Yingluck's Secret Weapon: Nong Pipe

[Bagwan]

The only thing i don't like is the boy being a Chelsea fan...c'mon boy if you wanna win you gotta stay with the winners...stay with the champions Manchester United...

Maybe the lady should be looking to buy up some suitable land for the time when her oh so cute son gets fed up with the antics of hooligans with funny haircuts and unsightly tattoos kicking a bladder, and often each other, around a field and takes up a game that requires activity between the ears, sportsmanship and good manners i.e. golf.

I should remind this Quixotic lady that being involved in the purchase of land in any way when PM can put you in Queer Street so she hasn't got a lot of time to pamper the child further.

[BangkokHank]

When I first saw the title of this topic, "Yingluck's Secret Weapon: Nong Pipe", I thought this was just the nickname of a pipe she secretly carries around to whack her enemies with.

Anyway, I don't see how it can be a good thing to have as a candidate a person who is there for no other reason than to gain amnesty for her brother - no matter how qualified she might or might not be for office - and no matter how fresh her face might be.

[samurai]

No-one is really interested in Abhisit.

I find that a quite remarkable statement, that nobody is interested in the current PM, can you offer any supporting evidence for it ?

Evidence for something that don't really exist?

Good job I'm sitting down. I must of imagined a person who has featured very heavily in the past eight years of my life, along with all her friends and family.

See that? That's your credibility, that is.

You could look how much internet traffic the searches for different persons in Thai politics generate.

Google trend is a nice tool for it. but its not allowed to post links to it so you have to check it out by your own.

Abhisit heavily featured in the last eight years? You must really live in another part of the town.

But wasn't it you who noticed that here are nearly no Abhisit topics in discussion? what is heavily featured for you?

Remember that? That's your credibility, that is.

[Ricardo]

No-one is really interested in Abhisit.

I find that a quite remarkable statement, that nobody is interested in the current PM, can you offer any supporting evidence for it ?

Evidence for something that don't really exist?

So your statement has no foundation ? Ok !

[samurai]

No-one is really interested in Abhisit.

I find that a quite remarkable statement, that nobody is interested in the current PM, can you offer any supporting evidence for it ?

Evidence for something that don't really exist?

So your statement has no foundation ? Ok !

HUH?

I see no-one who is really interested in Abhisit. Please explain how I could bring evidence for something what I think that don't exist.

Count the the threads here on Yingluck, count the threads on Abhisits election campaign. Do you see a difference or not?

Abhisit is totally under represented compared to that who much he actually should be represented as the current PM.

Jesus, even a red shirt would understand this.

Edited May 25, 2011 by samurai

[rubl]

Some samurai quotes:

"No-one is really interested in Abhisit."

"Evidence for something that don't really exist? "

"I see no-one who is really interested in Abhisit. Please explain how I could bring evidence for something what I think that don't exist."

"Jesus, even a red shirt would understand this."

I see the problem of providing evidence for something that you think doesn't exist. On the other hand only one example would suffice to prove you wrong in your thoughts. So Yahoo-ing on +thailand +abhisit I found

"Thailand election on 3 July will test PM Abhisit"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13334852

So, even trollers should understand this

PS don't bother, I only list one example, I skipped the multitude of others.

Edited May 25, 2011 by rubl

[Insight]

You could look how much internet traffic the searches for different persons in Thai politics generate.

Google trend is a nice tool for it. but its not allowed to post links to it so you have to check it out by your own.

Abhisit heavily featured in the last eight years? You must really live in another part of the town.

But wasn't it you who noticed that here are nearly no Abhisit topics in discussion? what is heavily featured for you?

Remember that? That's your credibility, that is.

Usually I'd point you in the direction of a PR 101, but something tells me you already have a firm grasp.

Enjoy the reality your trying to sell.

[kathukid]

Yingluck's secret asset. Easy on the eyes..... Suay Jing Jing

And for young master Pipe.. good for him! His own pitch!

[samurai]

I see the problem of providing evidence for something that you think doesn't exist. On the other hand only one example would suffice to prove you wrong in your thoughts. So Yahoo-ing on +thailand +abhisit I found

"Thailand election on 3 July will test PM Abhisit"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13334852

So, even trollers should understand this

PS don't bother, I only list one example, I skipped the multitude of others.

FYI.

No-one at the BBC will really participating in the Thai election. Thai people will do. (and thai people speak thai, not angrit. so if you do an evaluation, switch the language and the media channels)

But okay, a few more people than "no-one" are interested. I didn't thought someone would take that for literally. only some trolls will maybe deliberate misunderstand this.

What I mean is that the number of people interested in Abhisit is extremely and significant low compared with that what it actually should be considering that he is the current PM and wants win an election.

Edited May 25, 2011 by samurai

[rubl]

Some samurai quotes:

"No-one is really interested in Abhisit."

"Evidence for something that don't really exist? "

"I see no-one who is really interested in Abhisit. Please explain how I could bring evidence for something what I think that don't exist."

"Jesus, even a red shirt would understand this."

I see the problem of providing evidence for something that you think doesn't exist. On the other hand only one example would suffice to prove you wrong in your thoughts. So Yahoo-ing on +thailand +abhisit I found

"Thailand election on 3 July will test PM Abhisit"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13334852

So, even trollers should understand this

PS don't bother, I only list one example, I skipped the multitude of others.

FYI.

No-one at the BBC will really participating in the Thai election. Thai people will do. (and thai people speak thai, not angrit. so if you do an evaluation, switch the language and the media channels)

But okay, a few more people than "no-one" are interested. I didn't thought someone would take that for literally. only some trolls will maybe deliberate misunderstand this.

What I mean is that the number of people interested in Abhisit is extremely and significant low compared with that what it actually should be considering that he is the current PM and wants win an election.

If you say so

PS I put all of my post back since it's relevant to (try to) understand the reasoning given.

[BigJohnnyBKK]

>> I assume we'll not see much of Nong Pipe. Like all kids in Thailand he's got to go to school (chauffeur driven in his case probably).

80%+ of the international school students here are ferried to and fro by chauffeurs and so what? Having a full-time driver is not an indicator of any kind of special status within that class. Just the fact that their kid is going to such a school is the real indicator, the school expenses in one year alone for one child are more than what the driver would get salary over five years, it's less of an expense than what they would spend for air conditioning in just one of their houses!

Even a poor English teacher can afford a full-time driver if she wants one - paying for the car itself is infinitely more difficult, so don't make it out to be such a big deal. . .

[Insight]

But okay, a few more people than "no-one" are interested. I didn't thought someone would take that for literally. only some trolls will maybe deliberate misunderstand this.

So "no one" doesn't actually mean "no one".

No one believes you.