Abhisit Ready For Political Debate With Yingluck

[bulmercke]

Abhisit was a minister at twenty-seven. He's had years of ministerial experience compared to Thaksin Lite - Yingluk - and is presumably very knowledgable about ministrial procedures and other matters.

I fear he could expose her ignorance concerning such things as - statistics - facts - figures - policies - procedures - you name it - things the electorate would presume she would know about.

It would not be a pretty sight to see Abhisit tear Yingluk apart in front of the television cameras.

She is running for PM (or at least that is the idea if she actually is party-list #1) ------ Yes, that is Prime Minister .... if she can't handle her own in a public debate against a guy that HAS to be nice ... how will she accomplish doing her duty as PM?

She (in theory) has run TWO major companies, and in theory is considered by PTP to be a good candidate for the position of PM. Just because she has a record of being associated with corruption on a personal level .... does that mean she gets a free-ride under the "Thaksin thinks ...." motto of PTP?

as a final note ---

Yes it would be a pretty sight to see her and the PTP's platform torn to ribbons in a public debate

I would have thought last year's bloodfest would have been enough to sate your nocturnal anti-Red cravings.

[Buchholz]

In addition to a televised debate, they should have the audio of the debate broadcast over the village announcement system.

The video aspect is too important... sharing and/or communal television is needed or any other method of mass display. Project it onto inexpensive big screens.

As it would be the first debate ever (AFAIK), everyone, even in remote moo baans, needs to be able to see and hear it.

They, the public, have already said they wanted that, the candidates should make it happen.

.

Edited May 15, 2011 by Buchholz

[473geo]

I would have thought such a debate could well be set up to provide a sustainable base for true reconciliation...........both parties in agreement on most policies to move the country forward.......both candidates expressing a wish to move on in the best interest of Thailand

But I'm probably a bit ahead of most on that one........

[jdinasia]

Abhisit was a minister at twenty-seven. He's had years of ministerial experience compared to Thaksin Lite - Yingluk - and is presumably very knowledgable about ministrial procedures and other matters.

I fear he could expose her ignorance concerning such things as - statistics - facts - figures - policies - procedures - you name it - things the electorate would presume she would know about.

It would not be a pretty sight to see Abhisit tear Yingluk apart in front of the television cameras.

She is running for PM (or at least that is the idea if she actually is party-list #1) ------ Yes, that is Prime Minister .... if she can't handle her own in a public debate against a guy that HAS to be nice ... how will she accomplish doing her duty as PM?

She (in theory) has run TWO major companies, and in theory is considered by PTP to be a good candidate for the position of PM. Just because she has a record of being associated with corruption on a personal level .... does that mean she gets a free-ride under the "Thaksin thinks ...." motto of PTP?

as a final note ---

Yes it would be a pretty sight to see her and the PTP's platform torn to ribbons in a public debate

I would have thought last year's bloodfest would have been enough to sate your nocturnal anti-Red cravings.

2009's was enough for me ... but not enough for Thaksin apparently. .....

Now, feel free to discuss the debate instead of trying for a cheap-shot .... since you state she's a nominee for Thaksin (obviously) and he was behind the violence last year does your apparent support of her equal a wish for more violence? I would assume not ... so please avoid trying to paint me that way

She's running to be PM? She's a successful* businesswoman* ---- she only has the assets forfieture case against her politically .....

and if she is to govern what will she do, send her brother to talk to ...... oh wait he's a convicted felon on the run from justice and with terrorism charges still pending ... If she can't manage to hold her own in a debate then how will she ever manage to get anything done?

edit for typo

Edited May 15, 2011 by jdinasia

[bulmercke]

Of course - that would have been an ideal scenario. But Thaksin has encountered difficulties finding a suitable individual to lead Pheu Thai into this election and has unfortunately - or fortunately as the case amy be - had to fall back on his sister.

By suitable candidate you mean be sure to go after their only real goal, pardoning Thaksin and returning his wealth. Anyone else might have wavered in this

That's right. But a Pheu Thai government will really move the country along which is not happening at the moment.

[bulmercke]

Interesting, a rather arrogant sounding statement.........

Which statement did you find arrogant-sounding and why?

When did the Dems underestimate the opposition and how do you know this?

I thought the statement suggesting a debate and that Abhisit was ready to debate a political novice.....as a rather arrogant statement.....just my opinion

The government under estimated, and thus failed to control, the gathering, which led to the crackdown and subsequent violence.......in my opinion of course

Please do not hesitate to cantact me if you require any further information or assistance.......

Abhisit has a right to offer a debate and in doing so to make ridicule of the Thaksin puppet

she is a ridiculous choice for a PM and Abhisit's offer only serves to highlight just how ridiculous it is t

what about the media interviewing her about policy ?

it would be like Katie Couric interviewing Sara Palin

maybe she can see Cambodia from her door step.........

in my opinion:

the reds shouldn't have been there

no illegal gathering

no crackdown

no violence

all are fruit of the Thaksin poisoned red tree

i see that people in this forum are very eager to emit their opinions and speculations, is true that thaksin's sister apparently don't has a lot of experience in politics,but she has not answered yet, we all should wait to hear if she's gonne accept the challenge or not and then we can debate here, people should nout understimate her

Wasn't it Katie Couric who said - a few days after the Japanese nuke disaster - that radiation is good for you!

[bristolgeoff]

will her brother be the main topic,or if they let him back in without serving his time

[rubl]

I would have thought such a debate could well be set up to provide a sustainable base for true reconciliation...........both parties in agreement on most policies to move the country forward.......both candidates expressing a wish to move on in the best interest of Thailand

But I'm probably a bit ahead of most on that one........

With PTP slogan 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts' a debate between k. Abhisit and Ms. Yingluck seems unlikely to further reconciliation even when a lot of their policies are similar. One site being somewhat democratic , the other side being 'Thaksin'.

Probably you're being a wee bit behind on this. No offence, IMHO and so, in a really reconciliar voice and that on a nice Sunday Evening 11:45 PM :-)

[DP25]

In addition to a televised debate, they should have the audio of the debate broadcast over the village announcement system.

The video aspect is too important... sharing and/or communal television is needed or any other method of mass display. Project it onto inexpensive big screens.

As it would be the first debate ever (AFAIK), everyone, even in remote moo baans, needs to be able to see and hear it.

They, the public, have already said they wanted that, the candidates should make it happen.

.

That would be fantastic, but I can't imagine anything like public showings of the debate ever being permitted in PTP areas. Doubt the debate will happen anyway, if it does hopefully some will tune in

[Pi Sek]

By suitable candidate you mean be sure to go after their only real goal, pardoning Thaksin and returning his wealth. Anyone else might have wavered in this

That's right. But a Pheu Thai government will really move the country along which is not happening at the moment.

This is the statement that I hear every now and again that really needs some qualification. I've put this to several apparent PTP supporters over the last couple of weeks... how will "a Pheu Thai government will really move the country along" and clarify how their actions would do any better than that which "is not happening at the moment"? I honestly don't think they stand a snowball's chance in hell of doing any better... if Thaksin's history in the last 10 years is anything to go by, how can you expect any middle-to-long-term benefit for the country under PTP, if indeed "Thaksin thinks, Peua Thai acts"?

A Peua Thai government looks like they have a plan to increase inflation to an extent that a real benefit will be seen for maybe 5 years before the entire economy collapses! Much like the UK Labour party in the 70s, the effect of which of course led to the country going the other way and ending up with Thatcher.

[473geo]

I would have thought such a debate could well be set up to provide a sustainable base for true reconciliation...........both parties in agreement on most policies to move the country forward.......both candidates expressing a wish to move on in the best interest of Thailand

But I'm probably a bit ahead of most on that one........

With PTP slogan 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts' a debate between k. Abhisit and Ms. Yingluck seems unlikely to further reconciliation even when a lot of their policies are similar. One site being somewhat democratic , the other side being 'Thaksin'.

Probably you're being a wee bit behind on this. No offence, IMHO and so, in a really reconciliar voice and that on a nice Sunday Evening 11:45 PM :-)

Abhisit has already stated he will not stay a long time in Thai politics, I believe he would work hard to be the man that pulled the country together

You are welcome to hold your negative view point but the future can only have real chance of success if an workable attempt at reconciling and working for one Thailand is instigated

We shall see....I do not expect to identify many solutions on Tvisa.......I doubt reconciliation is upper most on the posters agenda....sad really......

[hanuman1]

Abhisit is a polished politician, good speaker and can think clearly and quickly on his feet. He would do well in a debate against anyone and I'm sure that point isn't lost on whoever decides whether Yingluck engages in the debate (including possibly herself).

An analogy the anti-red obsessive would appreciate would be the decision of a defence attorney to put the accused in the witness box or not. Even if the person is in reality not guilty, the failure to express him/her self adequately well in the face of skilled questioning would turn opinion against him/her.

So it is a tactical matter of political expediency which I think is what is preventing her from engaging in the debate.

Whilst it is true that ideally all sides - and particularly undecided voters - would benefit from a clear and coherent message being conveyed from the main candidate, PTP leaders must obviously think that there are other more effective (or less potentially damaging) ways to convey their message to voters.

Clear and able leadership has always been a problem for PTP and their followers without Thaksin and you might say the same thing about the Dems were it not for Abhisit and maybe Korn.

And yet PTP still after everything that has happened continue to be the single biggest party. I would suggest therefore that this is indicative of something more than just the machinations of each party's leadership. It is about the broader, underlying issues which just will not go away regardless of what one leader or another might say in a debate. This however would only apply to voters who have already made their minds up.

As far as courting undecided voters, pulling Yingluck out of a head to head debate I think would make sense to any political strategist.

Cheers.

h1

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Heh, I'd love a debate. It'd be a debate between two puppets, contesting an election to an institution that has been shown in 2006 to not hold real power when push comes to shove.

It'd be like watching Miss Piggy debate Kermit the Frog over who gets to run the muppet show.

And where the most pressing questions won't be asked nor answered, or all would be at risk of going to jail.

So.. bring it on, I guess. Or not. But if not, then I would hope some better reasons will be communicated, along the lines of the above.

[Pi Sek]

It'd be like watching Miss Piggy debate Kermit the Frog over who gets to run the muppet show.

I disagree with your view as I don't consider Abhisit to be a puppet at all, but I appreciate your post nonetheless for its humour

[jdinasia]

PTP (may) be considered the largest party. It does not follow that it is the party or even Thaksin that is popular. The defection of Newin (and BJT's subsequent smashing of PTP in the by-elections) tends to indicate that it is still the regional power-players that are the issue. S'noh may help PTP/Thaksin but then again I think his MP's are already there anyways .. so that may be a zero-sum game for PTP.

Chavalit and his group could be a game changer if they go against PTP and join a Dem-led coalition. They have another approx 20 days to declare what party they will run under/support --- but then we have the waiting game of seeing how the vote plays out in parliament.

Who knows .... there is still time for some of the other PTP leaders to decide to make a hasty retreat when their positions on the PTP party list becomes apparent. So, in my mind at least, it all comes down to how much loyalty has Thaksin bought from the regional political machines.

As for Yingluck choosing to debate or not .... it isn't her choice. "Thaksin thinks, PTP ......"

[hanuman1]

PTP (may) be considered the largest party. It does not follow that it is the party or even Thaksin that is popular. The defection of Newin (and BJT's subsequent smashing of PTP in the by-elections) tends to indicate that it is still the regional power-players that are the issue. S'noh may help PTP/Thaksin but then again I think his MP's are already there anyways .. so that may be a zero-sum game for PTP.

Chavalit and his group could be a game changer if they go against PTP and join a Dem-led coalition. They have another approx 20 days to declare what party they will run under/support --- but then we have the waiting game of seeing how the vote plays out in parliament.

Who knows .... there is still time for some of the other PTP leaders to decide to make a hasty retreat when their positions on the PTP party list becomes apparent. So, in my mind at least, it all comes down to how much loyalty has Thaksin bought from the regional political machines.

As for Yingluck choosing to debate or not .... it isn't her choice. "Thaksin thinks, PTP ......"

Good luck. Hope it all works out for you.

Just to clarify, my main point was that any party anywhere in the world fielding a candidate who they feel would come out badly in a head to head debate with their opposite number would choose to avoid such a debate. Politics 101, wouldn't you agree?

[animatic]

PTP (may) be considered the largest party. It does not follow that it is the party or even Thaksin that is popular. The defection of Newin (and BJT's subsequent smashing of PTP in the by-elections) tends to indicate that it is still the regional power-players that are the issue. S'noh may help PTP/Thaksin but then again I think his MP's are already there anyways .. so that may be a zero-sum game for PTP.

Chavalit and his group could be a game changer if they go against PTP and join a Dem-led coalition. They have another approx 20 days to declare what party they will run under/support --- but then we have the waiting game of seeing how the vote plays out in parliament.

Who knows .... there is still time for some of the other PTP leaders to decide to make a hasty retreat when their positions on the PTP party list becomes apparent. So, in my mind at least, it all comes down to how much loyalty has Thaksin bought from the regional political machines.

As for Yingluck choosing to debate or not .... it isn't her choice. "Thaksin thinks, PTP ......"

And that Chavalit decision may well rest on how close to the bosom Jatupron and his red cronies are held. Chavalit was well and truly jerked around and appalled by Red machinations, and then the LM charge which he was one of the quickest to step back from, twice. I suspect it will take a REALLY big pile in his hand to join back WITH Jatuporn on the party list.

[jdinasia]

PTP (may) be considered the largest party. It does not follow that it is the party or even Thaksin that is popular. The defection of Newin (and BJT's subsequent smashing of PTP in the by-elections) tends to indicate that it is still the regional power-players that are the issue. S'noh may help PTP/Thaksin but then again I think his MP's are already there anyways .. so that may be a zero-sum game for PTP.

Chavalit and his group could be a game changer if they go against PTP and join a Dem-led coalition. They have another approx 20 days to declare what party they will run under/support --- but then we have the waiting game of seeing how the vote plays out in parliament.

Who knows .... there is still time for some of the other PTP leaders to decide to make a hasty retreat when their positions on the PTP party list becomes apparent. So, in my mind at least, it all comes down to how much loyalty has Thaksin bought from the regional political machines.

As for Yingluck choosing to debate or not .... it isn't her choice. "Thaksin thinks, PTP ......"

Good luck. Hope it all works out for you.

Just to clarify, my main point was that any party anywhere in the world fielding a candidate who they feel would come out badly in a head to head debate with their opposite number would choose to avoid such a debate. Politics 101, wouldn't you agree?

No, I don't agree. I don't think there is a major party in the US/UK or OZ that would nominate someone for the highest position in the land and then not have them debate. Politics 101 would be "pick a candidate both qualified and capable ... as we know a debate will be forthcoming"

In the US they even have debates (inside the party itself) that are televised ... so all the Republican front runners get a chance to stand up against the rest from their party to see who can carry the message best.

Maybe someone can fill us in on the politics in the UK ----- has there ever been (in modern history) a general election where the candidates for the biggest 3 parties had one choose not to debate in a public forum that was televised? Has that happened in Australia? Hell, in the US they even televised the Palin/Biden debate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOWzc_bO5Dk

Edited May 15, 2011 by jdinasia

[hanuman1]

PTP (may) be considered the largest party. It does not follow that it is the party or even Thaksin that is popular. The defection of Newin (and BJT's subsequent smashing of PTP in the by-elections) tends to indicate that it is still the regional power-players that are the issue. S'noh may help PTP/Thaksin but then again I think his MP's are already there anyways .. so that may be a zero-sum game for PTP.

Chavalit and his group could be a game changer if they go against PTP and join a Dem-led coalition. They have another approx 20 days to declare what party they will run under/support --- but then we have the waiting game of seeing how the vote plays out in parliament.

Who knows .... there is still time for some of the other PTP leaders to decide to make a hasty retreat when their positions on the PTP party list becomes apparent. So, in my mind at least, it all comes down to how much loyalty has Thaksin bought from the regional political machines.

As for Yingluck choosing to debate or not .... it isn't her choice. "Thaksin thinks, PTP ......"

Good luck. Hope it all works out for you.

Just to clarify, my main point was that any party anywhere in the world fielding a candidate who they feel would come out badly in a head to head debate with their opposite number would choose to avoid such a debate. Politics 101, wouldn't you agree?

No, I don't agree. I don't think there is a major party in the US/UK or OZ that would nominate someone for the highest position in the land and then not have them debate. Politics 101 would be "pick a candidate both qualified and capable ... as we know a debate will be forthcoming"

In the US they even have debates (inside the party itself) that are televised ... so all the Republican front runners get a chance to stand up against the rest from their party to see who can carry the message best.

Maybe someone can fill us in on the politics in the UK ----- has there ever been (in modern history) a general election where the candidates for the biggest 3 parties had one choose not to debate in a public forum that was televised? Has that happened in Australia? Hell, in the US they even televised the Palin/Biden debate

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOWzc_bO5Dk

I'm sure you've noticed that the Thai political system isn't quite as developed as those in the other countries you mention. A result of this is that effective leaders are few and far between on all sides.

Your lofty standards are of course something that should be aimed at, but you're in the jungle complaining about all the trees.

I would go so far as to say putting any PTP person up against Abhisit in a debate would be risky for them. They're playing their hand as best they can, which you would expect from any party. It's just political expediency, like when the Dems refused to take part in those elections some years ago. It's their right to do it and is therefore acceptable as a political maneuver.

[jdinasia]

Just to clarify, my main point was that any party anywhere in the world fielding a candidate who they feel would come out badly in a head to head debate with their opposite number would choose to avoid such a debate. Politics 101, wouldn't you agree?

I was asked a question .. I answered it ... now it changes to being Thailand specific?

I would say that there are several (coarse) but capable orators in PTP ... Veera did fairly well in the 2010 redshirt negotiations .... a couple that were involved in the censure debate could do OK as well. The answer to the question asked remains the same ...

The Thai people deserve an open debate on the issues ... including what each party would do to work towards reconciliation. (Giving the PTP a chance to blast the Dems on how slow things are moving in that direction ... and the Dems a chance to blast PTP for its ties to violent and violence inciting UDD leaders ...)

Edited May 15, 2011 by jdinasia

[hanuman1]

Just to clarify, my main point was that any party anywhere in the world fielding a candidate who they feel would come out badly in a head to head debate with their opposite number would choose to avoid such a debate. Politics 101, wouldn't you agree?

I was asked a question .. I answered it ... now it changes to being Thailand specific?

I would say that there are several (coarse) but capable orators in PTP ... Veera did fairly well in the 2010 redshirt negotiations .... a couple that were involved in the censure debate could do OK as well. The answer to the question asked remains the same ...

The Thai people deserve an open debate on the issues ... including what each party would do to work towards reconciliation. (Giving the PTP a chance to blast the Dems on how slow things are moving in that direction ... and the Dems a chance to blast PTP for its ties to violent and violence inciting UDD leaders ...)

Apologies for developing the debate beyond general politics and I appreciate your dynamism in being able to handle a follow-up point.

There are a lot of things the Thai people deserve and haven't been getting for decades. Why you expect that this is going to change all of a sudden in the face of ongoing political point-scoring is a bit perplexing.

One would imagine that with Abhisit's evidently capable leadership (relative to other political heavyweights on all sides), the election should be a walkover. And yet we have the strength of PTP, which may well be down to the factors you indicated earlier, which in turn goes to show the underdeveloped nature of the Thai political system. This is the reason why people who complain about the leaders it produces are therefore whining about something that isn't going to change anytime soon and can't be blamed on any specific political party or movement. In my opinion.

[Buchholz]

At the end of the day, Yingluck is an unknown entity (even to many within the same party in which she is going to be their leader). As today's new thread points out, she is planning to speak about her "political plans and visions"... and there is no better method for doing this than a live, nation-wide televised debate.

If she backs away from the offer, it shows she's not really interested in explaining and expounding on those plans and visions.

Yingluck Shinawatra faces a week in the public spotlight. She is scheduled to introduce herself to Pheu Thai members as their prime ministerial hope today and then meet a greater audience yet on Wednesday to speak about her political plans and visions.

As expected, the PTP Party spokesman is already putting out lame excuses why she won't debate.

Thaksin stalwart PTP MP Surapong even suggested that if there was a debate that a stand-in should be used (Red Shirt Terrorist Suspect Out On Bail Natthawut) instead of Yingluck in the debate. A proxy for a proxy, as it were.

.

Edited May 15, 2011 by Buchholz

[timekeeper]

Interesting, a rather arrogant sounding statement.........

Are the Democrats under estimating the opposition yet again?

Which statement did you find arrogant-sounding and why?

When did the Dems underestimate the opposition and how do you know this?

I thought the statement suggesting a debate and that Abhisit was ready to debate a political novice.....as a rather arrogant statement.....just my opinion

The government under estimated, and thus failed to control, the gathering, which led to the crackdown and subsequent violence.......in my opinion of course

Please do not hesitate to cantact me if you require any further information or assistance.......

Abhisit has a right to offer a debate and in doing so to make ridicule of the Thaksin puppet

she is a ridiculous choice for a PM and Abhisit's offer only serves to highlight just how ridiculous it is t

what about the media interviewing her about policy ?

it would be like Katie Couric interviewing Sara Palin

maybe she can see Cambodia from her door step.........

in my opinion:

the reds shouldn't have been there

no illegal gathering

no crackdown

no violence

all are fruit of the Thaksin poisoned red tree

i see that people in this forum are very eager to emit their opinions and speculations, is true that thaksin's sister apparently don't has a lot of experience in politics,but she has not answered yet, we all should wait to hear if she's gonne accept the challenge or not and then we can debate here, people should nout understimate her

welcome red newbie, back as a re-run? or a genuine newcomer who wanted to wave a red flag?

either way, i see you have dived straight in to the political fray and ignored the hundreds of other fascinating non political posts on Thaivisa

welcome anyway, you have made it clear, from your posts why you are here..............

[scorecard]

PTP (may) be considered the largest party. It does not follow that it is the party or even Thaksin that is popular. The defection of Newin (and BJT's subsequent smashing of PTP in the by-elections) tends to indicate that it is still the regional power-players that are the issue. S'noh may help PTP/Thaksin but then again I think his MP's are already there anyways .. so that may be a zero-sum game for PTP.

Chavalit and his group could be a game changer if they go against PTP and join a Dem-led coalition. They have another approx 20 days to declare what party they will run under/support --- but then we have the waiting game of seeing how the vote plays out in parliament.

Who knows .... there is still time for some of the other PTP leaders to decide to make a hasty retreat when their positions on the PTP party list becomes apparent. So, in my mind at least, it all comes down to how much loyalty has Thaksin bought from the regional political machines.

As for Yingluck choosing to debate or not .... it isn't her choice. "Thaksin thinks, PTP ......"

Further, perhaps it is the 'biggest' party, but that doesn't mean it's the: most capable, most insightful, most honest, most forward looking etc etc.

In fact there is the possibility that it's 'big' because it has a big % of people who still follow (still very much want) the bad parts of what Thai politics has been for many decades - join the gang, pay your deposit, and get a chance at the feeding trough.

[scorecard]

I would have thought such a debate could well be set up to provide a sustainable base for true reconciliation...........both parties in agreement on most policies to move the country forward.......both candidates expressing a wish to move on in the best interest of Thailand

But I'm probably a bit ahead of most on that one........

With PTP slogan 'Thaksin thinks, Pheu Thai acts' a debate between k. Abhisit and Ms. Yingluck seems unlikely to further reconciliation even when a lot of their policies are similar. One site being somewhat democratic , the other side being 'Thaksin'.

Probably you're being a wee bit behind on this. No offence, IMHO and so, in a really reconciliar voice and that on a nice Sunday Evening 11:45 PM :-)

Abhisit has already stated he will not stay a long time in Thai politics, I believe he would work hard to be the man that pulled the country together

You are welcome to hold your negative view point but the future can only have real chance of success if an workable attempt at reconciling and working for one Thailand is instigated

We shall see....I do not expect to identify many solutions on Tvisa.......I doubt reconciliation is upper most on the posters agenda....sad really......

I disgaree with your last paragraph, but perhaps you would like to share what you mean by reconsiliation. This word has been thrown around a lot in the last 12 months or so, but 'what does it mean'? Perhaps you'd like to share your ideas about what reconciliation would look like, the steps to take, the appraoch, the process, who would be involved, etc. Look forward to your response.

[virtualtraveller]

Give her a chance, she hasn't even been nominated/confirmed as their PM candidate yet!

Still, a debate should be mandatory, given the proxy state of politics in Thailand.

[anterian]

public speaking is a learnt skill and has no direct bearing on one's ability to formulate and execute policies. The debate is at the core of the British higher education system, hence Abhisit scores well against ordinary Thais who lack his background. However, when Abhisit is seen performing against British questioners, for example on "Hard talk", he comes across as mediocre.

For Abhisit to challenge Yingluck is like a middle ranking chess master challenging a novice. There is no kudos in a win. But then being a chess master does not mean you can mend a fuse, or even be an able politician.

[animatic]

If we took away Thaksins money than the 'Legend' of himself that money has created. The PTP would be moribund and Yingluck would not hardly be on any ticket.

Abhisit's main impediments to success are/were two.

1) The old school players in Thai politics who have not died off yet, so must be dealt with. An unpleasant reality, but reality none the less.

2) And the world economic downturn which is the only real effect that is giving PTP any kind of edge, because they spin repeatedly that the economy is bad ONLY because of Abhisit, and not because it is bad world wide. When the reality it would be much more harsh here if not for Abhisits choice of Korn.

Without these two intractable issues Abhisit would be doing quite well. Thaksin of course abraces the old school dinosaurs and powerbrokers in EXACTLY the old school way that Thailand does not need.

Abhisit has a record of getting in the face of coalition partners and old school players and slowing, minimizing or stopping their gameplans, within the realm of the possible. Not 100%, because simply put that IS impossible to do now. I think of Police General positions and Newins buses and the Computer purchases scandals.

100% effective. No. Effective in a positive way yes.

Edited May 16, 2011 by animatic

[sillybilly]

Sorry got a question but no idea where to post it so please feel free to move it if need be...

Has Thaksin said anything in reply to Jutaporns bail being revoked???

I can`t seem to find anything.

[animatic]

public speaking is a learnt skill and has no direct bearing on one's ability to formulate and execute policies. The debate is at the core of the British higher education system, hence Abhisit scores well against ordinary Thais who lack his background. However, when Abhisit is seen performing against British questioners, for example on "Hard talk", he comes across as mediocre.

For Abhisit to challenge Yingluck is like a middle ranking chess master challenging a novice. There is no kudos in a win. But then being a chess master does not mean you can mend a fuse, or even be an able politician.

Oratory most certainly DOES have much to do with a Prime Minister job on both the local and international stages. To think otherwise is myopic at best, and foolhardy in most cases, and suicidal at worst.

Edited May 16, 2011 by animatic