Pheu Thai Could Be Dissolved For Not Acting On Poll Vows

[rubl]

Oh come on.... name One country, where politicians actually did what they promised during election campaigns...

Sorry for this historical piece of truth:

"The passage of the Enabling Act reduced the Reichstag to a mere stage for Hitler's speeches. It only met sporadically until the end of World War II, held no debates and enacted only a few laws. Within three months after the passage of the Enabling Act, all parties except the Nazi Party were banned or pressured into dissolving themselves, followed on July 14 by a law that formally made the Nazi Party the only legally permitted party in the country. With this, Hitler had fulfilled what he had promised in earlier campaign speeches: "I set for myself one aim ... to sweep these thirty parties out of Germany!""

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enabling_Act_of_1933

[khaowong1]

Politicians deceiving people? I can't believe it. What is the world coming to when you can't believe the politicians.

[whybother]

Apparently the PTP have now said they are going to implement all their policies, so this thread can be closed.

[SICHONSTEVE]

Apparently the PTP have now said they are going to implement all their policies, so this thread can be closed.

Yeah right!!!!!!

[animatic]

Apparently the PTP have now said they are going to implement all their policies, so this thread can be closed.

Yeah right!!!!!!

If you don't like what PTP says,

wait a day they will contradict themselves.

Nearly terminal foot in mouth disease seems to be contagious.

[nurofiend]

Has modern Thai politics, or should I say modern Thai election results, always been dominated by legal challenges? Or is this just a recent phenomenon?

put it this way, the democrats haven't won a general election in almost 20 years

[rubl]

Has modern Thai politics, or should I say modern Thai election results, always been dominated by legal challenges? Or is this just a recent phenomenon?

put it this way, the democrats haven't won a general election in almost 20 years

Let's put it this way, as I remember things started 1998 or so. Nothing to do with Dem's winning or nor winning, that's just distraction.

So let's start here for those of short memory

"Posted 2011-07-15 05:38:25

ASK THE EDITORS

Now is the time to remember 'Magnificent 14'

By The Nation

Believe it or not, there was a time when the Election Commission acted tough against big name politicians and managed to elicit applause from the public."

[BigBikeBKK]

Another brilliant represesentative of the Democrat party speaks.

And there are still foreigners that insist the Democrats should have been elected. :cheesy:

You have a problem with politicians being held accountable for their campaign promises?

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Apparently the PTP have now said they are going to implement all their policies, so this thread can be closed.

Huh, don't be silly. If they implement the policies then the bitching will just be about them actually implementing those policies and how it will bankrupt Thailand. If they don't then they should be dissolved in a judicial coup.

See, it's all very logical, and either way there is a great need to keep the posts coming!

[BigBikeBKK]

If the PTP cannot deliver on reconciliation and provide hope, the PTP will be tossed out next election.

I wish you were right about this, but I can't see it.

Electorally, it is now clear that what Isaan decides, Thailand does (PTP beat Democrats 102 to 4 there). I don't see those people changing their minds any time soon.

I guess you haven't been watching Thai news? The Isaan Kwai who were so easily duped into voting PTP with the promise of a 300 Baht minimum wage are fuming mad right now... Som num na :jap:

[letitbe]

1)300 baht a day wage increase

2)15,000 baht per month wage increase for graduates

3)free computers for students

These claims are a bit blatant to be overlooked and effect a very high majority of the population to gather votes.

If they are indeed lies, it's a bit over the top imo.

Most astute politicians make campaign promises that leave themselves some wiggle room, for when it comes down to the final implementation or lack thereof. This campaign seems to have indicated that Thai politics has taken a fledgling step from the past campaign methods of spreading the cash around in a open manner. It also points out how uninformed on real issues some of the candidates were/are, thus their amateur attempts to satisfy some of the personal desires of the vast majority of the voting public. Add in other publicly promised and advertised perks made to people who feel they are voting to change their life style and have already shown a propensity toward public demonstrations and even violence and you have a potential powder keg waiting for someone to light the fuse.

Lets face it - Pheu Thai have lied about everything from the start to garner votes and now this has come back to haunt them as they conveniently forgot the bit that say's they must honour them!!! Let them stew in their discomfort and I hope that the Thai people will NOW see what a bunch of irresponsible and uninteligent rabble they now have running (ruining) the country. Serves them right for believing PT!!!! Maybe there will be a people's revolt in the future which is far more acceptable than a coup in my eyes!!

dont see it Taksin is their idol and for most of buffalo will solve it all. When reds went on their outing in BKK 905 or more of people is market where we live where saying it will all be ok when Taksin gets back. Your clutching at straws if you ever think the poople I live amongst all total 100% Taksin worshipers will ever or for a long long time think their hero can ever do wrong. To give them their due they are fully aware of our views but are still vert friendly and stupidly subservient since we live in probably best house in village. Even the head of village who blatantly take most of 1 million baht given to all villages seems happy to have a hiso forang talk to him. TIT as they say but I wish those who have no clue would open their eyes and see Taksin for what he is. In meantime ill continue to get our money out.

[rubl]

Apparently the PTP have now said they are going to implement all their policies, so this thread can be closed.

Huh, don't be silly. If they implement the policies then the bitching will just be about them actually implementing those policies and how it will bankrupt Thailand. If they don't then they should be dissolved in a judicial coup.

See, it's all very logical, and either way there is a great need to keep the posts coming!

Last year with Pheu Thai in the opposition I wrote

"Whenever someone of the government lifts a finger, the PTP in the person of its leader, a member, or whoever will file a case or ask a commission to investigate:

- is the government allowed to lift a finger.

- is it the correct finger or should it have been another.

- is it against some law or another to lift a finger to that specific height or should it have been more-or-less.

- should the person lifting a finger not be investigate for unusual wealth seeing he's able to lift a finger.

- etc. etc."

Now I'm looking forward to the Dem's in the opposition doing the same and I can renew my lambasting (of the opposition)

[lannarebirth]

Has modern Thai politics, or should I say modern Thai election results, always been dominated by legal challenges? Or is this just a recent phenomenon?

put it this way, the democrats haven't won a general election in almost 20 years

I'm gonna go off topic here for a minute and ask a question I've never seen presented here. What if a Democrat led government came to power with a true majority, not a coalition. What do you think that would be like? Would it be more of the same? Would it move the country forward / backward? What do you think?

[hanuman1]

Has modern Thai politics, or should I say modern Thai election results, always been dominated by legal challenges? Or is this just a recent phenomenon?

put it this way, the democrats haven't won a general election in almost 20 years

I'm gonna go off topic here for a minute and ask a question I've never seen presented here. What if a Democrat led government came to power with a true majority, not a coalition. What do you think that would be like? Would it be more of the same? Would it move the country forward / backward? What do you think?

In the current political climate, I can't see how your hypothesis could at all be realistic.

[nurofiend]

Has modern Thai politics, or should I say modern Thai election results, always been dominated by legal challenges? Or is this just a recent phenomenon?

put it this way, the democrats haven't won a general election in almost 20 years

I'm gonna go off topic here for a minute and ask a question I've never seen presented here. What if a Democrat led government came to power with a true majority, not a coalition. What do you think that would be like? Would it be more of the same? Would it move the country forward / backward? What do you think?

i think that's a hard question to answer because if they did come to power with a true majority, then it would have to mean that the majority of thailand would be a different type of person with a different mindset

i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters, so then it would have to mean that the majority of thailand falls into these classes which it doesn't, so i don't know how to logically answer that question

[SICHONSTEVE]

1)300 baht a day wage increase

2)15,000 baht per month wage increase for graduates

3)free computers for students

These claims are a bit blatant to be overlooked and effect a very high majority of the population to gather votes.

If they are indeed lies, it's a bit over the top imo.

Most astute politicians make campaign promises that leave themselves some wiggle room, for when it comes down to the final implementation or lack thereof. This campaign seems to have indicated that Thai politics has taken a fledgling step from the past campaign methods of spreading the cash around in a open manner. It also points out how uninformed on real issues some of the candidates were/are, thus their amateur attempts to satisfy some of the personal desires of the vast majority of the voting public. Add in other publicly promised and advertised perks made to people who feel they are voting to change their life style and have already shown a propensity toward public demonstrations and even violence and you have a potential powder keg waiting for someone to light the fuse.

Lets face it - Pheu Thai have lied about everything from the start to garner votes and now this has come back to haunt them as they conveniently forgot the bit that say's they must honour them!!! Let them stew in their discomfort and I hope that the Thai people will NOW see what a bunch of irresponsible and uninteligent rabble they now have running (ruining) the country. Serves them right for believing PT!!!! Maybe there will be a people's revolt in the future which is far more acceptable than a coup in my eyes!!

dont see it Taksin is their idol and for most of buffalo will solve it all. When reds went on their outing in BKK 905 or more of people is market where we live where saying it will all be ok when Taksin gets back. Your clutching at straws if you ever think the people I live amongst all total 100% Taksin worshipers will ever or for a long long time think their hero can ever do wrong. To give them their due they are fully aware of our views but are still vert friendly and stupidly subservient since we live in probably best house in village. Even the head of village who blatantly take most of 1 million baht given to all villages seems happy to have a hiso forang talk to him. TIT as they say but I wish those who have no clue would open their eyes and see Taksin for what he is. In meantime ill continue to get our money out.

I think the big problem here is getting people to see and realise that Thaksin is sucking the lifeblood out of Thailand in trying to amass more and more of the nation's money. Just how they can view and treat a multi-billionaire as being "one of them" is beyond me.

All of his so called populist policies were flawed and whilst seeming to alleviate poverty for some - at what cost was this made to all?? He bankrupted the hospitals with his unaffordable health care scheme, injudicially killed 1,400 innocent people with his drug off the streets purge and when you bump off drugs dealers others soon take their place on the next rung of the ladder (as with the mafia and drugs cartels in Mexico) so it resorts back to before, his education policies were panned as being unaffordable and unworkable (just as his current ones will prove to be). I cannot comment on the success of his 'million baht per village scheme' as I do not know how successful this actually was but what I do know is that it was well received in the upper regions of the country and probably benefitted the poor people in the villages and helped the plight of a number of them. Everything else he implemented was either ill thought out or unworkable and made things appreciably worse and his steering of the economy was abysmal and for the masses to base EVERYTHING on his one success is the big problem for the Democrats. He has cleverly manipulated them for his own purpose without them appreciating the facts of his real intentions.

Finally, It was evident from very early on that all of his promises of 'this and that' was engineered solely to gain their vote and they seem less appreciative now that they are back tracking on nearly all of them in saying that "they really meant that they would look into the feasibility of doing them or they were only plans or thoughts when they actually said (pre-election of course) that we WILL do all of these things but failing to outline where the non-existent money would come from. In effect they LIED out of all their orrifices and will soon reap the repercussions of this when they don't get what was promised!!!! The masses that put them there are stirring and it will be pay back time soon.

Just who won the election????? it may prove to be a poisoned challice in all actuality!!

Edited July 19, 2011 by SICHONSTEVE

[rubl]

I'm gonna go off topic here for a minute and ask a question I've never seen presented here. What if a Democrat led government came to power with a true majority, not a coalition. What do you think that would be like? Would it be more of the same? Would it move the country forward / backward? What do you think?

i think that's a hard question to answer because if they did come to power with a true majority, then it would have to mean that the majority of thailand would be a different type of person with a different mindset

i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters, so then it would have to mean that the majority of thailand falls into these classes which it doesn't, so i don't know how to logically answer that question

Looking at the election results one may say that the Dem's are backed by most Thais South of Bangkok, with a larger part of BKK and bit and pieces elsewhere. The Election statistics DO NOT say anything about social class, or income of the voters. Consequently to say 'Dem's mainly backed by urban middle class to uppper class voters' seems incorrect

[nonresident]

Just to add another perspective: I'm from Oz and we are in a big mess mainly due to a broken election promise. Sure, pollies go against their election promises to do/not do this or that but in our case it was a whopper.<br /><br />Same here in LOS, the promises made by PT were (in my opinion) totally unrealistic or in my language, &lt;deleted&gt; (e.g. around 50% increase in min wage, millions of free computers, credit cards that would have inevitably led to rampant debt default).<br /><br />The election outcome may have been inevitable but spare a thought for the many millions of people who voted for Democrats and others parties who have every right to feel disenfranchised by the nullification of their vote by the massive and unsustainable promises (lies) of the PT.<br />Can anyone state definately that the election outcome would not have been different if the unsustainable lies had not been told

Edited July 19, 2011 by nonresident

[nurofiend]

Consequently to say 'Dem's mainly backed by urban middle class to uppper class voters' seems incorrect

well it may seem incorrect to you but i don't think it is

[rubl]

Looking at the election results one may say that the Dem's are backed by most Thais South of Bangkok, with a larger part of BKK and bit and pieces elsewhere. The Election statistics DO NOT say anything about social class, or income of the voters. Consequently to say 'Dem's mainly backed by urban middle class to uppper class voters' seems incorrect

well it may seem incorrect to you but i don't think it is

Well let's do this again then. As you said "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters".

With most of the Dem's voters just being South of Bangkok upto the Malaysian border, what you are saying is most Thai South of Bangkok are 'urban middle class to upper class voters'. Now that's a revelation which I'm afraid is not only somewhat, but totally incorrect

[nurofiend]

Looking at the election results one may say that the Dem's are backed by most Thais South of Bangkok, with a larger part of BKK and bit and pieces elsewhere. The Election statistics DO NOT say anything about social class, or income of the voters. Consequently to say 'Dem's mainly backed by urban middle class to uppper class voters' seems incorrect

well it may seem incorrect to you but i don't think it is

Well let's do this again then. As you said "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters".

With most of the Dem's voters just being South of Bangkok upto the Malaysian border, what you are saying is most Thai South of Bangkok are 'urban middle class to upper class voters'. Now that's a revelation which I'm afraid is not only somewhat, but totally incorrect

are you saying most of the dem's voters are not in bangkok or from urban area's?

[rubl]

Looking at the election results one may say that the Dem's are backed by most Thais South of Bangkok, with a larger part of BKK and bit and pieces elsewhere. The Election statistics DO NOT say anything about social class, or income of the voters. Consequently to say 'Dem's mainly backed by urban middle class to uppper class voters' seems incorrect

well it may seem incorrect to you but i don't think it is

Well let's do this again then. As you said "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters".

With most of the Dem's voters just being South of Bangkok upto the Malaysian border, what you are saying is most Thai South of Bangkok are 'urban middle class to upper class voters'. Now that's a revelation which I'm afraid is not only somewhat, but totally incorrect

are you saying most of the dem's voters are not in bangkok or from urban area's?

What I'm saying is that based on the election result which deals with voters it is incorrect to say 'Dem's mainly backed by urban middle class to upper class voters'. Nothing in this topic provides information on demography, just number of votes. Whereas the Dem's got a majority in Bangkok (i.e. urban area), it's not clear those voters are 'mainly' middle/upper class. Certainly for Dem's voters outside Bangkok there is no info on the social position of those voters, or even if they are 'urban'.

So again 'Dem's mostly backed by urban middle class to upper class voters' may sound nice, but is not backed by facts

[nurofiend]

Well let's do this again then. As you said "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters".

With most of the Dem's voters just being South of Bangkok upto the Malaysian border, what you are saying is most Thai South of Bangkok are 'urban middle class to upper class voters'. Now that's a revelation which I'm afraid is not only somewhat, but totally incorrect

are you saying most of the dem's voters are not in bangkok or from urban area's?

What I'm saying is that based on the election result which deals with voters it is incorrect to say 'Dem's mainly backed by urban middle class to upper class voters'. Nothing in this topic provides information on demography, just number of votes. Whereas the Dem's got a majority in Bangkok (i.e. urban area), it's not clear those voters are 'mainly' middle/upper class. Certainly for Dem's voters outside Bangkok there is no info on the social position of those voters, or even if they are 'urban'.

So again 'Dem's mostly backed by urban middle class to upper class voters' may sound nice, but is not backed by facts

but when you so confidently say i'm incorrect about it, it is based on facts?

[rubl]

Well let's do this again then. As you said "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters".

With most of the Dem's voters just being South of Bangkok upto the Malaysian border, what you are saying is most Thai South of Bangkok are 'urban middle class to upper class voters'. Now that's a revelation which I'm afraid is not only somewhat, but totally incorrect

are you saying most of the dem's voters are not in bangkok or from urban area's?

What I'm saying is that based on the election result which deals with voters it is incorrect to say 'Dem's mainly backed by urban middle class to upper class voters'. Nothing in this topic provides information on demography, just number of votes. Whereas the Dem's got a majority in Bangkok (i.e. urban area), it's not clear those voters are 'mainly' middle/upper class. Certainly for Dem's voters outside Bangkok there is no info on the social position of those voters, or even if they are 'urban'.

So again 'Dem's mostly backed by urban middle class to upper class voters' may sound nice, but is not backed by facts

but when you so confidently say i'm incorrect about it, it is based on facts?

I think it's fair to say what you thought is incorrect and I even give a few reasons at to why.

As you so confidently said "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters", please prove I'm wrong to assume you are wrong, based on just a few simple facts.

Not that it really matters, just keep on trolling if you like

[nurofiend]

are you saying most of the dem's voters are not in bangkok or from urban area's?

What I'm saying is that based on the election result which deals with voters it is incorrect to say 'Dem's mainly backed by urban middle class to upper class voters'. Nothing in this topic provides information on demography, just number of votes. Whereas the Dem's got a majority in Bangkok (i.e. urban area), it's not clear those voters are 'mainly' middle/upper class. Certainly for Dem's voters outside Bangkok there is no info on the social position of those voters, or even if they are 'urban'.

So again 'Dem's mostly backed by urban middle class to upper class voters' may sound nice, but is not backed by facts

but when you so confidently say i'm incorrect about it, it is based on facts?

I think it's fair to say what you thought is incorrect and I even give a few reasons at to why.

As you so confidently said "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters", please prove I'm wrong to assume you are wrong, based on just a few simple facts.

Not that it really matters, just keep on trolling if you like

disagreeing is trolling in your eyes, fair enough.

"Now that's a revelation which I'm afraid is not only somewhat, but totally incorrect "

can you give me some facts for this statement?

[nurofiend]

let me ask you another question rubl, if in fact i am incorrect as you say..... then in your opinion what social class of people do you think is the predominant voter for the democrats?

Edited July 19, 2011 by nurofiend

[monkfish]

This is an interesting chart.

Average income index from Thailand.

I think it kind of resembles the GE with just a couple of exceptions.

[rubl]

let me ask you another question rubl, if in fact i am incorrect as you say..... then in your opinion what social class of people do you think is the predominant voter for the democrats?

No idea, my dear chap.

I was only complaining about your "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters" which didn't seem to be based on any facts, additional info. I gave you some ideas as to why I think you're wrong. Till now you didn't tell me either why you should be right, nor why I should be wrong. That's all, nothing more, nothing less.

Keep

[nurofiend]

let me ask you another question rubl, if in fact i am incorrect as you say..... then in your opinion what social class of people do you think is the predominant voter for the democrats?

No idea, my dear chap.

I was only complaining about your "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters" which didn't seem to be based on any facts, additional info. I gave you some ideas as to why I think you're wrong. Till now you didn't tell me either why you should be right, nor why I should be wrong. That's all, nothing more, nothing less.

Keep

oh i'm , i'm not the one putting one of these bad boys in my replies

first off, your earlier replies simply stated i was incorrect...you didn't ask me about where i got this thought from

then you said it was not based on fact, and yes you're right, i based it on what i thought was realistic from what i've read about it....but you were just as guilty for not having the facts to state that i was "totally incorrect"

Edited July 19, 2011 by nurofiend

[rubl]

let me ask you another question rubl, if in fact i am incorrect as you say..... then in your opinion what social class of people do you think is the predominant voter for the democrats?

No idea, my dear chap.

I was only complaining about your "i think it's fair to say that the democrat party as it stands today is mainly backed by the urban middle class to upper class voters" which didn't seem to be based on any facts, additional info. I gave you some ideas as to why I think you're wrong. Till now you didn't tell me either why you should be right, nor why I should be wrong. That's all, nothing more, nothing less.

Keep

oh i'm , i'm not the one putting one of these bad boys in my replies

first off, your earlier replies simply stated i was incorrect...you didn't ask me about where i got this thought from

then you said it was not based on fact, and yes you're right, i based it on what i thought was realistic from what i've read about it....but you were just as guilty for not having the facts to state that i was "totally incorrect"

My dear fiend of the Nura kind, what's true is true. I made (likely) suggestions, didn't offer real proof. You based your opinion on what you read without telling what you read, I based my opinion of some election facts and a bit of logic. I started with 'seems incorrect', only to get a bit obdurate after some off-direction questions and switched to 'possibly, or totally wrong'.

So that leaves us with my question. As you thought it fair to say, you may indicate why you think that's fair to say, or why me thinking it's wrong is not fair to say?