Applause For Abhisit

[Pi Sek]

An adoring fan has credited Abhisit with "Against tremendous odds kept the economy going at a steady pace?"

OK. How did he do so: single-handed?

What were the measures, laws, regulations, promotion of Thais products, etc. that he himself generated or accomplished?

How did he keep the economy going at a steady pace? Specifically HOW?

How can it, in that context, be factored in the occupation of the airports by the Yellows, the assault of the army on the Reds, the increased budget for the army, the hostilities in the Cambodian temple-territory, the pulling out of Thailand from the UNESCO WHC?

True that he is credited by everyone to entice "quality tourists" to visit Thailand. Other than that I hear the crickets.

Single-handledly? Of course, this is a loaded question, as noone could do the listed points single-handedly (and the comment you quoted doesn't suggest so either!). But he was at the helm of the ship, and he did name and manage the cabinet that was working for him (regardless of how much or little pressure to which his decision was subject).

The economy fared very well compared to most other global economies in a time of economic crisis. That in itself should answer whether or not the Democrats handled the economy well or not. As to how... well, that was clearly documented throughout their term and, whilst I won't claim to be able to rattle the methods used by outgoing Finance Minister Korn off the top of my head, I will suggest you have a look yourself.

As someone else pointed out, the airport occupation was handled by another government, not Abhisit's Democrat-led coalition.

"The assault of the army on the Reds" was pre-empted by violent raids in particular by Arisaman Pongruengrong and Kwanchai Praiphana. But the actual "assault" itself, which was a clearance operation, was assaulted as pointed out above. If you want to condemn the Dems or the RTA for the events of last year, I really think you ought to be thinking about May, several weeks after the first grenade was fired, as there are clear grounds of self defence for the first 30-or-so deaths. I don't hold Amnesty International in the highest regard, but they were quite clear that both sides were responsible for unnecessary deaths, and their report has been the most conclusive attempt at uncovering the truth so far.

Increased budget for the army - yes, it increased, but it was still fairly in-line with other countries in the region, so I never had an issue with that, especially as the army's equipment generally needs replacing. The army though are a law unto themselves, so I did wonder where it was all going and whether their spending was justified; I think Yinglak will have the same headache.

As to the withdrawal from UNESCO, I thought this was a bit drastic - but I saw the logic. The US did the same, by the way - not saying it's right, just saying. Certainly UNESCO didn't help their own cause by backing ambiguous French maps nearly 50 years ago - which I think is at the heart of the problem and it's why so many people on here can't agree on the shared history of countries, some of whom no longer exist.

As for the border hostilities, I think you're a fool to think that the Cambodians didn't stoke the flames on their side, although it looks like the Thai army didn't exactly help the situation either. But Cambodia was building Cambodian settlements on land outside Cambodia - land that both Cambodia and Thailand claimed as theirs and were going through the process of getting the border demarcated. That was wrong. If someone was building a driveway through your garden, and a court had a future date for a hearing, but your neighbour was continuing work anyway, would you object? I think you probably would.

The "quality tourist idea", by the way, was not Abhisit's. Where did you get that from?

Back on topic, though, this thread is about Abhisit sticking to his word, and congratulating him for doing so. I will align myself with this opinion, because Abhisit from day one has made a point of doing what he said he was going to do, regardless of how well or poorly he handled himself during his term as PM. Certainly the likes of Thaksin can't say the same... but let's give Yinglak a chance to follow through with her policies before roasting her, although I do think that a roasting is on its way because I don't think PT's policies are attainable without crippling the country.

Abhisit himself is clearly a statesman and a diplomat. I would be sorry if he didn't return as Democrat leader - by the way, if you can remember that far back, his record was very good as opposition leader (at least in terms of Thai opposition leaders, because most Thai politicians don't seem to know what the opposition is supposed to be doing!) - but this does not compare to my feeling of worry for the peace and stability of Thailand if amnesty for Thaksin is pushed through. Every day I seem to meet a different Thai who says he will shoot Thaksin in the face as soon as he lands, but that's the general feeling anywhere south of Bangkok (which, whilst it may not hold anywhere close to as many constituencies as the north and northeast, is still quite a large part of the country).

[hellodolly]

(In my opinion) Mr. Abhisit was educated, articulate, intelligent, fair, honest and seemingly incorruptible...

He had no place in Thai politics.

Good luck Sir. It was a valiant effort (golf clap).

Abhist is a true gentlemen if of only there were more like him around, I hope he sticks around to re group the opposition, this time to his way of thinking. He came out of defeat with honour and I hope Thais acknowledge that and give him another chance. He is a force for good and I wish him well.

What kind of gentleman who endorsed fully armed soldiers, tanks, and snipers to round up people and shoot them. All is fair in love love and war? For the last seven days before the election, his speeches ain't anything but jealousy, full of accusation and sarcasm, a gentleman? Incorruptible and honest? how about allowing consuming product shortage, and then price manipulation, rotten food for the flood victims in the south, dust free roads projects, tripple war machine budget increased for the armed forces? He was ready to sell his soul to the devil to stick to the power. I wish he never ever comes back.

Well you certainly are good at running off at the mouth.

Perhaps you will share with us all your method to stop the terrorists with out the loss of life.

Are you giving the red shirts 100% support on there invasion of a hospital. You most certainly have great idols to look up to. Your pay master doesn't think enough of Thailand to come into the country and abide by it's law's.

What kind of a idiotic statement is round them up. Were you in Lala land they came of there own free will and a pay check from Thaksin they took over public property depriving many honest hard working citizens out of a way to earn a living and then tried to burn the city down.

[hellodolly]

An adoring fan has credited Abhisit with "Against tremendous odds kept the economy going at a steady pace?"

OK. How did he do so: single-handed?

What were the measures, laws, regulations, promotion of Thais products, etc. that he himself generated or accomplished?

How did he keep the economy going at a steady pace? Specifically HOW?

How can it, in that context, be factored in the occupation of the airports by the Yellows, the assault of the army on the Reds, the increased budget for the army, the hostilities in the Cambodian temple-territory, the pulling out of Thailand from the UNESCO WHC?

True that he is credited by everyone to entice "quality tourists" to visit Thailand. Other than that I hear the crickets.

I'll bet that's not all you hear.

Yes, I hear lame excuses of sore losers.

Abhisit, the elite of Democrats and the army lost because they thought that Bangkok was Thailand.

I want to hear the praises for Suthep's edifying deeds under his boss Abhisit.

Today he said that if the Reds take over most of Thailand there is going to be chaos... Or something to that effect. What a sore loser!

Hello! in the elections you were sent a loud message Khun Suthep: we do not like what your boss and you stand for. Bye!

Reality check:

Nothing said in this forum will change the outcome of the elections. If people feel like venting, it's OK, may they do so lest they turn blue to punish me.

The sore losers should wait until the new administration gets going to capitalize on the mistakes that inevitably will be made. Then they will be fair game.

You are very very confused the ones venting are the TP supporters such as your self. The Abhist supporters are congratulating Abhist on being a man of his word. Just out of curiosity do you think your man Thaksin is a man of his word? In a way he is half that every thing he says counteracts other things he has said. He is a shrewd politician he knows how to play on the uneducated. And the ones who he can't outsmart he puts them on his payroll temporally.

The election is over and all you people seem able to do is put down the losers. How about telling us about the land of honey and sugar we were promised. How about telling us how a minimum wage of 300 Baht a day will stop inflation? The ball is in your court. Stop your whining.

[Canada]

My steph daughter went actualy vote for the first time in her life.

She voted for Abhisit as she was approached by his party and handed 500Baht to vote for them so can we please stop the hypocrisy that only one party in Thailand did ay vote buying???????

I agree but would add that in addition to stopping with the hypocrisy that only one party is guilty of vote-buying, we should also stop with the false claim that people being given money aren't swayed one way or the other when they get in the voting booth, as they are still free to vote for whomever they wish. Fact is they are swayed. If they weren't, millions wouldn't be spent at election time.

Would be fascinating to know what each party's vote buying budget was. Might give us some idea of exactly how powerful vote-buying is.

As an aside, as her father figure, did you question your step-daughter's decision making process, or try to get her think more deeply about the importance and responsibility of voting?

My mother in law took money from all parties then voted for who she wanted to.

[Pi Sek]

My steph daughter went actualy vote for the first time in her life.

She voted for Abhisit as she was approached by his party and handed 500Baht to vote for them so can we please stop the hypocrisy that only one party in Thailand did ay vote buying???????

I agree but would add that in addition to stopping with the hypocrisy that only one party is guilty of vote-buying, we should also stop with the false claim that people being given money aren't swayed one way or the other when they get in the voting booth, as they are still free to vote for whomever they wish. Fact is they are swayed. If they weren't, millions wouldn't be spent at election time.

Would be fascinating to know what each party's vote buying budget was. Might give us some idea of exactly how powerful vote-buying is.

As an aside, as her father figure, did you question your step-daughter's decision making process, or try to get her think more deeply about the importance and responsibility of voting?

My mother in law took money from all parties then voted for who she wanted to.

Whilst we're on the subject of dispelling myths, I'd like to add my 2 satang.

Paying 200, 500, 1000 Baht or whatever is not the vote buying that got TRT disbanded. That was because they were buying up the elected representatives, not buying up the electorate. As (I think) most of us are aware, in Thailand the voters elect an MP, the MPs elect the PM. TRT paid some to change their allegiance after they were elected. That is wrong... or I should say, I think that is wrong as my values of reasonable behaviour are clearly different to those of the majority of Thais as shown by the recent election results.

I don't see paying money to voters as any different to putting on free concerts, or giving out T-shirts or pens with the party logo. The only reason it happens is because, in Thailand, sharing wealth is deemed to be one of the best ways to show that you are a good person (no matter how that wealth is obtained). I don't like this but it's expected, so it would be electoral suicide not to follow suit.

Also I'd like to add that what "Canada" suggest above is in line with what I have witnessed too: people take what's offered by whomever and do what they want to do anyway. I don't know if it's the same all over the country, but I imagine it is.

[Throatwobbler]

(In my opinion) Mr. Abhisit was educated, articulate, intelligent, fair, honest and seemingly incorruptible...

He had no place in Thai politics.

Good luck Sir. It was a valiant effort (golf clap).

Abhist is a true gentlemen if of only there were more like him around, I hope he sticks around to re group the opposition, this time to his way of thinking. He came out of defeat with honour and I hope Thais acknowledge that and give him another chance. He is a force for good and I wish him well.

What kind of gentleman who endorsed fully armed soldiers, tanks, and snipers to round up people and shoot them. All is fair in love love and war? For the last seven days before the election, his speeches ain't anything but jealousy, full of accusation and sarcasm, a gentleman? Incorruptible and honest? how about allowing consuming product shortage, and then price manipulation, rotten food for the flood victims in the south, dust free roads projects, tripple war machine budget increased for the armed forces? He was ready to sell his soul to the devil to stick to the power. I wish he never ever comes back.

I'm sorry but your first sentence is complete rubbish. This therefore totally invalidates anything else you say. I wish I reaaly could say what I feel about people of your intellect on here.

[Throatwobbler]

You obviously weren't here when Thaksin was running the show. If you had been, you might have some clue about how comical your post is. Why don't you educate yourself - look up "Tak Bai" and see what a real massacre is like.

Tak Bai was accidental death caused by ignorant officials handling the case. Even with that said, that commander should be held responsible for manslaughter, unless they were proved to have intention to kill. That is far more different from sending in happy trigger snipers into Ratchaprasong. I saw few clips that a soldier took aim and shot a fallen victim twice, even his second officer told him not to. I saw soldiers strolled along Lumpini Park, leisurly pause to shoot into the park. Killing at Pathumwanaram Temple, and many more of the likes. After a whole year past, we still do not hear or see any report from the fact finding cum reconciliation committee who shot who, who must be held responsible for the hundred dead. Comiccal? right, I heard that Superman denounced American citizenship last month.

So Thai soldiers were shooting to kill at will then? So if that is true why the low numbers of dead. By the way can you tell the difference between someone shooting plastic bullets and someone shooting live rounds?

[metisdead]

A post containing false information has been removed.

[hellodolly]

My steph daughter went actualy vote for the first time in her life.

She voted for Abhisit as she was approached by his party and handed 500Baht to vote for them so can we please stop the hypocrisy that only one party in Thailand did ay vote buying???????

I agree but would add that in addition to stopping with the hypocrisy that only one party is guilty of vote-buying, we should also stop with the false claim that people being given money aren't swayed one way or the other when they get in the voting booth, as they are still free to vote for whomever they wish. Fact is they are swayed. If they weren't, millions wouldn't be spent at election time.

Would be fascinating to know what each party's vote buying budget was. Might give us some idea of exactly how powerful vote-buying is.

As an aside, as her father figure, did you question your step-daughter's decision making process, or try to get her think more deeply about the importance and responsibility of voting?

My mother in law took money from all parties then voted for who she wanted to.

Whilst we're on the subject of dispelling myths, I'd like to add my 2 satang.

Paying 200, 500, 1000 Baht or whatever is not the vote buying that got TRT disbanded. That was because they were buying up the elected representatives, not buying up the electorate. As (I think) most of us are aware, in Thailand the voters elect an MP, the MPs elect the PM. TRT paid some to change their allegiance after they were elected. That is wrong... or I should say, I think that is wrong as my values of reasonable behaviour are clearly different to those of the majority of Thais as shown by the recent election results.

I don't see paying money to voters as any different to putting on free concerts, or giving out T-shirts or pens with the party logo. The only reason it happens is because, in Thailand, sharing wealth is deemed to be one of the best ways to show that you are a good person (no matter how that wealth is obtained). I don't like this but it's expected, so it would be electoral suicide not to follow suit.

Also I'd like to add that what "Canada" suggest above is in line with what I have witnessed too: people take what's offered by whomever and do what they want to do anyway. I don't know if it's the same all over the country, but I imagine it is.

I personally disagree with vote buying. You how ever have brought up some really good points on paying money as being the same as free concerts and giving away free paraphernalia with the party logo.

If and that is a very big if Thailand ever tries to do some thing about vote buying they will have to address those issues also.

[Thaddeus]

Other than that I hear the crickets.

Me too ..... 'Rave On' is a great tune.

[DLock]

Can you abound on the items I enumerated instead of turning into an ad hominem rebuttal?

Too late to try to sound intelligent.

Put your thesaurus down and attempt to answer my questions prior to your exam.

[phiphidon]

My steph daughter went actualy vote for the first time in her life.

She voted for Abhisit as she was approached by his party and handed 500Baht to vote for them so can we please stop the hypocrisy that only one party in Thailand did ay vote buying???????

I agree but would add that in addition to stopping with the hypocrisy that only one party is guilty of vote-buying, we should also stop with the false claim that people being given money aren't swayed one way or the other when they get in the voting booth, as they are still free to vote for whomever they wish. Fact is they are swayed. If they weren't, millions wouldn't be spent at election time.

Would be fascinating to know what each party's vote buying budget was. Might give us some idea of exactly how powerful vote-buying is.

As an aside, as her father figure, did you question your step-daughter's decision making process, or try to get her think more deeply about the importance and responsibility of voting?

My mother in law took money from all parties then voted for who she wanted to.

Whilst we're on the subject of dispelling myths, I'd like to add my 2 satang.

Paying 200, 500, 1000 Baht or whatever is not the vote buying that got TRT disbanded. That was because they were buying up the elected representatives, not buying up the electorate. As (I think) most of us are aware, in Thailand the voters elect an MP, the MPs elect the PM. TRT paid some to change their allegiance after they were elected. That is wrong... or I should say, I think that is wrong as my values of reasonable behaviour are clearly different to those of the majority of Thais as shown by the recent election results.

I don't see paying money to voters as any different to putting on free concerts, or giving out T-shirts or pens with the party logo. The only reason it happens is because, in Thailand, sharing wealth is deemed to be one of the best ways to show that you are a good person (no matter how that wealth is obtained). I don't like this but it's expected, so it would be electoral suicide not to follow suit.

Also I'd like to add that what "Canada" suggest above is in line with what I have witnessed too: people take what's offered by whomever and do what they want to do anyway. I don't know if it's the same all over the country, but I imagine it is.

Another form of "vote buying" is employed when forming a coalition and then "rewarding" the coalition partners, in this case the BJP, with "lucrative ministries" such as the Interior Ministry. For what political savvy Abhisit is being applauded for, he made a major mistake there, compounded with accepting Suthep as a DPM, not just once, but twice and Kasit as Foreign Secretary. Not that politically astute then..........

[moe666]

Thaksin could learn a lot about sticking to your word from the out going prime minister. How many time did he say I am no longer involved in Thai politics

[rubl]

Another form of "vote buying" is employed when forming a coalition and then "rewarding" the coalition partners, in this case the BJP, with "lucrative ministries" such as the Interior Ministry. For what political savvy Abhisit is being applauded for, he made a major mistake there, compounded with accepting Suthep as a DPM, not just once, but twice and Kasit as Foreign Secretary. Not that politically astute then..........

True, true. As k. Abhisit said himself he wasn't really successful in fighting off corruption. Mind you with corruption ingrained in politics and life as it is a daunting task indeed.

The only thing we can do now is watch the forming of the new government with scrutiny for any suspicious deals in 'lucrative' ministries. It has to stop somewhere and somewhen and scrutiny, exposure seems the only way to get there.

[themockrat]

Newin must be going through a really bad time right now. He spent a huge amount of money buying votes in this election (@ 500 Baht each) and in the end lost.

[Asa]

(In my opinion) Mr. Abhisit was educated, articulate, intelligent, fair, honest and seemingly incorruptible...

He had no place in Thai politics.

Good luck Sir. It was a valiant effort (golf clap).

Abhist is a true gentlemen if of only there were more like him around, I hope he sticks around to re group the opposition, this time to his way of thinking. He came out of defeat with honour and I hope Thais acknowledge that and give him another chance. He is a force for good and I wish him well.

What kind of gentleman who endorsed fully armed soldiers, tanks, and snipers to round up people and shoot them. All is fair in love love and war? For the last seven days before the election, his speeches ain't anything but jealousy, full of accusation and sarcasm, a gentleman? Incorruptible and honest? how about allowing consuming product shortage, and then price manipulation, rotten food for the flood victims in the south, dust free roads projects, tripple war machine budget increased for the armed forces? He was ready to sell his soul to the devil to stick to the power. I wish he never ever comes back.

I'm sorry but your first sentence is complete rubbish. This therefore totally invalidates anything else you say. I wish I reaaly could say what I feel about people of your intellect on here.

Prove me wrong, if you can. And what you want to keep up yours, don't spill it.

[DLock]

Abhist is a true gentlemen if of only there were more like him around, I hope he sticks around to re group the opposition, this time to his way of thinking. He came out of defeat with honour and I hope Thais acknowledge that and give him another chance. He is a force for good and I wish him well.

What kind of gentleman who endorsed fully armed soldiers, tanks, and snipers to round up people and shoot them. All is fair in love love and war? For the last seven days before the election, his speeches ain't anything but jealousy, full of accusation and sarcasm, a gentleman? Incorruptible and honest? how about allowing consuming product shortage, and then price manipulation, rotten food for the flood victims in the south, dust free roads projects, tripple war machine budget increased for the armed forces? He was ready to sell his soul to the devil to stick to the power. I wish he never ever comes back.

I'm sorry but your first sentence is complete rubbish. This therefore totally invalidates anything else you say. I wish I reaaly could say what I feel about people of your intellect on here.

Prove me wrong, if you can. And what you want to keep up yours, don't spill it.

You made the assertions. It's up to you to prove they are valid before anyone can respond, which you have failed to do in your rant.

And as far as "And what you want to keep up yours, don't spill it."....are we arguing Viagara Vs. Cialis and premature ejaculation, or Thai politics? Because Sir, I have no idea what you are talking about.

Drunk posting is not advised.

[rixalex]

Yes glad he and his jolly crooks are out of here, and yes I am a Thaksin supporter,

A Thaksin supporter who doesn't like jolly crooks?! Say it ain't so.

power to the people, not the wealthy class and others, you can guess who I mean there.:jap:

Stab in the dark: The Shinawatras?

[rixalex]

By the way, who is Pilgrim?

Not sure if this sheds any light, but a number of years ago i recall hearing young teenagers calling each other "pilgrim" by way of insult - along the lines of "fool", "idiot", "peasant". Of course Pingman may have been referring to some other, less infantile meaning. Or not...

[DLock]

By the way, who is Pilgrim?

Not sure if this sheds any light, but a number of years ago i recall hearing young teenagers calling each other "pilgrim" by way of insult - along the lines of "fool", "idiot", "peasant". Of course Pingman may have been referring to some other, less infantile meaning. Or not...

Actually Rixalex, I misquoted Pingman.

He actually referred to me as "Pilgram", not Pilgrim.

Could the attempted insult have backfired into an ownage of massive proportions?

Pingman, the floor is yours.

[Siam Simon]

Abhisit is at least a few years ahead of his time in politics. I thought he made a huge mistake taking on the First Minister job in the contrived circumstances that he did. I could fully understand him wanting to get in there to serve the nation and be a force for good. But I expect he could never have imagined, when in opposition, the levels of interference, the amount of having to turn a blind eye to corruption.

The cycle of corrupt Thaksin governments, equally corrupt Old Money dominated governments and corrupt Generals is causing Thailand to slowly-but-surely implode. IMO this will eventually lead to one of two scenarios, or possibly the first followed by the second: (1) Some kind of civil disruption on a scale we've never seen before (2) A genuine national unity government of the type that has formed in other countries that have gone through similar 'growing up' processes. Abhisit was the man for the job in the second scenario, but he is now associated by a large section of the population (unfairly IMO) with the latest attempt by the Old Elite to take back the country for themselves.

Abhisit now needs to distance himself from most of his former allies and spend a while making it clear that he and his reformers were a force for good working from the inside.

[SpoliaOpima]

Does anyone have a link to the original Thai version of this article in Kom Chad Luek? I looked on the website and couldn't find it.

[rixalex]

Abhisit is at least a few years ahead of his time in politics. I thought he made a huge mistake taking on the First Minister job in the contrived circumstances that he did. I could fully understand him wanting to get in there to serve the nation and be a force for good. But I expect he could never have imagined, when in opposition, the levels of interference, the amount of having to turn a blind eye to corruption.

The cycle of corrupt Thaksin governments, equally corrupt Old Money dominated governments and corrupt Generals is causing Thailand to slowly-but-surely implode. IMO this will eventually lead to one of two scenarios, or possibly the first followed by the second: (1) Some kind of civil disruption on a scale we've never seen before (2) A genuine national unity government of the type that has formed in other countries that have gone through similar 'growing up' processes. Abhisit was the man for the job in the second scenario, but he is now associated by a large section of the population (unfairly IMO) with the latest attempt by the Old Elite to take back the country for themselves.

Abhisit now needs to distance himself from most of his former allies and spend a while making it clear that he and his reformers were a force for good working from the inside.

I wouldn't disagree with any of that, besides to say that i don't think it was a huge mistake him becoming PM, although i agree the way that he did was far from ideal. I think he did a reasonable job and although he has been rejected by the Thai people, will be remembered as a good man who did the best he could in extremely tricky times. I don't think we have seen the last of him either.

[DLock]

Pingman, why do you feel this way? This is a valid question, I am interested.

Do you truly believe this or are you trying to get a rise out of people?

Are you well read in Thai politics or does this reflect a few bullet points your read online?

Are you influenced by your girlfriend or your buddies?

In isolation, I would just overlook comments like this as an opinion.

But your comments, in the context of Thaksins Sister supported by the "soon to be back" Thaksin...I am interested in what peoples expectations are for the political future.

Pilgram -

Yes glad he and his jolly crooks are out of here, and yes I am a Thaksin supporter, and now a Yingluck advocate, power to the people, not the wealthy class and others, you can guess who I mean there.:jap:

Didn't really answer the questions.

Why should I , I know where I stand, and with the vote, many more are feeling the same way as I.

I applaud you using the same defense as Yingluck when she refused to debate Abhisit.

Both you and Yingluck knows the likely outcome had either of you done so.

You never did answer who is "Pilgram".

[rixalex]

Why should I , I know where I stand, and with the vote, many more are feeling the same way as I.

Why should you? Well this is a discussion forum. If all you have come here to say is that you love Thaksin and good riddance to Abhisit, that's fine but it doesn't make for the most riveting or engaging of discussions.

What's the problem with giving reasoning? Opinions don't count for much without them.

Edited July 7, 2011 by rixalex

[rubl]

Another form of "vote buying" is employed when forming a coalition and then "rewarding" the coalition partners, in this case the BJP, with "lucrative ministries" such as the Interior Ministry. For what political savvy Abhisit is being applauded for, he made a major mistake there, compounded with accepting Suthep as a DPM, not just once, but twice and Kasit as Foreign Secretary. Not that politically astute then..........

True, true. As k. Abhisit said himself he wasn't really successful in fighting off corruption. Mind you with corruption ingrained in politics and life as it is a daunting task indeed.

The only thing we can do now is watch the forming of the new government with scrutiny for any suspicious deals in 'lucrative' ministries. It has to stop somewhere and somewhen and scrutiny, exposure seems the only way to get there.

Who would have thought, one of these day I might be wearing a red shirt.

Ms. Thida agrees with me, she said "However, Thida said the movement "does not support any particular political party" and would scrutinise the next government."

[Thaddeus]

The silence if deafening.

Pigman(sic), Asa...the microphone is yours.

Do you want me to make some sandwiches while we wait?

[SpoliaOpima]

Pilgram -

Yes glad he and his jolly crooks are out of here, and yes I am a Thaksin supporter, and now a Yingluck advocate, power to the people, not the wealthy class and others, you can guess who I mean there.:jap:

A party headed by the richest man in Thailand, whose mega-rich sister now serves as PM, isn't for the wealthy? In fact during his PM tenure, the Shinawatra patriarch pushed legislation through that lowered taxes for the wealthy, most obviously the abolishment of capital gains taxes for stock market sales, a law he personally took advantage of four days after it was passed if I recall correctly, selling Thailand's satcom system to a foreign investor for US$1.88 billion and paying zero taxes on the sale. I can think of no clearer represention of the Thaksin cult's full support of not just the wealthy, but the wealthiest, starting with themselves.

There are more, including the activities for which he was convicted of corruption. By all accounts, he enriched himself and his cronies more than any previous PM in history, including Fielf Marshal Sarit.

In terms of his loans to villagers, they were just that, loans, and have left tambons in higher debt than they were before the program was initiated. Hardly a friend to the peasant or the working man.

That you believe the Thaksin/PT cult's propaganda, however, shows how effective the Red machine has been.

Back to the topic on hand, I think Abhisit will be remembered as one of the better PMs in Thai history, for the reasons eloquently stated in the OP. I think what helped push PT over 50 percent (52 percent to be exact, hardly the 'landslide' portrayed in some news media) was the fact that many who might have voted otherwise wanted to keep the PT's tactical regiments off the street for a couple of years. It was a vote not for the PT but for stability. The Abhisit mishandled the Red occupation of Bangkok last year, and that sunk the Dems in this election as much as PT promises pulled in votes, I believe. It was a civilian coup; the violent part of the Red coup took place in April and May 2010, and winning the election was the spoils. Without forcing the government's hand - no government anywhere in the world can stand by indefinitely while its central business district is held hostage - the PT might not have earned the extra 2 percent it needed to become a ruling party.

Still I wish Yingluck and the PT the best of luck in fulfilling such promises as doubling minimum wage and bringing all BA degree-holders to a minimum 15,000 baht per month at entry level. If they can achieve such goals without crippling the economy, they will indeed be hailed as heroes of the working classes.

Edited July 7, 2011 by metisdead
Removed previously deleted content.

[rixalex]

I think what helped push PT over 50 percent (52 percent to be exact, hardly the 'landslide' portrayed in some news media) was the fact that many who might have voted otherwise wanted to keep the PT's tactical regiments off the street for a couple of years. It was a vote not for the PT but for stability. The Abhisit mishandled the Red occupation of Bangkok last year, and that sunk the Dems in this election as much as PT promises pulled in votes, I believe.

Sorry for snipping your post, but just wanted to add to the above that i think what was also crucial in PT's win was the recent increase in cost of living, fuel prices etc, which is hitting pretty much everyone directly in the pocket. Nobody likes that, and blaming the government is the obvious, if not perhaps logical thing to do. Whether PT will have any answers to this problem that the Dems couldn't think of or implement, i seriously doubt, but i believe some of the extra votes they won were in that misguided belief.

[rubl]

begin removed ...

Still I wish Yingluck and the PT the best of luck in fulfilling such promises as doubling minimum wage and bringing all BA degree-holders to a minimum 15,000 baht per month at entry level. If they can achieve such goals without crippling the economy, they will indeed be hailed as heroes of the working classes.

I can agree with this.

One minor note though. The 'working classes' normally do not include anyone with an BA

The definition is tiresome though, read the wiki article

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_class