PM Yingluck's Tears Not Helping Us: Thai Poll

[Buchholz]

I would not have wanted to inherit this mess either no wonder she has had a cry,

no matter what your political views are stop and think for a minute how you would feel

if you inherited this major problem would you have done any better?

Give her a break she is only human too and if she shows it for 5 minutes

everyone gets the knives out??

No wonder soceity is selfish and self centered .

As far as I know, it's this forum's members who gets the knives out. They are the ones who are selfish and self centred, no matter how they try to explain off otherwise. I know many Thais who are not PT supporters but they would never criticise YL like the self important members here and would surely not droop to the level of insults that we read here. I guess Thai culture is still far superior to ours.

Nice rant, but as for how the Thais feel about her performance:

More than 70 percent of flood victims blame the government for poor preparation and communication, compared with 16 percent who were pleased with the response to the disaster

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-14/thai-floods-won-t-delay-minimum-wage-raise-plan-kittiratt-says.html

.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Buchholz

[Buchholz]

Tears are a sign of weakness in a national leader, unless something truly extraordinary and horrible has happened. Such as if the dam had burst and killed 10,000 in a day.

A slow moving flood that's killed 450 in 3 months is not that heart wrenching to call for this show of extraordinary emotion, and makes it seem a sign of weakness, not of ' the rock ' needed for all to cling to in their need. It is a truly sad and melancholy thing in so many ways, and should cause controlled emotion to be seen.

Would they accept it if she cried if a plane with 450 Thais crashed and all lost? No they wouldn't. They would expect she was upset, and talked of the steps being taken for their loved ones, not break down in tears. Strength in a leader is what they need and expect.

A leader MUST show STRENGTH to lead,

crying is not a show of this strength,

regardless of is shows humanity.

This is exactly how most men think, and they don't understand women. A woman's tears are not a sign of weakness, but usually a sign of rage and/or frustration. There have been many studies done on the reason men and women tear-up.

Unless she's grieving or sad, women cry for a myriad of reasons not just because of anger or frustration.

Thanks for debunking some of these purported explanations that attempt to imply what is "usual".

Both sexes cry for a plethora of reasons and to be so concrete as to the internal factors that are resulting in this outward expression is a quest in futility.

It's worth pointing out that the woman in question herself denies even that she has been crying.

.

[housepainter]

Total weakness and indicative of her uselessness when faced with politcal action or inher case the lack of it.

She is not a politician; she is a rather pampered and priviledged member of a powerful and rich dynasty held to account by no onr other than themselves. However, now in the political spotlight every one has an opinion and when the going gets tough the ordinary folk are no longer backward in coming forward. Rightly, they are disatisfied.

Perhaps they will realise that wealth may give you everything that money can buy but that is not enough when action, intellect and answers are required. Hence Clone 1 had 95 wrist watches and I should think Clone 2 has several hundred pairs of shoes. None of which are waterproff, sensible or relevant here.

Just like their owner.

The Thais get what they deserve and what they voted for.

It doesn't happen elsewhere other than in Italy and that was simlilar to Clone 1. The pair sharing the ability to make money, circumvent the law and gut the country whilst thinking only of their own wealth.

Will things improve? No. Will the waters recede? Yes. Will the Thais vote her out? No. Will this be repeated next year? Yes. Does anyone learn from Hat Yai? No. Will they learn from this?

Next.

[Gweiloman]

I would not have wanted to inherit this mess either no wonder she has had a cry,

no matter what your political views are stop and think for a minute how you would feel

if you inherited this major problem would you have done any better?

Give her a break she is only human too and if she shows it for 5 minutes

everyone gets the knives out??

No wonder soceity is selfish and self centered .

As far as I know, it's this forum's members who gets the knives out. They are the ones who are selfish and self centred, no matter how they try to explain off otherwise. I know many Thais who are not PT supporters but they would never criticise YL like the self important members here and would surely not droop to the level of insults that we read here. I guess Thai culture is still far superior to ours.

Nice rant, but as for how the Thais feel about her performance:

More than 70 percent of flood victims blame the government for poor preparation and communication, compared with 16 percent who were pleased with the response to the disaster

http://www.businessw...iratt-says.html

.

Nice try but your response bears little to no relevance to my post.

[Buchholz]

I would not have wanted to inherit this mess either no wonder she has had a cry,

no matter what your political views are stop and think for a minute how you would feel

if you inherited this major problem would you have done any better?

Give her a break she is only human too and if she shows it for 5 minutes

everyone gets the knives out??

No wonder soceity is selfish and self centered .

As far as I know, it's this forum's members who gets the knives out. They are the ones who are selfish and self centred, no matter how they try to explain off otherwise. I know many Thais who are not PT supporters but they would never criticise YL like the self important members here and would surely not droop to the level of insults that we read here. I guess Thai culture is still far superior to ours.

Nice rant, but as for how the Thais feel about her performance:

More than 70 percent of flood victims blame the government for poor preparation and communication, compared with 16 percent who were pleased with the response to the disaster

http://www.businessw...iratt-says.html

Nice try but your response bears little to no relevance to my post.

You seem to think it's only farang on this forum that are criticizing Yingluck.

I would venture a guess that more than a few Thais from the 70% who think she's doing poorly might also criticize the capabilities of the woman, identified as a clone by her own brother.

.

[FOODLOVER]

Man, she looks soooo high! Although it could be an allergic reaction to poor people. Either way.

[Mitker]

You are trying to equate Yingluck with Churchill. Not even remotely close... or relevant.

Churchill made the hard decisions during a time of war. Yingluck cries because she cannot and is ineffectual.

I wouldn't neither

The current PM just proved being the wrong person at the wrong job.

Tears are not the issue. Achievements, team and true agenda are.

[OZEMADE]

In reply to thread Number 65.

No I would not say that he is saying that it's only farangs that criticize on this forum. But in your case it seems that that's all you do.Through your mainly negative criticism on this forum you seem to object to any one else voicing their opinion. Your negative criticism is also often interpreted as an attack against other persons on this forum who at time are offering constructive criticism. There is no need to infer that what they are saying is wrong, false or misleading.

I feel you would be better off offering some constructive criticism to the members and the forum. By offering constructive criticism, it would show other people on this forum that the same goal could be achieved via a different direction. So if you do find fault with what someone has said or done, it would be better served by offering an option for putting it right.

A lot of the time you are very narcissistic and you seem sensitive to personal criticism and critical ofother people. I believe you have to feel superior or infallible or else worthless. There's no middle ground.

Most of your comments, quotes or links are taken from the Nation and someother media linked to the nation? Which I feel does not give the correct information as do other media groups. However members of TVF are not allowed to comment, quote or link to these other media groups.

Save the children fund Australia, have stated, that the majority of the 500 deaths that have occurred inThailand due to the floods, have been children who cannot swim, have been playing in the flood water and drowned, or they have been swept away by fast flowing water near canals or rivers. Do you not think this would play heavily on the Prime Minister? There would also be numerous other problems weighing heavily on her from this current flooding and what must be done in relation to the food and medical needs now and after the waters have receded. Do you not feel not only her but many Thai's eyes would be welling up or they would have tears in their eyes.

[i also feel that there is no reason as you have done to keep bringing up the cloning issue and mentioning it in other threads. This is only trying to throw off or detract from the thread or the issue at hand, as you have done on this thread.

We all have a bit of fun on here from time to time; it's all in good spirit. Lighten up.

Edited November 15, 2011 by metisdead
Font reset to default forum font.

[jayboy]

You seem to think it's only farang on this forum that are criticizing Yingluck.

I would venture a guess that more than a few Thais from the 70% who think she's doing poorly might also criticize the capabilities of the woman, identified as a clone by her own brother.

It's not criticism that's the issue.That is completely legitimate and I would say should be encouraged if it's constructive.

The issue is the almost psychotic hatred and bile from a small number, exemplified by the appalling recent statement slandering the PM and Northern women by the deranged Thaksin obsessed Akeyuth Anchanbutr.On a lesser scale on this forum there has been, again from a small minority, a stream of sexist abuse which thankfully is now restricted due to excellent moderation.

The construct you put on the poll incidentally makes no sense (70% think she's doing poorly?) but I'm sure it is correct many Thais are unhappy with the authorities performance - not just the government but the other agencies involved including the BMA.There's little evidence however that in a general election there would be a different result from the last one.

[Arkady]

What happened to the Commerce Minister? He seems to have been disappeared since his own tearful incident.

[Sphere]

Anyone remember this statement.

The night of April 10 was night of my biggest misery as Thailand’s PM. I cried a long time that night.

Yes, also remember that his wife made him to go back to work the next day.

[Buchholz]

In reply to thread Number 65.

No I would not say that he is saying that it's only farangs that criticize on this forum. But in your case it seems that that's all you do.

You're completely overlooking quite a bit of posting.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=user_activity&search_app=&mid=108212&sid=301e6ef54832f1c541181ada0dfa705b

you seem sensitive to personal criticism

It's based on the factual amount of personal flaming as evidenced by the high number of deleted posts. Perhaps you've missed seeing those posts before their removal.

Most of your comments, quotes or links are taken from the Nation and someother media linked to the nation? Which I feel does not give the correct information as do other media groups.

So Associated Press, Reuters, New York Times, and Bloomberg (but to name a few of the media sources I have posted) are linked to The Nation?

However members of TVF are not allowed to comment, quote or link to these other media groups.

I've encouraged other posters several times to post outside news sources. Any limitations on that are entirely within the purview of the Forum's Administration and NOT my own. You should direct your comments to them.

.

Edited November 15, 2011 by Buchholz

[MILT]

An appropriate photo for the OP:

Photo snip

.

BUT

seven in 10 people did not think another politician would handle the flooding any better than the prime minister

which includes this politician

It's easy to say that Mark couldn't do a better job than the current cry baby. To be honest mark and his administration didn't have money tied up in a far fetch rice scheme hence the flooding would not have been so dramatic. I believe Mark would have handled this disaster quite differently and with better planning. Again easy to say. How people fall for the river of tears from this cry baby PM is astonishing. Can't wait for the no confidence vote after this flood drama is over. New elections are held and Thaskin is still wanted for crimes he committed while PM.

[MILT]

Tears are a sign of weakness in a national leader, unless something truly extraordinary and horrible has happened. Such as if the dam had burst and killed 10,000 in a day.

A slow moving flood that's killed 450 in 3 months is not that heart wrenching to call for this show of extraordinary emotion, and makes it seem a sign of weakness, not of ' the rock ' needed for all to cling to in their need. It is a truly sad and melancholy thing in so many ways, and should cause controlled emotion to be seen.

Would they accept it if she cried if a plane with 450 Thais crashed and all lost? No they wouldn't. They would expect she was upset, and talked of the steps being taken for their loved ones, not break down in tears. Strength in a leader is what they need and expect.

A leader MUST show STRENGTH to lead,

crying is not a show of this strength,

regardless of is shows humanity.

This is exactly how most men think, and they don't understand women. A woman's tears are not a sign of weakness, but usually a sign of rage and/or frustration. There have been many studies done on the reason men and women tear-up.

Pure dribble tlandsford!

[softgeorge]

I suppose people would rather be ruled by robots. How refreshing to see a human being in politics for a change.

+1

shows she has a little compassion for the people, a thing that most politicians seem to lack.

[softgeorge]

I would not have wanted to inherit this mess either no wonder she has had a cry,

no matter what your political views are stop and think for a minute how you would feel

if you inherited this major problem would you have done any better?

Give her a break she is only human too and if she shows it for 5 minutes

everyone gets the knives out??

No wonder soceity is selfish and self centered .

As far as I know, it's this forum's members who gets the knives out. They are the ones who are selfish and self centred, no matter how they try to explain off otherwise. I know many Thais who are not PT supporters but they would never criticise YL like the self important members here and would surely not droop to the level of insults that we read here. I guess Thai culture is still far superior to ours.

Nice rant, but as for how the Thais feel about her performance:

More than 70 percent of flood victims blame the government for poor preparation and communication, compared with 16 percent who were pleased with the response to the disaster

http://www.businessw...iratt-says.html

.

The current government or the previous government who left the mess to be cleaned up with so little time. Personally I do not think you can blame the lack of preparation solely on the current government. You can't build a skyscraper when you have been left a pile of rubble to work with. I am niether red nor yellow and I can see that dumping the entire blame squarely at the feet of the current P.M is total nonsense. Put away your redshirt hatred and look at it from a non bias point.

[Payboy]

Anyone remember this statement.

The night of April 10 was night of my biggest misery as Thailand’s PM. I cried a long time that night.

Yes, also remember that his wife made him to go back to work the next day.

Too bad that, otherwise would have been an early election.

[mushepea]

thailands current PM is the sister of a well known politico who is on the run from justice. she was put there to help get certain legal decisions overturned in my opinion, not for her crisis management skills. she has no political experience and this is evident in the lack of coherence with attempts to handle this crisis, or even get accurate news and information. shes just out of her depth (sorry for the pun).

but she was elected, so she is your PM for another 5 years. good luck thailand.

just think, would you let someone thats never been in a car drive yours? but ' driving' a country without any experience is ok? see what you get.

funny how her brother has gone quiet now isnt it?

[sbk]

Most of your comments, quotes or links are taken from the Nation and someother media linked to the nation? Which I feel does not give the correct information as do other media groups.

So Associated Press, Reuters, New York Times, and Bloomberg (but to name a few of the media sources I have posted) are linked to The Nation?

However members of TVF are not allowed to comment, quote or link to these other media groups.

I've encouraged other posters several times to post outside news sources. Any limitations on that are entirely within the purview of the Forum's Administration and NOT my own. You should direct your comments to them.

.

Please cease spreading this incorrect information ozemade. Outside sources are used, if you looked you would see them. HOWEVER, they do not allow full quotes like the Nation and a few other sources do, so ONLY the first three sentences and a link are allowed. People who fail to follow this directive find their posts edited. The Bangkok Post does not allow fair use, quotes or links for Thaivisa.

I hope this clears up this incorrect misconception.

[Buchholz]

I would not have wanted to inherit this mess either no wonder she has had a cry,

no matter what your political views are stop and think for a minute how you would feel

if you inherited this major problem would you have done any better?

Give her a break she is only human too and if she shows it for 5 minutes

everyone gets the knives out??

No wonder soceity is selfish and self centered .

As far as I know, it's this forum's members who gets the knives out. They are the ones who are selfish and self centred, no matter how they try to explain off otherwise. I know many Thais who are not PT supporters but they would never criticise YL like the self important members here and would surely not droop to the level of insults that we read here. I guess Thai culture is still far superior to ours.

Nice rant, but as for how the Thais feel about her performance:

More than 70 percent of flood victims blame the government for poor preparation and communication, compared with 16 percent who were pleased with the response to the disaster

http://www.businessw...iratt-says.html

.

The current government or the previous government who left the mess to be cleaned up with so little time. Personally I do not think you can blame the lack of preparation solely on the current government. You can't build a skyscraper when you have been left a pile of rubble to work with. I am niether red nor yellow and I can see that dumping the entire blame squarely at the feet of the current P.M is total nonsense. Put away your redshirt hatred and look at it from a non bias point.

I don't see people "dumping the entire blame" on Yingluck, but I do see criticisms of the manner in which her government has responded to the flood. They are holding her accountable for the extremely poor coordination and the even worse communication that has happened as a result of the flood.

Sort of like what the poll results pointed out.

I've not seen any poll that asked, "Do you put the entire blame on Yingluck". That would be "total nonsense" if it were done.

.

[mushepea]

PS im not blaming the PM for the floods, just pointing out that she is a figurehead for a movement, not necciserily a good choice of leader. there are other peoples agendas here which may not be good for thailand or its people.

[animatic]

Tears are a sign of weakness in a national leader, unless something truly extraordinary and horrible has happened. Such as if the dam had burst and killed 10,000 in a day.

A slow moving flood that's killed 450 in 3 months is not that heart wrenching to call for this show of extraordinary emotion, and makes it seem a sign of weakness, not of ' the rock ' needed for all to cling to in their need. It is a truly sad and melancholy thing in so many ways, and should cause controlled emotion to be seen.

Would they accept it if she cried if a plane with 450 Thais crashed and all lost? No they wouldn't. They would expect she was upset, and talked of the steps being taken for their loved ones, not break down in tears. Strength in a leader is what they need and expect.

A leader MUST show STRENGTH to lead,

crying is not a show of this strength,

regardless of is shows humanity.

This is exactly how most men think, and they don't understand women. A woman's tears are not a sign of weakness, but usually a sign of rage and/or frustration. There have been many studies done on the reason men and women tear-up.

In this case she is not simply a woman, but a National Leader, and that calls for sterner stuff. Or are we giving her a 'lady pass' to be weak?

I note 'some' try and equate her to Churchill, which is definitely a stretch.

Of course what he had to deal with was much greater and more Captains decisions of life and death daily. Many went to their deaths specifically from Churchills decisions and orders. Ones I believe Yingluck would not likely be able to deal with. Maybe, but not likely.

And even if a few tears escaped, he tried to hold them back, control them, and show strength as the leader. If anyone knew what I am speaking of it is Churchill himself.

Edited November 15, 2011 by animatic

[jayboy]

I note 'some' try and equate her to Churchill, which is definitely a stretch.

And even if a few tears escaped, he tried to hold them back, control them, and show strength as the leader. If anyone knew what I am speaking of it is Churchill himself.

Since it was I that referred to Churchill's capacity for tears, I will respond.Only the most obtuse would believe I was ranking Yingluck with Churchill in any way.The point I was making was that tears are not incompatible with leadership.I hope forum members will indulge me if I quote a relevant passage.

From William Manchester, The Last Lion - Winston Spencer Churchill.Visions of Glory

"But probably the trashiest movie he ever watched was a sentimental pastiche based on a novel by Paul Gallico.Entitled "Never Take No For An Answer", its chief character was a little Italian orphan whose donkey,named Violetta, helped him run a grocery stand.Violetta sickened.She could be healed, the boy believed,if he could take her to that hub of miracles, The Shrine of St Francis.So the orphan embarked on a journey, appealing in vain to a series of clerics, priests, archdeacons, bishops, archbishops, cardinals.Each time the boy was turned down the camera would flash back to Violetta, sprawled in her stable, ready for the last rites.Churchill wept inconsolably."Oh the donkey's dead" he would sob.The others would reassure him:"No, no Prime Minister, she's still alive".Churchill would recover and declare firmly:"If the donkey dies, I shan't stay.I shall go out".Finally the boy, in his finest hour, was granted an audience with the Pope.The pontiff reversed the lower rulings and made an appointment at the shrine for Violetta.In the last scene a blazing cone of light, slanting down from heaven, revealed the donkey, bursting with health, beside her loyal, trudging little friend.The prime minister arose slowly from his chair, his eyes luminous and his cheeks streaming".

[Scott]

I have removed a series of off-topic posts. It appears that more posts should be removed, but that may come later.

Please stay on the topic and treat other posters in a civil manner.

[tlansford]

Tears are a sign of weakness in a national leader, unless something truly extraordinary and horrible has happened. Such as if the dam had burst and killed 10,000 in a day.

A slow moving flood that's killed 450 in 3 months is not that heart wrenching to call for this show of extraordinary emotion, and makes it seem a sign of weakness, not of ' the rock ' needed for all to cling to in their need. It is a truly sad and melancholy thing in so many ways, and should cause controlled emotion to be seen.

Would they accept it if she cried if a plane with 450 Thais crashed and all lost? No they wouldn't. They would expect she was upset, and talked of the steps being taken for their loved ones, not break down in tears. Strength in a leader is what they need and expect.

A leader MUST show STRENGTH to lead,

crying is not a show of this strength,

regardless of is shows humanity.

This is exactly how most men think, and they don't understand women. A woman's tears are not a sign of weakness, but usually a sign of rage and/or frustration. There have been many studies done on the reason men and women tear-up.

Unless she's grieving or sad, women cry for a myriad of reasons not just because of anger or frustration.

Thanks for debunking some of these purported explanations that attempt to imply what is "usual".

Both sexes cry for a plethora of reasons and to be so concrete as to the internal factors that are resulting in this outward expression is a quest in futility.

It's worth pointing out that the woman in question herself denies even that she has been crying.

.

look up the studies, buchholtz.

[tlansford]

Tears are a sign of weakness in a national leader, unless something truly extraordinary and horrible has happened. Such as if the dam had burst and killed 10,000 in a day.

A slow moving flood that's killed 450 in 3 months is not that heart wrenching to call for this show of extraordinary emotion, and makes it seem a sign of weakness, not of ' the rock ' needed for all to cling to in their need. It is a truly sad and melancholy thing in so many ways, and should cause controlled emotion to be seen.

Would they accept it if she cried if a plane with 450 Thais crashed and all lost? No they wouldn't. They would expect she was upset, and talked of the steps being taken for their loved ones, not break down in tears. Strength in a leader is what they need and expect.

A leader MUST show STRENGTH to lead,

crying is not a show of this strength,

regardless of is shows humanity.

This is exactly how most men think, and they don't understand women. A woman's tears are not a sign of weakness, but usually a sign of rage and/or frustration. There have been many studies done on the reason men and women tear-up.

In this case she is not simply a woman, but a National Leader, and that calls for sterner stuff. Or are we giving her a 'lady pass' to be weak?

I note 'some' try and equate her to Churchill, which is definitely a stretch.

Of course what he had to deal with was much greater and more Captains decisions of life and death daily. Many went to their deaths specifically from Churchills decisions and orders. Ones I believe Yingluck would not likely be able to deal with. Maybe, but not likely.

And even if a few tears escaped, he tried to hold them back, control them, and show strength as the leader. If anyone knew what I am speaking of it is Churchill himself.

"Or are we giving her a 'lady pass' to be weak?" exactly the point. No one knows why Yingluck has tears in her eyes, not you not me. But the overwhelming assumption that she is "weak" (IMO) is just a lack of understanding. Compassion, anger, frustration can all lead to tears.

As for those spouting about her being a weak leader, let them take her job... right now, today. Go ahead guys, give it your best shot.

[Buchholz]

This is exactly how most men think, and they don't understand women. A woman's tears are not a sign of weakness, but usually a sign of rage and/or frustration. There have been many studies done on the reason men and women tear-up.

Unless she's grieving or sad, women cry for a myriad of reasons not just because of anger or frustration.

Thanks for debunking some of these purported explanations that attempt to imply what is "usual".

Both sexes cry for a plethora of reasons and to be so concrete as to the internal factors that are resulting in this outward expression is a quest in futility.

It's worth pointing out that the woman in question herself denies even that she has been crying.

look up the studies, buchholtz.

As it's your hypothesis, that's your task to present the evidence that women "usually" cry because they are enraged and/or frustrated as well as evidence that that is why Yingluck is crying... which is something she's denies in the first place.

.. and it's B-u-c-h-h-o-l-z

.

[tlansford]

-snip-

Unless she's grieving or sad, women cry for a myriad of reasons not just because of anger or frustration.

Thanks for debunking some of these purported explanations that attempt to imply what is "usual".

Both sexes cry for a plethora of reasons and to be so concrete as to the internal factors that are resulting in this outward expression is a quest in futility.

It's worth pointing out that the woman in question herself denies even that she has been crying.

look up the studies, buchholtz.

As it's your hypothesis, that's your task to present the evidence that women "usually" cry because they are enraged and/or frustrated as well as evidence that that is why Yingluck is crying... which is something she's denies in the first place.

.. and it's B-u-c-h-h-o-l-z

.

it is the "hypothesis" of the other posters that crying is a sign of weakness & that this is the reason Yingluck is crying --- and with what evidence ? zero. It is stereotyping without information.

Finding information on the studies is straight forward. I leave it to the readers.

[Buchholz]

Thanks for debunking some of these purported explanations that attempt to imply what is "usual".

Both sexes cry for a plethora of reasons and to be so concrete as to the internal factors that are resulting in this outward expression is a quest in futility.

It's worth pointing out that the woman in question herself denies even that she has been crying.

look up the studies, buchholtz.

As it's your hypothesis, that's your task to present the evidence that women "usually" cry because they are enraged and/or frustrated as well as evidence that that is why Yingluck is crying... which is something she's denies in the first place.

.. and it's B-u-c-h-h-o-l-z

it is the "hypothesis" of the other posters that crying is a sign of weakness & that this is the reason Yingluck is crying --- and with what evidence ? zero. It is stereotyping without information.

Finding information on the studies is straight forward. I leave it to the readers.

Three different things.

Posters are saying she appears weak from the outward manifestation of her crying, not that weakness is the cause of her crying.

You are alleging that women "usually" cry because they are enraged or frustrated as the cause for crying.

Yingluck is alleging that she never cried.

.

[Ricardo]

<snip for brevity>

she was elected, so she is your PM for another 5 years.

<snip>

A minor point, but aren't elections currently held every four years, under the current Constitution ?

For example the previous one was in December-2007, so the next was due by November-2011, had former-PM Abhisit not decided to hold it earlier ?

PM-Yingluck will therefore have to run an election by July 2015, in roughly three-and-a-half years' time, at the latest. Of course if she wins that one, she could still be PM for several years, yet.