air to tell the public his proposal without first notifying the red shirt leaders through intermediaries? In that way, insanity lies. And the PM is far from being insane. He's showed himself to be a skilled negotiator - and a patient one - resulting in a small number of deaths (though it can be argued that one is one too many). The other option was to crush the rebellion, at the cost of many thousands of lives. Negotiations saved many, many lives. That's what defines a successful negotiation in this kind of situation.

Cut through the rhetoric, and look behind the glass tube into what has taken place outside the view of the public.

The PM is not talking with folks in the red mob anymore and he certainly didn't negotiate with them to come up with this deal. They had their chance to negotiate. If this came from negotiations then the reds would be on their way home now and not saying they will not have a reply until Wednesday. And by they way, their reply will be meaningless. The red mob has no voice anymore and we can thank the PM for that including giving them just enough rope to hang themselves.

Please remember the concept of saving face in Thailand - where important negotiations are concerned, saving face is highly prized throughout the world.

So, if the red shirts take two days and come up with a positive response, then I would suggest that those two days were negotiated in so that the leaders could talk with the rank-and-file members to get their 'approval.' Which, by the sounds of things, has already been shouted to the rooftops by the red shirts.

Everyone gets to go home, lick their wounds, and try to plan their future. Everyone left standing wins (an homage to those who have fallen). Again, that's the heart of a successful negotiation; not a winner or a loser, but two sides that accept a solution that's 'good-enough' for both sides.

[Businessman]

Hats off to Abisit. This forum is full of self professed experts who can tell exactly what is wrong with almost any topic, person and Abisit as well. I do not recall Abisit advocating that he is infallible. What I do see is that he has done a great job as seeking a political solution against a Para-military action that used innocent peasents as pawns. He has kept a cool head, and he has never given up hope for a peaceful settlement and continues to seek a solution and justice that is good for all Thais, (even if it means his loss of the next election). The man shows vision and foresight and a glimmer of hope for the Thai people. I have seen very little sincere concern for the people from any other politician in Thailand in the last 15 years of self-serving PMs. Sure critics can find fault with Abisit, but he is the best PM by far. He has tabled a proposal that allows the Red's to save face. Yes there are "IFs" and conditions attached to the proposal, as there should be. If the Reds do not play nice, then the deal is off. It looks to me that Abisit is a great leader and the best hope for a nation seeking to mature it's democratic model. Who cares if he is yellow, green or red, a puppet or a visionary... he is what Thailand need most at this time, a catalyst to a new level of maturity for Thailand. I hope that the Thai people see this and support him in future elections. I hope the Red activist seize the chance to promote their cause in the next elections. I pray that the Thai people see their way to a more stable, and humane society reaching a harmony that is right for the people, their values and morals, and to live in happiness and mutual respect.

[deadsnoopy]

Electoral fraud is rigging an election. The Election Commission recommend the dissolution of the ruling Democrat Party for receiving an illegal 258 million baht donation and the alleged misuse of a 29 million baht political development fund provided by the EC.

So if I get an illegal donation and then use it to pay for my election, that isn't election fraud? Either way, it's fraud. So basically, we have a fraudulent government and a fraudulent Prime Minister telling the whole country that there might be elections held if everything goes according to them. Great. But thanks for enlightening me.

[Nip]

If oversee by somebody like UN this can work.

You are of course jesting? The UN? Perhaps the most contrived, corrupt, capitalist, cabal that has ever existed. They knew what they were

doing when former Irish President Mary Robinson was shuffled away from the hot seat because she would actually attempt to do something for the worlds disadvantaged.

[snaggletooth]

a reasonable person would expect to see the proposals in writing, go through them, develop questions and rebuttals, and then go through back-channels to express their concerns. Most negotiations are not done under the spectre of the tv camera.

I think you missed the part about there will be no more negotiating with red shirts ... they lost that option after showing their true color.

Says who? You? Abhisit clearly is negotiating. You understand nothing about how politics work, my friend. Behind the scenes they're drinking coffee and having dinner together while discussing things. It's just a "show" for the "little people".

That's a foolish, condescending comment and shows your how ill-informed you are. Have you sat in one these fictitious coffee clatches too? This what is happening is not politics. If you think it is, you really are out in left field.

[jcbangkok]

a reasonable person would expect to see the proposals in writing, go through them, develop questions and rebuttals, and then go through back-channels to express their concerns. Most negotiations are not done under the spectre of the tv camera.

I think you missed the part about there will be no more negotiating with red shirts ... they lost that option after showing their true color.

I will suggest that you show a somewhat limited knowledge of the process of negotiation. Public posturing is just that: posturing. It's part of negotiating. Do you think that Mr Abhisit went on the air to tell the public his proposal without first notifying the red shirt leaders through intermediaries? In that way, insanity lies. And the PM is far from being insane. He's showed himself to be a skilled negotiator - and a patient one - resulting in a small number of deaths (though it can be argued that one is one too many). The other option was to crush the rebellion, at the cost of many thousands of lives. Negotiations saved many, many lives. That's what defines a successful negotiation in this kind of situation.

Cut through the rhetoric, and look behind the glass tube into what has taken place outside the view of the public.

The PM is not talking with folks in the red mob anymore and he certainly didn't negotiate with them to come up with this deal. They had their chance to negotiate. If this came from negotiations then the reds would be on their way home now and not saying they will not have a reply until Wednesday. And by they way, their reply will be meaningless. The red mob has no voice anymore and we can thank the PM for that including giving them just enough rope to hang themselves.

Please remember the concept of saving face in Thailand - where important negotiations are concerned, saving face is highly prized throughout the world.

So, if the red shirts take two days and come up with a positive response, then I would suggest that those two days were negotiated in so that the leaders could talk with the rank-and-file members to get their 'approval.' Which, by the sounds of things, has already been shouted to the rooftops by the red shirts.

Everyone gets to go home, lick their wounds, and try to plan their future. Everyone left standing wins (an homage to those who have fallen). Again, that's the heart of a successful negotiation; not a winner or a loser, but two sides that accept a solution that's 'good-enough' for both sides.

If the reds accept this then they will surely lose face. As soon as they clear out the talk will be about how all this was for nothing because they refused to take what was basically the same deal the PM offered right out the gate when he agreed to site down with them and they refused to negotiate.

[hjvdhoef]

A good compromise...but it will never happen.

Why? Because the Red Shirts do not want a compromise solution. They certainly do not want the government to do anything that will actually help the poor Issan farmer because that is where their core membership is drawn from. The Red Shirts do not want a solution to the political crises because if there is a real solution the Red Shirts lose all the support they get from the dissatisfied Issan farmers. If the Red shirts lose that support, they have no real political program to offer...they in fact have nothing to offer but more protests. The power of the Red Shirts comes from anger toward the governemnt. If that anger drops, they lose their support. The real reason for the Red Shirts movement is to bring back Thaksin. Anything else, such as "helping the poor" is just a lie they use to disquise their real purpose...to restore Thaksin to power.

If you don't believe me now...go right ahead. But you will see that the Red Shirts will find some good reason not to accept this or any compromise. Disruption is their bread and butter, it legitimises their protests. Without disruption, the Red Shirts have no reason for protest. Without the protests they have no way to mobilize their followers. Without mobilizing the poor farmers to protest the Red Shirs lose theri reason for existance. Therefore any compromise is not in the real interests of the Red Shirts.

My prediction: the Red Shirts will find some "reason" to reject this or any compromise offered to them. Why? Because without protests the Red Shirts have no reason to exist as they do now. You will see.

Why you never read Abhisit statement to the bottum and not only the first lines.Did you read his IFS?Thats the trick.He will complain in November that one of his IFS is not solved.A smart fellow.

But the red shirts are reading it to the bottum as well and say no and I cannot blame them.

[snaggletooth]

Electoral fraud is rigging an election. The Election Commission recommend the dissolution of the ruling Democrat Party for receiving an illegal 258 million baht donation and the alleged misuse of a 29 million baht political development fund provided by the EC.

So if I get an illegal donation and then use it to pay for my election, that isn't election fraud? Either way, it's fraud. So basically, we have a fraudulent government and a fraudulent Prime Minister telling the whole country that there might be elections held if everything goes according to them. Great. But thanks for enlightening me.

These are allegations, remember? I know you think you are, but sorry little man, you're not enlightened.

[jcbangkok]

a reasonable person would expect to see the proposals in writing, go through them, develop questions and rebuttals, and then go through back-channels to express their concerns. Most negotiations are not done under the spectre of the tv camera.

I think you missed the part about there will be no more negotiating with red shirts ... they lost that option after showing their true color.

Says who? You? Abhisit clearly is negotiating. You understand nothing about how politics work, my friend. Behind the scenes they're drinking coffee and having dinner together while discussing things. It's just a "show" for the "little people".

That's a foolish, condescending comment and shows your how ill-informed you are. Have you sat in one these fictitious coffee clatches too? This what is happening is not politics. If you think it is, you really are out in left field.

If you haven't seen it yet you will soon and that is the ignore feature on ThaiVisa really does serve a purpose.

[deadsnoopy]

Hats off to Abisit. This forum is full of self professed experts who can tell exactly what is wrong with almost any topic, person and Abisit as well. I do not recall Abisit advocating that he is infallible. What I do see is that he has done a great job as seeking a political solution against a Para-military action that used innocent peasents as pawns. He has kept a cool head, and he has never given up hope for a peaceful settlement and continues to seek a solution and justice that is good for all Thais, (even if it means his loss of the next election). The man shows vision and foresight and a glimmer of hope for the Thai people. I have seen very little sincere concern for the people from any other politician in Thailand in the last 15 years of self-serving PMs. Sure critics can find fault with Abisit, but he is the best PM by far. He has tabled a proposal that allows the Red's to save face. Yes there are "IFs" and conditions attached to the proposal, as there should be. If the Reds do not play nice, then the deal is off. It looks to me that Abisit is a great leader and the best hope for a nation seeking to mature it's democratic model. Who cares if he is yellow, green or red, a puppet or a visionary... he is what Thailand need most at this time, a catalyst to a new level of maturity for Thailand. I hope that the Thai people see this and support him in future elections. I hope the Red activist seize the chance to promote their cause in the next elections. I pray that the Thai people see their way to a more stable, and humane society reaching a harmony that is right for the people, their values and morals, and to live in happiness and mutual respect.

I'd take my hat off to Abhisit any day ...as soon as he explains on national television as to why he took a 259 million Baht illegal donation during the last election, and approved it as the chairman of the Democrats. Sure, you can try and smear the opposition party as corrupt, but at least you've got to acknowledge you're just as corrupt. Hands caught in the cookie jar

[bendejo]

I think it important that Thai gov't proves to the world that the whole redshirt movement was the work of one man acting strictly in his own self-interest. That one man, from outside the country, promoted and sponsored violent confrontation with authorities and hired thousands of people to take to the streets to promote his cause, which ended up causing death and injury.

Any sort of leniency to any of the leaders should begin with each one denouncing Taksin's involvement in all this, and provide details such that the Thai gov't can make it's case to the world of what a despicable, cynical piece of slime they have been up against in this not-really-political uprising.

Any of the leaders who actually spoke of committing acts of violence should be dealt with severely, especially those who did so before April 10th. Like that guy who told the reds to bring all the empty bottles they could find to Bangkok, and when they get there they'll fill them with gasoline and ...

[gatorsoft]

a reasonable person would expect to see the proposals in writing, go through them, develop questions and rebuttals, and then go through back-channels to express their concerns. Most negotiations are not done under the spectre of the tv camera.

I think you missed the part about there will be no more negotiating with red shirts ... they lost that option after showing their true color.

I will suggest that you show a somewhat limited knowledge of the process of negotiation. Public posturing is just that: posturing. It's part of negotiating. Do you think that Mr Abhisit went on the air to tell the public his proposal without first notifying the red shirt leaders through intermediaries? In that way, insanity lies. And the PM is far from being insane. He's showed himself to be a skilled negotiator - and a patient one - resulting in a small number of deaths (though it can be argued that one is one too many). The other option was to crush the rebellion, at the cost of many thousands of lives. Negotiations saved many, many lives. That's what defines a successful negotiation in this kind of situation.

Cut through the rhetoric, and look behind the glass tube into what has taken place outside the view of the public.

So just how do we do that? Maybe you are privvy to what goes on outside the view of the public, but most of us have to rely on what we can glean from an arguably biased media.

The vast majority of posters here act and write as if they have some special ability to discern other people's motivations. As long as you have already made up your mind about how and why things are being done, then no discourse can help. Someone needs to be mature enough to say "OK, I really don't believe what you are saying, but I'm willing to give you a chance to show that you are sincere".

[enginerevision]

Abhisit just tries to safe his $ss, because he know's wen he resigns, his life is over.

Stupid "vision"! Get real.

Get real? Mmmm...let's see, where to start?

- Almost starting a war with Camobodia over a stupid temple?

- Dumping refugees out in the ocean to torture and then die?

- Introducing computer crimes act?

- Southern problems increased drastically?

- Drug problems increased drastically?

- Working together with the criminal Sondhi?

- According to CRES has taken illegal donations?

- Not allowing the Dalai Lama into Thailand?

- Deportation of Hmong refugees back to Communist Laos ?

- Rejecting human rights commisions?

- Need to go on?

[deadsnoopy]

Abhisit just tries to safe his $ss, because he know's wen he resigns, his life is over.

Stupid "vision"! Get real.

Get real? Mmmm...let's see, where to start?

- Almost starting a war with Camobodia over a stupid temple?

- Dumping refugees out in the ocean to torture and then die?

- Introducing computer crimes act?

- Southern problems increased drastically?

- Drug problems increased drastically?

- Working together with the criminal Sondhi?

- According to CRES has taken illegal donations?

- Not allowing the Dalai Lama into Thailand?

- Deportation of Hmong refugees back to Communist Laos ?

- Rejecting human rights commisions?

- Need to go on?

You forgot ...

- Forming a coalition government with Newin, who's banned from politics.

[snaggletooth]

Reply to deadsnoopy.

Thailand has had democracy for many years, the basis being 'one man one vote'. Just because some people choose to sell their right to democracy to the highest bidder is not the fault of democracy. It is the fault of the seller of their right of a democratic vote.

Cheers, Rick

I think the ignore feature will provide better results.

If you can't counter an argument, just ignore it. It will probably go away. But not really, as we've seen with the PM ignoring the issues of the rural poor. Ignoring works on ThaiVisa, but not in real life.

And that's where the rubber hits the road. He hasn't ignored the rural poor. That's just the red's propaganda. He hasn't taken funding from them, taken way their rights.

In fact he's increased funding for rural schools to help bring up the educational standards in the provinces. He continued with Thaksin's 30baht health care plan

And a majority of his economic stimulus plan was aimed at the "grassroots," particularly farmers.

What else should he do? Give them money so they don't have to work anymore? Give them near-dead rubber saplings? Give village headman $1 million baht each to "lend" to their communities so that they can pocket 30% for themselves?

[way2muchcoffee]

a reasonable person would expect to see the proposals in writing, go through them, develop questions and rebuttals, and then go through back-channels to express their concerns. Most negotiations are not done under the spectre of the tv camera.

I think you missed the part about there will be no more negotiating with red shirts ... they lost that option after showing their true color.

I will suggest that you show a somewhat limited knowledge of the process of negotiation. Public posturing is just that: posturing. It's part of negotiating. Do you think that Mr Abhisit went on the air to tell the public his proposal without first notifying the red shirt leaders through intermediaries? In that way, insanity lies. And the PM is far from being insane. He's showed himself to be a skilled negotiator - and a patient one - resulting in a small number of deaths (though it can be argued that one is one too many). The other option was to crush the rebellion, at the cost of many thousands of lives. Negotiations saved many, many lives. That's what defines a successful negotiation in this kind of situation.

Cut through the rhetoric, and look behind the glass tube into what has taken place outside the view of the public.

Precisely.

[gatorsoft]

Reply to deadsnoopy.

Thailand has had democracy for many years, the basis being 'one man one vote'. Just because some people choose to sell their right to democracy to the highest bidder is not the fault of democracy. It is the fault of the seller of their right of a democratic vote.

Cheers, Rick

Under which fundamental of democracy was the 2006 coup executed?

[gl9999]

Abhisit just tries to safe his $ss, because he know's wen he resigns, his life is over.

Stupid "vision"! Get real.

Get real? Mmmm...let's see, where to start?

- Almost starting a war with Camobodia over a stupid temple?

- Dumping refugees out in the ocean to torture and then die?

- Introducing computer crimes act?

- Southern problems increased drastically?

- Drug problems increased drastically?

- Working together with the criminal Sondhi?

- According to CRES has taken illegal donations?

- Not allowing the Dalai Lama into Thailand?

- Deportation of Hmong refugees back to Communist Laos ?

- Rejecting human rights commisions?

- Need to go on?

Thaksin murdered 2500 Thais and he's still around. He has done other shit of course but 2500 dead Thais I think tops the list.

[bangkokrick]

Electoral fraud is rigging an election. The Election Commission recommend the dissolution of the ruling Democrat Party for receiving an illegal 258 million baht donation and the alleged misuse of a 29 million baht political development fund provided by the EC.

So if I get an illegal donation and then use it to pay for my election, that isn't election fraud? Either way, it's fraud. So basically, we have a fraudulent government and a fraudulent Prime Minister telling the whole country that there might be elections held if everything goes according to them. Great. But thanks for enlightening me.

Snoops, to save embarrassing yourself further and given that you appear to have been in Thailand for a maximum of 30 seconds, I would like to recommend that you use the Google feature from the Internet to find the facts on the recent history of Thai politics and then you might be able to make some posts that have a modicum of credibility.

Good hunting.

Cheers, Rick

[jdinasia]

Reply to deadsnoopy.

Thailand has had democracy for many years, the basis being 'one man one vote'. Just because some people choose to sell their right to democracy to the highest bidder is not the fault of democracy. It is the fault of the seller of their right of a democratic vote.

Cheers, Rick

I keep reading about the "vote buying". How sure are you anyways that people will vote for this or that candidate after receiving the money? Nobody in Thailand follows you to the ballot box when you cast your vote. On the contrary, you're required to go alone. So I could take 500 Baht from the chicken party and tell them I'll vote for them, then vote for the peanuts party and nobody would know.

Sounds plausible?

OH please! Stop making excuses. At very least, just try pretend to deny that votes were bought rather then making stupid excuses.

Apparently some people did not see the election booth's layout in places from last election. Nor do some people apparently know that getting the individual constituencie voting numbers is fairly easy too.