Yongyuth Returns As Pheu Thai Party Leader Amid Turmoil

[whybother]

If my memory serves correctly there have only ever been two majority elected Governments in Thailand's history. Coalition Governments are the norm here. Thailand - like all countries with a similar electoral process - provides the opportunity to form a Government via a coalition with minor parties.

After winning the Dec 2007 elections the PPP formed such a coalition (as per normal) with minor parties who very obviously has campaigned against all other political parties in the election. What do you find untoward in this?? Really strange! Every coalition Government worldwide is formed in this manner.

What is untoward is the loosing party "purchasing" MPs of the Government --- so that even after loosing an election (yet again) they could grasp power.!! And its not as though they even paid For Newins 22 pocket MPs (all PPP) with their own money -- instead they just handed over a couple of the more "profitable' portfolios. Let the public pay. Twice!

Your memory doesn't serve you correctly. The TRT didn't win a majority in the 2001 election, and the only reason they did in the 2005 election was because the "purchased" a lot of the smaller parties before hand.

It's interesting that you mention other countries with a similar electoral process, because Australia currently has government where the "loosing" party is currently in government, and I'm not sure if the UK does, but if it doesn't it could have had quite easily if the smallest party had decided to support the other major party. In fact the Australian government is in power because they "purchased" a couple independent MPs. One was even offered a ministry post.

In every coalition, smaller parties are offered plum posts to garner their support. Everything you say about the Democrats was done exactly the same by the TRT and PPP.

In the campaigning for the 2007 Thai election, some of the smaller parties didn't just "campaign against all other political parties". They specifically said that they wouldn't support the PPP. And after the election, they did support the PPP. That is outright lying. Very untoward.

It doesn't matter who is the losing party. It matters who can get the support of the majority of elected MPs. In this case, some MPs changed their mind, as is their right. The may have changed their mind because the PPP was incompetent in government. They may have changed their mind because the PPP got caught being involved in election fraud. But, whatever, they changed their minds. They decided that the PPP/PTP were no longer worth supporting. And even now MPs are leaving the PTP.

But, the bottom line is, a majority of the elected MPs support a Democrat government. If the electorate don't like what the people they elected are doing, then they will vote them out at the next election.

[Buchholz]

"The party's direction is clear - the Party Leader and Party Executive Board are supposed to carry out secretarial and ceremonial jobs. The person who will take up the PM's post will be announced later.

It could be Party MP Chairman Chalerm, the Party Chairman Chavalit, the Party Economic Chairman Mingkwan, or the Party Chief Adviser General Chetta Thanajaro,"

Interesting article in this morning's other paper regarding reports that Party Economic Chairman (whatever that title means) Mingkwan was paying PTP MP's to support his taking over of the Party.

[animatic]

If my memory serves correctly there have only ever been two majority elected Governments in Thailand's history. Coalition Governments are the norm here. Thailand - like all countries with a similar electoral process - provides the opportunity to form a Government via a coalition with minor parties.

After winning the Dec 2007 elections the PPP formed such a coalition (as per normal) with minor parties who very obviously has campaigned against all other political parties in the election. What do you find untoward in this?? Really strange! Every coalition Government worldwide is formed in this manner.

What is untoward is the loosing party "purchasing" MPs of the Government --- so that even after loosing an election (yet again) they could grasp power.!! And its not as though they even paid For Newins 22 pocket MPs (all PPP) with their own money -- instead they just handed over a couple of the more "profitable' portfolios. Let the public pay. Twice!

In 2007 elections PPP got 233 MP's. New party formed after TRT disbanded, TRT had 374 MP's in 2005 (with various small parties thrown in). The Dem's had 96 MP's in 2005, 165 in 2007. Obviously some see this as loosing. Well, counting with only ten fingers ain't easy for some.

As for purchasing MP's, please do tell me how the political haggling between Dem's and BJT is different from how TRT was founded in the first place, how small parties were 'persuaded' to join TRT in 2001, how things were in 2005 and April 2006.

Thank you

TRT bought most of the smaller parties BEFORE the election, rather than after.

Thaksin renamed those parties 'TRT Factions',

when in fact the same leaders ran those parties, just as they had before, and were paid off with seats and positions for their networks. A semantic fiction, that slide past the Election Commission. That is the only way Thaksin got his TRT party majority. It was a subterfuge that fell apart as soon as Thaksin was not in hands on control. Business as usual in Thailand political circles.

PPP no longer existed 2 years ago, and so all their MP's were up for grabs,

same as before when TRT bought their coalition partners in advance. When PPP folded, the clock was reset and those who 'created a workable coalition 1st' got to form a government.

Only the losers never stopped whining about their inability to get the job done,

and would they ever consider blaming themselves for this failure?

Of course not. Blame Newin, Abhisit and the amorphous Amarta, and save face. Some times it is really hard to believe these are actually adults.

Edited September 23, 2010 by animatic

[Ricardo]

Some times it is really hard to believe these are actually adults.

Of course at the age of many of these 'political dinosaurs' & contenders-for-PM, senility may perhaps be a contributing factor, roll-on the next generation !

[Buchholz]

seems to be a bit of a fallout from all this ongoing Pheu Thai Party turmoil....

Democrats could win if poll held now

If a general election was held today, slightly more than half of respondents surveyed by Abac Poll said they would vote for the Democrat Party to form the next government, according to survey results released yesterday.

The survey showed both the ruling Democrat Party and the opposition Pheu Thai Party would not win enough seats to allow either to form a one-party government, Abac Poll director Noppadon Kannikar said.

Noppadon said the smaller parties would decide who would get to form the next government if a general election was held now.

A total of 4,312 respondents took part in the survey, conducted from September 1-25.

Of 4,312 respondents, 50.7% said they had decided to support the Democrats, 33% said they would opt for Pheu Thai, and 16% preferred other parties.

An analysis of the survey found that of total respondents who supported the Democrats, the largest group (56%) were over 50 years old, while 42% of respondents under 20 also supported the Democrats.

Company employees are the largest group of Democrat supporters (nearly 58%).

Of total state officials and state enterprise workers, 48% said they preferred the Democrats and 40.5% said they would vote for Pheu Thai. Some 12% said liked other parties.

In terms of income, respondents earning over Bt15,000 was the largest group that backed the Democrats (59%), while 45.5% of respondents earning less than Bt5,000 also said they would vote for the Democrats.

Of total respondents, 58% of respondents with a bachelor degree, and 57% with more than one degree said they favoured the Democrats.

The survey found that those who reside in cities or towns prefer the Democrats while those who live in rural areas prefer Pheu Thai.

About 53% of urban dwellers said they would support the Democrats along with 49% of people who live in rural areas.

The number of respondents who live in rural areas who said they would vote for Pheu Thai stood at 36%, along with 29% of those who live in urban areas.

Of total residents in the Northeast, the largest group (49%) said they would vote for Pheu Thai, while 32% would vote for the Democrats, and 19% would back other parties.

The Democrats won support from more than half of total respondents in the Central and South regions, but support in the North was split, with 44% saying they would vote for the Democrats and 42% saying they would vote for Pheu Thai.

Of total Bangkok residents, 46% would vote for the Democrats and 37% said Pheu Thai, while 17% preferred other parties.

-- The Nation 2010-09-27

[Buchholz]

The poll would seem to contradict a large variety and number of different postulations that have been put forth on the forum.