Thaksin Going For 'Psychological Impact': Abhisit

[anterian]

It seems to me that Yingluck is behaving like a good politician and candidate, no personal attacks on her opposition, and a simple message that ordinary people understand.

Abhisit in contrast is running scared, making wild accusations. He is so busy seeing Thaksin as his enemy that he is ignoring Yingluck, a big mistake.

In football terms, Yingluck has the ball and Thaksin is running interference, Abhisit is too foolish to see this.

[Thai at Heart]

C'mon now, give credit where it is due. Mme. Yingluck has run a solid campaign so far. No major gaffes, no panic, no running off at the mouth, no remarks in desparation. She's been able to hold it together and get her message out.

The Democrats have run a lacklustre campaign. The Abhisit adminstration has introduced some interesting ideas and it has tried to implement some policies to benefit the people. Yet, one wouldn't know about this aspect of the Abhisit administration because the Democrats have gone off message and been distracted by Mr. Thaksin. If Abhisit wants to keep some of the voters he needs to get back on message and stick with that message.

I commented in another thread about 3 weeks ago when the Dems came up with their '10' policy points, that it offered absolutely nothing to their core supporters. It was all about countering PTP and completely aimed to the poor. All well and good, but that isn't enough to simply counter PTP. When I said that the Dems would struggle with that as their policies, people said the Dems would probably come up with '10' things for the middle class.

Their message has been completely stolen by PTP for a variety of reasons, one of which is probably that the poor don't believe that the Dems will ever enact most of these policies, whereas PTP probably will. Having read that in TRT's day, it was really the first political party to start survey groups, do proper analysis of their message, I won't doubt that they have done it again. As an article by the economist in another thread mentions, the PTP policies have been simple, clear and articulated very well. They have mangled the Dems strategy of simply pointing fingers at Yingluck personally and it wouldn't surprise me that PTP does get a majority, if not very close. Abhisit is obviously a very able guy, but he really is a very lacklustre campaigner. He still hasn't shrugged off the image that he is their only because the army want it that way, and there is still the idea front and centre that if PTP win, the army will step in.

Politics isn't easy, but for all the education in the world, politics is 99% perception. As an example, when Abhisit talks about putting up the minimum wage, the poor don't perceive that he will do it, and the business owners can't believe he had said it. The policies that the Dems are talking about are annoying their core support, and not being believed by the poor. Why did True claim that DTAC is a foreign company? Because they know that PTP will probably open up those types of industries, but Abhisit hasn't even mentioned this issue in the campaign I believe. It was as much a cry for attention from True as anything else.

That said, TIT, and who am I to know everything, maybe the Dems pull it out of the fire, but I don't get that feeling. May we live in interesting (and hopefully peaceful) times.

[gleeglee]

How sad you are!!

so you want to vote for these people

red shirts protestors being paid

Desperation & bitterness from Abhisit while Yingluck calmly goes about her business. This campaign has been run beautifully by Thaksin against the hapless Democrats.

[geriatrickid]

"Yingluck has been dismissed as a dumb uneducated stooge"

She has a Masters degree in Business Admin. I doubt anyone considers her uneducated. Lacking experience yes, but unecucated, no way

Though ti's easy to wonder how she got that, even at a marginal USA Uni, with the marginal english language skills she has shown during the Reuters interview.... just saying, US unis expect solid language skills.

Sadly, the nature of people is to attack the person rather than the political policies. The comment in respect to language skills indicates a profound ignorance and belies a condescending position.

It is indeed true that Mme. Yngluck has an accent when she speaks in English and does not demonstrate the same fluency as PM Abhisit. This does not demonstrate incompetence nor ignorance. On the contrary, it highlights the discipline and tenacity that the non-english language speaker had as a student. Universities, particularly those that admit foreign students, do test for language skill proficiency. Hence the requirement of passing a TOEFL type of exam (e..g. CAEL, MELB, IELTS etc.) as a condition of admission.

How many of those ridiculing Mme. Yingluck's education would be capable of gaining enterance to an MBA program and of doing it in a very foreign language?

U.S. universities may indeed expect solid english language skills, but the typical student today is often incapable of writing a comprehensible paper. Some of my classes were chock full of asians that had a hard time speaking english, yet they managed to achieve excellent grades. One should not denigrate a person because his or her english language speaking skills are poor.

It is what one does with an education that counts. For every person that graduates at the top of the class, there is someone that graduates at the bottom. The bottom ranked person can achieve greatness if he or she is possessed of a work ethic, determination and drive.

[animatic]

"Yingluck has been dismissed as a dumb uneducated stooge"

She has a Masters degree in Business Admin. I doubt anyone considers her uneducated. Lacking experience yes, but unecucated, no way

Though ti's easy to wonder how she got that, even at a marginal USA Uni, with the marginal english language skills she has shown during the Reuters interview.... just saying, US unis expect solid language skills.

Sadly, the nature of people is to attack the person rather than the political policies. The comment in respect to language skills indicates a profound ignorance and belies a condescending position.

It is indeed true that Mme. Yngluck has an accent when she speaks in English and does not demonstrate the same fluency as PM Abhisit. This does not demonstrate incompetence nor ignorance. On the contrary, it highlights the discipline and tenacity that the non-english language speaker had as a student. Universities, particularly those that admit foreign students, do test for language skill proficiency. Hence the requirement of passing a TOEFL type of exam (e..g. CAEL, MELB, IELTS etc.) as a condition of admission.

How many of those ridiculing Mme. Yingluck's education would be capable of gaining enterance to an MBA program and of doing it in a very foreign language?

U.S. universities may indeed expect solid english language skills, but the typical student today is often incapable of writing a comprehensible paper. Some of my classes were chock full of asians that had a hard time speaking english, yet they managed to achieve excellent grades. One should not denigrate a person because his or her english language speaking skills are poor.

It is what one does with an education that counts. For every person that graduates at the top of the class, there is someone that graduates at the bottom. The bottom ranked person can achieve greatness if he or she is possessed of a work ethic, determination and drive.

I was attacking her skills in the job,

because I don't believe she should HAVE the job.

One of these needed skills is English language communications skills. Hers were demonstrated during an reuters interview.

She is better than Samak, but that's not an excuse.

Marginal University.

http://www.webometri...=kentucky+state

World ranked # 3279 Kentucky State University

When someone wants a job or a position governing, their abilities and skill sets are totally germain to their doing the job properly.

Discussing them is a public duty, not an personal insult.

You, on the other hand, attacked me as:

" indicates a profound ignorance "

thank you so much... you should know better,

but apparently can not help yourself.

"and belies a condescending position"

And the word "belies",

means ; it makes your assertion of a 'condescending position' as not so

If you want to insult me, try and use the correct words.

And that WAS condescending, since there was nothing to rise up to.

Edited June 17, 2011 by soundman

[sirchai]

C'mon now, give credit where it is due. Mme. Yingluck has run a solid campaign so far. No major gaffes, no panic, no running off at the mouth, no remarks in desparation. She's been able to hold it together and get her message out.

The Democrats have run a lacklustre campaign. The Abhisit adminstration has introduced some interesting ideas and it has tried to implement some policies to benefit the people. Yet, one wouldn't know about this aspect of the Abhisit administration because the Democrats have gone off message and been distracted by Mr. Thaksin. If Abhisit wants to keep some of the voters he needs to get back on message and stick with that message.

Personally I think her brother and other advisors have run a solid campaign so far, perfectly orchestrated, must have cost some solid money

Common sense, and a calm demeanor are a character trait. It is not a quality that can be purchased.

It's rather facile to dismiss the discipline Mme. Yingluck has shown as being the product of campaign donations. PM Abhisit benefits from the support of some very wealthy people that include some of the largest land owners and corporate bosses in Thailand. He too has had the benefit of money. Yet, he has not managed to stay on message and to focus. Mr. Abhisit is described as a man of intellect and superior education, while Mme. Yingluck has been dismissed as a dumb uneducated stooge. He should have been able to knock her off message and put her on the defensive. Instead she stayed cool while PM Abhisit is providing the public a display of worried despair.

"

Yingluck has been dismissed as a dumb uneducated stooge"

She has a Masters degree in Business Admin. I doubt anyone considers her uneducated. Lacking experience yes, but unecucated, no way

It has reached a point where a Terminator like Arnold Schwarzenegger should jump in. California won't miss him.....:jap:

[jdinasia]

C'mon now, give credit where it is due. Mme. Yingluck has run a solid campaign so far. No major gaffes, no panic, no running off at the mouth, no remarks in desparation. She's been able to hold it together and get her message out.

The Democrats have run a lacklustre campaign. The Abhisit adminstration has introduced some interesting ideas and it has tried to implement some policies to benefit the people. Yet, one wouldn't know about this aspect of the Abhisit administration because the Democrats have gone off message and been distracted by Mr. Thaksin. If Abhisit wants to keep some of the voters he needs to get back on message and stick with that message.

Personally I think her brother and other advisors have run a solid campaign so far, perfectly orchestrated, must have cost some solid money

Common sense, and a calm demeanor are a character trait. It is not a quality that can be purchased.

It's rather facile to dismiss the discipline Mme. Yingluck has shown as being the product of campaign donations. PM Abhisit benefits from the support of some very wealthy people that include some of the largest land owners and corporate bosses in Thailand. He too has had the benefit of money. Yet, he has not managed to stay on message and to focus. Mr. Abhisit is described as a man of intellect and superior education, while Mme. Yingluck has been dismissed as a dumb uneducated stooge. He should have been able to knock her off message and put her on the defensive. Instead she stayed cool while PM Abhisit is providing the public a display of worried despair.

It isn't facile to point out that all Yingluck has done is avoid actually discussing topics in a reasoned and meaningful way. That she has avoided any chance of being "knocked off message" by simply not giving any message at all. Her sole message has been "I am my brother's clone." and "Thaksin thinks, PTP does" .... Her only big step took her completely off message for the rest of the country. That is when she put Chalerm in charge of the amnesty -- but the next day stated amnesty wasn't a priority.

If you keep a candidate quiet and don't have them talk about how they will accomplish something and instead only make promises then of course it is hard to "knock them off message" -- because there is no message.

[h90]

C'mon now, give credit where it is due. Mme. Yingluck has run a solid campaign so far. No major gaffes, no panic, no running off at the mouth, no remarks in desparation. She's been able to hold it together and get her message out.

The Democrats have run a lacklustre campaign. The Abhisit adminstration has introduced some interesting ideas and it has tried to implement some policies to benefit the people. Yet, one wouldn't know about this aspect of the Abhisit administration because the Democrats have gone off message and been distracted by Mr. Thaksin. If Abhisit wants to keep some of the voters he needs to get back on message and stick with that message.

Actually no: I know a lot Democrat voters who are very angry with the Democrats and want to vote "No". Painting the Thaksin Ghost on the wall is now changing them into voting Democrats, because it is still better than get Thaksin back.

[wackysleet]

Jekyll and Hyde: Thaksin and Nattawud shouting their mouths off with their usual bluster and BS, then Yingluck sounding conciliatory and poise, man these guys have reading the 'know to run a campaign' books.

Still, a rats a rat. Wolf in sheep's clothing...

Act like the innocent flower but be the serpent under it (that's Shakespeare btw Maewrocks just in case you ill informed lot were wondering)

Perhaps the ill informed would have edited your first paragraph.

[mikebell]

Jekyll and Hyde: Thaksin and Nattawud shouting their mouths off with their usual bluster and BS, then Yingluck sounding conciliatory and poise, man these guys have reading the 'know to run a campaign' books.

Still, a rats a rat. Wolf in sheep's clothing...

Act like the innocent flower but be the serpent under it (that's Shakespeare btw Maewrocks just in case you ill informed lot were wondering)

Lady Macbeth urging her husband to kill the king. Appropriate?

[RogueExpat]

Yes sir,

There is no doubt about the effectiveness of the multi billion Baht Shinawatra marketing machine, however, if you scratch off the gloss, you'll still find the same gangrenous flesh underneath ready to bring more rot and corruption into Thai soceity.

It really is a pity that the other side can't cough up the same sort of dough to compete in the media, but hey, they obviously don't have anywhere near the same type of income. Too busy trying to make tax Bahts actually do some good for the country.

[Buchholz]

Thaksin is the first, and so far the only one, to be able to unite a clear majority of voters, nation wide, around his name.

and he now admits that was less than desirable.

He was quoted as saying that a single-party government has proved to be an unsuccessful format for Thailand, referring to his own experience during his premiership.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=431798&view=findpost&p=4490221

[robertson468]

C'mon now, give credit where it is due. Mme. Yingluck has run a solid campaign so far. No major gaffes, no panic, no running off at the mouth, no remarks in desparation. She's been able to hold it together and get her message out.

The Democrats have run a lacklustre campaign. The Abhisit adminstration has introduced some interesting ideas and it has tried to implement some policies to benefit the people. Yet, one wouldn't know about this aspect of the Abhisit administration because the Democrats have gone off message and been distracted by Mr. Thaksin. If Abhisit wants to keep some of the voters he needs to get back on message and stick with that message.

Must agree with you there. Unfortunately Abhisit's performance so far has not been any where near as charismatic as Yingluck"s and in the game of politics, charisma counts for a lot - just look at some of the people who became President of the good old USA and the disaster Gordon Brown was in the UK. Charisma rules okay!!

[yeeowww]

Desperation & bitterness from Abhisit while Yingluck calmly goes about her business. This campaign has been run beautifully by Thaksin against the hapless Democrats.

If you call making ridiculously unfulfillable promises/handouts to those vapid enough to believe them, and evading an intellectual debate so as not to expose the fact that there is no brain power behind the party "beautiful", then I suppose you're entitled to your opinion & we'll see you on TV at the next mob scene. But the whole thing with the supporters of Puah Thai is that they are such "low hanging fruit" it's a piece of cake to convince them of anything... about as much as it is to convince monkeys to take a banana, as their logic is on about a par.

[lannarebirth]

Desperation & bitterness from Abhisit while Yingluck calmly goes about her business. This campaign has been run beautifully by Thaksin against the hapless Democrats.

In this respect I agree with you. Somehow PTP has managed to separate itself from the party that has disgraced itself as an opposition party these past years. When Thaksin was in power they seemed to have no idea how to govern a nation democratically. when he has been out of power they seem to have no idea how to be"a party in opposition". So what they hell are they other than people who feed on other people (not unlike the "amartya" ), who are not the Democrats.

Edited June 17, 2011 by lannarebirth

[bungalownights]

Thaksin has done a great job this election.

The momentum is well and truly with PT and gaining.

Abhisit by comparison looks like a whining, inexperienced, impotent little man.

I just hope that when he loses the election (which he will) he shows a bit more respect for his political opponents.

Edited June 17, 2011 by bungalownights

[RogueExpat]

Thaksin has done a great job this election.

The momentum is well and truly with PT and gaining.

Abhisit by comparison looks like a whining, inexperienced, impotent little man.

I just hope that when he loses the election (which he will) he shows a bit more respect for his political opponents.

What a complete & utter load of un-substantiated brainwashed Shinawatra propaganda.

[lannarebirth]

C'mon now, give credit where it is due. Mme. Yingluck has run a solid campaign so far. No major gaffes, no panic, no running off at the mouth, no remarks in desparation. She's been able to hold it together and get her message out.

The Democrats have run a lacklustre campaign. The Abhisit adminstration has introduced some interesting ideas and it has tried to implement some policies to benefit the people. Yet, one wouldn't know about this aspect of the Abhisit administration because the Democrats have gone off message and been distracted by Mr. Thaksin. If Abhisit wants to keep some of the voters he needs to get back on message and stick with that message.

Must agree with you there. Unfortunately Abhisit's performance so far has not been any where near as charismatic as Yingluck"s and in the game of politics, charisma counts for a lot - just look at some of the people who became President of the good old USA and the disaster Gordon Brown was in the UK. Charisma rules okay!!

Charismatic when? When comforting victims of flooding? When establishing rapport with old folks and starting a pension scheme on their behalf? When changing the way the universal health care is distributed so some people might actually get some benifit from it. Charismatic how? You know charismatic and bullshit and lying aren't the same thing, right?

[RogueExpat]

You know charismatic and bullshit and lying aren't the same thing, right?

Yeah, but look who you get when you roll all those traits up into one person.

[lovelomsak]

C'mon now, give credit where it is due. Mme. Yingluck has run a solid campaign so far. No major gaffes, no panic, no running off at the mouth, no remarks in desparation. She's been able to hold it together and get her message out.

The Democrats have run a lacklustre campaign. The Abhisit adminstration has introduced some interesting ideas and it has tried to implement some policies to benefit the people. Yet, one wouldn't know about this aspect of the Abhisit administration because the Democrats have gone off message and been distracted by Mr. Thaksin. If Abhisit wants to keep some of the voters he needs to get back on message and stick with that message.

The democrats never learned how to run a campaign. They have their captive electorate in Bangkok, then buy (literally speaking) the support of smaller factions to form a coalition.

Thaksin is the first, and so far the only one, to be able to unite a clear majority of voters, nation wide, around his name. One can argue that Thaksin is the first "modern" politician in Thailand and will probably remembered as the father of modern democracy in Thailand

Jurgen for once I agree with you. Politics is politics and it can influence many things in its time but history is what is learnt from today in the future.

I often look at Thaksin as the Tommy Douglas of democracy in Thailand. The more i look at what is happening here as an observer I keep seeing what appears to be a strong parrallel between Tommy Douglas's fight for medicare in Canada as Thaksin is having in bringing democracry to Thailand. There is a movie out about Tommy Douglas and his fight for medicare , I think people here should watch it and look at what he went through. The name of the movie is Prairie Giant.

Edited June 17, 2011 by lovelomsak

[JurgenG]

The democrats never learned how to run a campaign. They have their captive electorate in Bangkok, then buy (literally speaking) the support of smaller factions to form a coalition.

Thaksin is the first, and so far the only one, to be able to unite a clear majority of voters, nation wide, around his name. One can argue that Thaksin is the first "modern" politician in Thailand and will probably remembered as the father of modern democracy in Thailand

You don't think Thaksin did any of his own buying of smaller parties? Particularly prior to the election that he got a majority.

The Thai Rak Thai Party was the first political party in Thailand to have been represented by more than half of the Members of the House of Representatives. In the 2005 legislative election, the party's candidates were elected to occupy 376 seats of the 500 seats in the House of Representatives, defeating the largest opposition party, the Democrat Party. It won 96 seats. After the election, Thailand's first single party government was successfully formed.

One man, one party, no compromise.

The Democrats can't even dream of coming close to that.

A new area in Thai politic, that why his opponents were so scared of him.

Edited June 17, 2011 by JurgenG

[whybother]

The democrats never learned how to run a campaign. They have their captive electorate in Bangkok, then buy (literally speaking) the support of smaller factions to form a coalition.

Thaksin is the first, and so far the only one, to be able to unite a clear majority of voters, nation wide, around his name. One can argue that Thaksin is the first "modern" politician in Thailand and will probably remembered as the father of modern democracy in Thailand

You don't think Thaksin did any of his own buying of smaller parties? Particularly prior to the election that he got a majority.

The Thai Rak Thai Party was the first political party in Thailand to have been represented by more than half of the Members of the House of Representatives. In the 2005 legislative election, the party's candidates were elected to occupy 376 seats of the 500 seats in the House of Representatives, defeating the largest opposition party, the Democrat Party. It won 96 seats. After the election, Thailand's first single party government was successfully formed.

One man, one party, no compromise.

The Democrats can't even dream of coming close to that.

A new area in Thai politic, that why his opponents were so scared of him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_Rak_Thai#Factions

Various factions who joined the TRT between the 2001 and 2005 elections.

Wang Nam Yen - Sanoh - "Sanoh preferred to play the role of kingmaker by shifting his group from party to party."

Wang Phayanak - "This group is led by Deputy Prime Minister Phinij Jarusombat,[4] who was leader of the small Seritham Party before it merged with Thai Rak Thai after the 2001 elections."

Wang Lam Takong - "composed of the remnants of the old Chart Pattana Party, which merged into Thai Rak Thai before the 2005 elections."

Chonburi Faction - "split from the Chart Thai Party before the 2005 elections to join Thai Rak Thai."

Buri Ram Faction - "Like the Chonburi Faction, this group also defected from the Chart Thai Party before the 2005 elections."

Phor Mod Dam - "former New Aspiration Party, which merged with Thai Rak Thai after the 2001 elections."

See, I can cut and paste from Wiki too.

[mrtoad]

Desperation & bitterness from Abhisit while Yingluck calmly goes about her business. This campaign has been run beautifully by Thaksin against the hapless Democrats.

What meds are you on, I'd love to take some to get away from reality?

[samurai]

The democrats never learned how to run a campaign. They have their captive electorate in Bangkok, then buy (literally speaking) the support of smaller factions to form a coalition.

Thaksin is the first, and so far the only one, to be able to unite a clear majority of voters, nation wide, around his name. One can argue that Thaksin is the first "modern" politician in Thailand and will probably remembered as the father of modern democracy in Thailand

You don't think Thaksin did any of his own buying of smaller parties? Particularly prior to the election that he got a majority.

The Thai Rak Thai Party was the first political party in Thailand to have been represented by more than half of the Members of the House of Representatives. In the 2005 legislative election, the party's candidates were elected to occupy 376 seats of the 500 seats in the House of Representatives, defeating the largest opposition party, the Democrat Party. It won 96 seats. After the election, Thailand's first single party government was successfully formed.

One man, one party, no compromise.

The Democrats can't even dream of coming close to that.

A new area in Thai politic, that why his opponents were so scared of him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_Rak_Thai#Factions

Various factions who joined the TRT between the 2001 and 2005 elections.

Wang Nam Yen - Sanoh - "Sanoh preferred to play the role of kingmaker by shifting his group from party to party."

Wang Phayanak - "This group is led by Deputy Prime Minister Phinij Jarusombat,[4] who was leader of the small Seritham Party before it merged with Thai Rak Thai after the 2001 elections."

Wang Lam Takong - "composed of the remnants of the old Chart Pattana Party, which merged into Thai Rak Thai before the 2005 elections."

Chonburi Faction - "split from the Chart Thai Party before the 2005 elections to join Thai Rak Thai."

Buri Ram Faction - "Like the Chonburi Faction, this group also defected from the Chart Thai Party before the 2005 elections."

Phor Mod Dam - "former New Aspiration Party, which merged with Thai Rak Thai after the 2001 elections."

See, I can cut and paste from Wiki too.

It says nothing about "buying of smaller parties".

[mrtoad]

C'mon now, give credit where it is due. Mme. Yingluck has run a solid campaign so far. No major gaffes, no panic, no running off at the mouth, no remarks in desparation. She's been able to hold it together and get her message out.

The Democrats have run a lacklustre campaign. The Abhisit adminstration has introduced some interesting ideas and it has tried to implement some policies to benefit the people. Yet, one wouldn't know about this aspect of the Abhisit administration because the Democrats have gone off message and been distracted by Mr. Thaksin. If Abhisit wants to keep some of the voters he needs to get back on message and stick with that message.

The democrats never learned how to run a campaign. They have their captive electorate in Bangkok, then buy (literally speaking) the support of smaller factions to form a coalition.

Thaksin is the first, and so far the only one, to be able to unite a clear majority of voters, nation wide, around his name. One can argue that Thaksin is the first "modern" politician in Thailand and will probably remembered as the father of modern democracy in Thailand

the father of modern democracy in Thailand?? If the topic was not that serious, I would be laughing!

Did Thaksin not say that "democracy was not his goal?"

[samurai]

Desperation & bitterness from Abhisit while Yingluck calmly goes about her business. This campaign has been run beautifully by Thaksin against the hapless Democrats.

What meds are you on, I'd love to take some to get away from reality?

It is the reality.

[animatic]

You don't think Thaksin did any of his own buying of smaller parties? Particularly prior to the election that he got a majority.

The Thai Rak Thai Party was the first political party in Thailand to have been represented by more than half of the Members of the House of Representatives. In the 2005 legislative election, the party's candidates were elected to occupy 376 seats of the 500 seats in the House of Representatives, defeating the largest opposition party, the Democrat Party. It won 96 seats. After the election, Thailand's first single party government was successfully formed.

One man, one party, no compromise.

The Democrats can't even dream of coming close to that.

A new area in Thai politic, that why his opponents were so scared of him.

http://en.wikipedia....k_Thai#Factions

Various factions who joined the TRT between the 2001 and 2005 elections.

Wang Nam Yen - Sanoh - "Sanoh preferred to play the role of kingmaker by shifting his group from party to party."

Wang Phayanak - "This group is led by Deputy Prime Minister Phinij Jarusombat,[4] who was leader of the small Seritham Party before it merged with Thai Rak Thai after the 2001 elections."

Wang Lam Takong - "composed of the remnants of the old Chart Pattana Party, which merged into Thai Rak Thai before the 2005 elections."

Chonburi Faction - "split from the Chart Thai Party before the 2005 elections to join Thai Rak Thai."

Buri Ram Faction - "Like the Chonburi Faction, this group also defected from the Chart Thai Party before the 2005 elections."

Phor Mod Dam - "former New Aspiration Party, which merged with Thai Rak Thai after the 2001 elections."

See, I can cut and paste from Wiki too.

It says nothing about "buying of smaller parties".

It need not, it was common knowledge at the time.

[animatic]

Desperation & bitterness from Abhisit while Yingluck calmly goes about her business. This campaign has been run beautifully by Thaksin against the hapless Democrats.

What meds are you on, I'd love to take some to get away from reality?

It is the reality.

Well adjusting reality to fit your perceptions is the road to.... sadness

[whybother]

It says nothing about "buying of smaller parties".

Funnily enough, none of it says anything about the Democrats buying coalition partners, either.

[mrtoad]

Desperation & bitterness from Abhisit while Yingluck calmly goes about her business. This campaign has been run beautifully by Thaksin against the hapless Democrats.

What meds are you on, I'd love to take some to get away from reality?

It is the reality.

Your reality maybe