Comparative Rating On Abhisit-Yingluck Govt

[CalgaryII]

The real Yingluck, alas, was too afraid to compete with Abhisit in front of cameras.

She beat him soundly in an election.

I don't understand why his people stick with him.

He doesn't have a hope of winning an election anytime soon. He doesn't have the sort of appeal to do that, beyond a narrow sliver of his own constituancies.

Plus he has the burden of R'song on his shoulders, to the extent of having war crime charges leveled at him.

Why he is still in political office is something I can only speculate about

For any of you familiar with the American political scene, have you noticed the similarities between Abhi. and Romney?

• Both are cartoonishly good looking guys
  
• Both come from moneyed backgrounds
  
• Both are extremely moneyed themselves
  
• Both have difficulty 'touching the common man" politically
  
• Both represent Conservative political forces
  
• Both have to contend with ultra - ultra rightwingers in their political base
  

Maybe there are more comparisons, but those are top-of-mind.

Edited February 6, 2012 by CalgaryII

[wxyz]

Wake me when PM clone gets the MAJORITY of the Thai peoples vote, as in over 50% something like over 67% of the vote,

Edited February 6, 2012 by wxyz

[Reasonableman]

Hahaha, keep digging your own hole! This endless diatribe proves only that you have a deep-seated fear he can and will win an election. Don't stop now. Go the whole hog.

The real Yingluck, alas, was too afraid to compete with Abhisit in front of cameras.

She beat him soundly in an election.

I don't understand why his people stick with him.

He doesn't have a hope of winning an election anytime soon. He doesn't have the sort of appeal to do that, beyond a narrow sliver of his own constituancies.

Plus he has the burden of R'song on his shoulders.

Why he is still in political office is something I can only speculate about

[Ricardo]

The real Yingluck, alas, was too afraid to compete with Abhisit in front of cameras.

She beat him soundly in an election.

I don't understand why his people stick with him.

He doesn't have a hope of winning an election anytime soon. He doesn't have the sort of appeal to do that, beyond a narrow sliver of his own constituancies.

Plus he has the burden of R'song on his shoulders, to the extent of having war crime charges leveled at him.

Why he is still in political office is something I can only speculate about

For any of you familiar with the American political scene, have you noticed the similarities between Abhi. and Romney?

• Both are cartoonishly good looking guys
  
• Both come from moneyed backgrounds
  
• Both are extremely moneyed themselves
  
• Both have difficulty 'touching the common man" politically
  
• Both represent Conservative political forces
  
• Both have to contend with ultra - ultra rightwingers in their political base
  

Maybe there are more comparisons, but those are top-of-mind.

"a narrow sliver of his own constituancies"

or 35% of the popular vote, as the 2011-election numbers show.

"she beat him soundly in an election"

0r 48% of the popular vote, enough to get elected, but hardly the 'landslide' which some claim.

Please give my regards to the hamster !

[whybother]

The real Yingluck, alas, was too afraid to compete with Abhisit in front of cameras.

She beat him soundly in an election.

I don't understand why his people stick with him.

He doesn't have a hope of winning an election anytime soon. He doesn't have the sort of appeal to do that, beyond a narrow sliver of his own constituancies.

Plus he has the burden of R'song on his shoulders, to the extent of having war crime charges leveled at him.

Why he is still in political office is something I can only speculate about

For any of you familiar with the American political scene, have you noticed the similarities between Abhi. and Romney?

• Both are cartoonishly good looking guys
  
• Both come from moneyed backgrounds
  
• Both are extremely moneyed themselves
  
• Both have difficulty 'touching the common man" politically
  
• Both represent Conservative political forces
  
• Both have to contend with ultra - ultra rightwingers in their political base
  

Maybe there are more comparisons, but those are top-of-mind.

Charges? When?

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[wxyz]

The real Yingluck, alas, was too afraid to compete with Abhisit in front of cameras.

She beat him soundly in an election.

I don't understand why his people stick with him.

He doesn't have a hope of winning an election anytime soon. He doesn't have the sort of appeal to do that, beyond a narrow sliver of his own constituancies.

Plus he has the burden of R'song on his shoulders, to the extent of having war crime charges leveled at him.

Why he is still in political office is something I can only speculate about

For any of you familiar with the American political scene, have you noticed the similarities between Abhi. and Romney?

• Both are cartoonishly good looking guys
  
• Both come from moneyed backgrounds
  
• Both are extremely moneyed themselves
  
• Both have difficulty 'touching the common man" politically
  
• Both represent Conservative political forces
  
• Both have to contend with ultra - ultra rightwingers in their political base
  

Maybe there are more comparisons, but those are top-of-mind.

"war crime charges"

What war would that be? Maybe you are confusing him with mr T' and his “war on drugs”.

Human Rights Watch has branded ousted Thai prime minister “a human rights abuser of the worst kind”

Thaksin’s human rights violations.

Thaksin presided over extrajudicial killings during the notorious “war on drugs”. HRW says 2,500 people were killed during one three-month period at the start of 2003.

Thaksin told the Thai military to employ any means to suppress an insurgency in the south of Thailand.

Thaksin Suppressed the Thai media.

Edited February 7, 2012 by wxyz

[cdnvic]

The PM's brother and his record are not the topic here. Get back on topic.

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

[CalgaryII]

Wake me when PM clone gets the MAJORITY of the Thai peoples vote, as in over 50% something like over 67% of the vote,

The effort at denigrating Ms. Y' through the descriptor clone, proxy or anything like that doesn't hold water now.

The reason it doesn't is because it was out in the open during the election, with not the slightest obfuscation, and voters elected her in the full knowledge.

On the other hand who Abhi. was a nominee of, we can only speculate, as it is not, and never has been in the open.

[CalgaryII]

Hahaha, keep digging your own hole! This endless diatribe proves only that you have a deep-seated fear he can and will win an election. Don't stop now. Go the whole hog.

Let's bring this up and talk again after the next election Mr. Reasonable.

[CalgaryII]

The real Yingluck, alas, was too afraid to compete with Abhisit in front of cameras.

She beat him soundly in an election.

I don't understand why his people stick with him.

He doesn't have a hope of winning an election anytime soon. He doesn't have the sort of appeal to do that, beyond a narrow sliver of his own constituancies.

Plus he has the burden of R'song on his shoulders, to the extent of having war crime charges leveled at him.

Why he is still in political office is something I can only speculate about

For any of you familiar with the American political scene, have you noticed the similarities between Abhi. and Romney?

• Both are cartoonishly good looking guys
  
• Both come from moneyed backgrounds
  
• Both are extremely moneyed themselves
  
• Both have difficulty 'touching the common man" politically
  
• Both represent Conservative political forces
  
• Both have to contend with ultra - ultra rightwingers in their political base
  

Maybe there are more comparisons, but those are top-of-mind.

"a narrow sliver of his own constituancies"

or 35% of the popular vote, as the 2011-election numbers show.

"she beat him soundly in an election"

0r 48% of the popular vote, enough to get elected, but hardly the 'landslide' which some claim.

Please give my regards to the hamster !

You kid your friends, and I'll kid mine, but let's not kid each other.

Ms. Y. is solidly the PM as a result of electoral results and seats in parliament, even without graciously invited coalition members

No other spin holds water.

Edited February 7, 2012 by CalgaryII

[whybother]

Wake me when PM clone gets the MAJORITY of the Thai peoples vote, as in over 50% something like over 67% of the vote,

The effort at denigrating Ms. Y' through the descriptor clone, proxy or anything like that doesn't hold water now.

The reason it doesn't is because it was out in the open during the election, with not the slightest obfuscation, and voters elected her in the full knowledge.

On the other hand who Abhi. was a nominee of, we can only speculate, as it is not, and never has been in the open.

Right. That's why there are continuous reports of PTP MPs running off to Dubai, but never any reports of Democrat MPs running off to ... whoever.

The "proxy" tag holds as much water as the Chao Phraya river basin.

[Reasonableman]

Hahaha, keep digging your own hole! This endless diatribe proves only that you have a deep-seated fear he can and will win an election. Don't stop now. Go the whole hog.

Let's bring this up and talk again after the next election Mr. Reasonable.

Why wait until the next election? No government lasts forever, despite its most fervent hopes, and no matter how popular it may appear at some stages in its evolution. Like all other governments, this one will pass. Would you like to talk about it again when that happens?

[wxyz]

Wake me when PM clone gets the MAJORITY of the Thai peoples vote, as in over 50% something like over 67% of the vote,

The effort at denigrating Ms. Y' through the descriptor clone, proxy or anything like that doesn't hold water now.

The reason it doesn't is because it was out in the open during the election, with not the slightest obfuscation, and voters elected her in the full knowledge.

On the other hand who Abhi. was a nominee of, we can only speculate, as it is not, and never has been in the open.

Don't blame me, her bro mr T called her his clone, so blame mr T.

Edited February 7, 2012 by wxyz

[longway]

Wake me when PM clone gets the MAJORITY of the Thai peoples vote, as in over 50% something like over 67% of the vote,

The effort at denigrating Ms. Y' through the descriptor clone, proxy or anything like that doesn't hold water now.

The reason it doesn't is because it was out in the open during the election, with not the slightest obfuscation, and voters elected her in the full knowledge.

On the other hand who Abhi. was a nominee of, we can only speculate, as it is not, and never has been in the open.

Don't blame me, her bro mr T called her his clone, so blame mr T.

The description doesnot hold water because its true? That their voters feel comforatble with that arrangemnet is neither here nor there.

BTW there is a contniuous pretence that Yingluck is not his nominee and is working for the thai people rather than her brother, so that part is not true either.

[phiphidon]

Wake me when PM clone gets the MAJORITY of the Thai peoples vote, as in over 50% something like over 67% of the vote,

The effort at denigrating Ms. Y' through the descriptor clone, proxy or anything like that doesn't hold water now.

The reason it doesn't is because it was out in the open during the election, with not the slightest obfuscation, and voters elected her in the full knowledge.

On the other hand who Abhi. was a nominee of, we can only speculate, as it is not, and never has been in the open.

Right. That's why there are continuous reports of PTP MPs running off to Dubai, but never any reports of Democrat MPs running off to ... whoever.

The "proxy" tag holds as much water as the Chao Phraya river basin.

I don't think Prem lives that far away so it's probably fairly easy to pop in for tea.....................

[pastitche]

The redshirts are now a part of the government and have to behave.

Agree with most of what you posted geriatrickid, but would like to add a comment to above.

One must keep in mind what spawned the Red Shirt Movement.....namely the Coup.

It took 'em a while to organize, but organize they did.

To then characterise their anti-coup activity as misbehavior is not accurate.

If their anti-coup stuff was misbehavior, what was the coup.

On a scale of misbehavior, the coup perpetrators so massively exceed the Red Shirt feeble effort to protest a theft of their elected Govt, it wouldn't even be close.

Every one knew, and especially the Red Shirts, that the last election represented electoral reality in Thailand, and to therefore have an electoral minority governing was appalling.

Protesting coups is not misbehavior. It is an exemplary form of standing up to wrongs. Then to have the military rampage through their efforts to protest these wrongs, added insult to injury.

There are those who seek to characterize the feeble efforts to withstand the military assault as being some sort of gross anti-social behavior, when in fact it was opposing military rule.

Considering the Oppositions efforts to again use judicial cover to steal another elected Govt. as some of yesterday's headlines featured, will have entirely different outcomes.

Having Red Shirt affiliates in Government is a very natural thing, totally in line with what those of different affiliation were included in the unelected coup-military Government. I am not a Dem. Party lover, but after they were artificially hoisted into place, I didn't particularly object to the Kasit thing. When there is a major two-way political divide, whichever side is elected has earned the right to appoint whomever they want from their side.

But bottom line, the days of freeby coups are over, regardless what cover and excuses are used - judicial, military or whatever.

If the Opposition thinks they can pull the judicial trick on an elected Government again, they'd better think again.

"Every one knew, and especially the Red Shirts, that the last election represented electoral reality in Thailand, and to therefore have an electoral minority governing was appalling."

Yes the current 'red shirt' "electoral minority" is governing and it is appalling.

The 'red shirts' got a minority of the voting Thais and if you include those eligible to vote, they are even more of a minority.

So yes, the Thais should be appalled at this "electoral minority" government.

Really this subject of a minority vote in a multi-party situation has been done to death - just accept that in a parliamentary election (as opposed to the US presidential election) there are more than 2 candidates in every seat so there can be a winner with less than 50% of votes cast. Get back to reality - this electoral system has been working for a hundred years with universal suffrage in the UK and has rarely produced a need for coalition and has never produced a need for extra-parliamentary intervention

[Ricardo]

The real Yingluck, alas, was too afraid to compete with Abhisit in front of cameras.

She beat him soundly in an election.

I don't understand why his people stick with him.

He doesn't have a hope of winning an election anytime soon. He doesn't have the sort of appeal to do that, beyond a narrow sliver of his own constituancies.

Plus he has the burden of R'song on his shoulders, to the extent of having war crime charges leveled at him.

Why he is still in political office is something I can only speculate about

For any of you familiar with the American political scene, have you noticed the similarities between Abhi. and Romney?

• Both are cartoonishly good looking guys
  
• Both come from moneyed backgrounds
  
• Both are extremely moneyed themselves
  
• Both have difficulty 'touching the common man" politically
  
• Both represent Conservative political forces
  
• Both have to contend with ultra - ultra rightwingers in their political base
  

Maybe there are more comparisons, but those are top-of-mind.

"a narrow sliver of his own constituancies"

or 35% of the popular vote, as the 2011-election numbers show.

"she beat him soundly in an election"

0r 48% of the popular vote, enough to get elected, but hardly the 'landslide' which some claim.

Please give my regards to the hamster !

You kid your friends, and I'll kid mine, but let's not kid each other.

Ms. Y. is solidly the PM as a result of electoral results and seats in parliament, even without graciously invited coalition members

No other spin holds water.

It was your spin, to try to describe 35% of the national vote, as "a narrow sliver of his own constituencies" !

"graciously invited coalition members"

So not just a cynical political ploy by DL, to learn from experience and ward off the next defection of a chunk of his bought-and-paid-for party or coalition-partners, it now becomes a 'gracious invitation' ? From an absconded convicted-criminal, in self-exile, but who still pulls the strings, even according to some of poor PM-Yingluck's own Cabinet, and who openly describes his sister the PM as his 'clone' ?

Fine spin indeed !

[wxyz]

The redshirts are now a part of the government and have to behave.

Agree with most of what you posted geriatrickid, but would like to add a comment to above.

One must keep in mind what spawned the Red Shirt Movement.....namely the Coup.

It took 'em a while to organize, but organize they did.

To then characterise their anti-coup activity as misbehavior is not accurate.

If their anti-coup stuff was misbehavior, what was the coup.

On a scale of misbehavior, the coup perpetrators so massively exceed the Red Shirt feeble effort to protest a theft of their elected Govt, it wouldn't even be close.

Every one knew, and especially the Red Shirts, that the last election represented electoral reality in Thailand, and to therefore have an electoral minority governing was appalling.

Protesting coups is not misbehavior. It is an exemplary form of standing up to wrongs. Then to have the military rampage through their efforts to protest these wrongs, added insult to injury.

There are those who seek to characterize the feeble efforts to withstand the military assault as being some sort of gross anti-social behavior, when in fact it was opposing military rule.

Considering the Oppositions efforts to again use judicial cover to steal another elected Govt. as some of yesterday's headlines featured, will have entirely different outcomes.

Having Red Shirt affiliates in Government is a very natural thing, totally in line with what those of different affiliation were included in the unelected coup-military Government. I am not a Dem. Party lover, but after they were artificially hoisted into place, I didn't particularly object to the Kasit thing. When there is a major two-way political divide, whichever side is elected has earned the right to appoint whomever they want from their side.

But bottom line, the days of freeby coups are over, regardless what cover and excuses are used - judicial, military or whatever.

If the Opposition thinks they can pull the judicial trick on an elected Government again, they'd better think again.

"Every one knew, and especially the Red Shirts, that the last election represented electoral reality in Thailand, and to therefore have an electoral minority governing was appalling."

Yes the current 'red shirt' "electoral minority" is governing and it is appalling.

The 'red shirts' got a minority of the voting Thais and if you include those eligible to vote, they are even more of a minority.

So yes, the Thais should be appalled at this "electoral minority" government.

Really this subject of a minority vote in a multi-party situation has been done to death - just accept that in a parliamentary election (as opposed to the US presidential election) there are more than 2 candidates in every seat so there can be a winner with less than 50% of votes cast. Get back to reality - this electoral system has been working for a hundred years with universal suffrage in the UK and has rarely produced a need for coalition and has never produced a need for extra-parliamentary intervention

Regardless, any form of govt and political party receiving less than 50% of the peoples vote and thus support is a minority. And is clearly not a mandate for anything from the voting citizens. It does not matter how many parties their are. The USA has many parties as well. Say you have 10 parties in which 9 parties get 9% of the vote and a tenth party gets 19% of the vote, is not a mandate from the country's people to party 10 to do anything. Should they have gotten well over 50% of the vote, say 2/3s or better, then yes, all the voting citizens clearly want that parties platform. Anything short of 50% of the vote is a minority govt. and does not have the support of the majority of the voting people, even less of a % if you include those that chose not to vote, which is also a NO VOTE to the winning MINORITY party's platform. And forming a coalition gov't does not change anything, it is still a minority govt as far as the voting public is concerned.

Edited February 7, 2012 by wxyz

[ThaiOats]

All the pro-government posters bring only one argument to the table and turn a blind eyes towards everything else. The idea that PTP won the election, Yingluck is the PM and the Democrats lost, sucks to be the rest of you who don't agree. Total <deleted> and ignorance. What do you suppose the minority of the voters who didn't vote for PTP and voted for the other parties including the Democrats had in mind? Obviously the whole of Thailand didn't think the Democrats were such losers as you lot put them out to be. Now let me ask you this, what do you yhink the gap is between those who are educated and those who are uneducated? Those who have morals and those who don't? I would say the majority of Thais are uneducated (not only academically but worldly as well) and majority would take money over morals. There you have it, majority means diddly squat. Just because there's a majority, doesn't mean it's the way it should be.

To really understand what the Thai people want, you need to learn the language and do your own research instead of relying on what others tell you. Learn the language and set up a set of questions that you think are important for Thailand to progress as a nation and draw your own conclusions. Forget politics for a minute and all these BS being thrown about. Go to your rural villages and ask them about the global economy, what are affecting the prices of goods, inflation, and whatever else that you think is important. Ask them about technology and how the education system can be improved, about how their lives can be better, about corruption. Do you realize that the majority can't even answer these questions or care to sit down and discuss these things with you? The majority that gossip day in and day out when they have free time about the evilness that are the military and the Democrats. Their world is the world around them and things that affect them day to day (like prices of pork and eggs) instead of Thailand as a nation.

All the Red apologists on this forum, do you even realize what you're trying to represent? Do you guys really see nothing wrong with Jatuporn or Natthawut being MPs and the decisions on how they got there? I understand the Democrats chose their own ilk to the positions but at least they did it with some sort of standard and sense. You would agree with the populist schemes like the free tablets and rice pledging schemes. Go out and ask your rural red shirt what are the pros and cons of these schemes. Then go out and ask your educated Uni graduate and see who comes up with a better answer. Sad thing is, the Uni graduate is more than likely, the minority. The minority who can probably come up with ideas and help drive Thailand towards progress are instead beaten by the majority who only has more numbers. Remember what I said about majority in reference to the population of Thailand as a whole and those who would take money over morals.

If you think what I'm saying is wrong, then you definately haven't lived in Thailand long enough. Law is thrown out the window when it comes to money. Money is everything in Thailand and only the minority of the people can hold onto their morals and ethics. So really, before you go on spouting nonsense about majority, democratically elected BS, don't turn a blind eye on what is Thailand. You also really, really have to ask yourself... is it okay for the PM to dodge Parliament and debates? Is it really okay if she had no political background and has no thoughts of her own? Would you accept her as a PM in your own country? For those of you who knows Note Udom (a Thai stand up comedian) he made a satire comment about Yingluck and the fact that it's because her brother is rich, she's able to be where she's at. By the way, if you understand Thai, go watch Note Udom 9, it's funny.

Finally, ask your red shirt supporters how have their lives improved ever since Abhisit lost. How much oppression was there under the Abhisit gov't aka Military Junta? Then ask your uni grad in Bangkok the same question. See how many good answers you get and from whom.

[Siam Simon]

All the pro-government posters bring only one argument to the table and turn a blind eyes towards everything else. The idea that PTP won the election, Yingluck is the PM and the Democrats lost, sucks to be the rest of you who don't agree. Total <deleted> and ignorance. What do you suppose the minority of the voters who didn't vote for PTP and voted for the other parties including the Democrats had in mind? Obviously the whole of Thailand didn't think the Democrats were such losers as you lot put them out to be. Now let me ask you this, what do you yhink the gap is between those who are educated and those who are uneducated? Those who have morals and those who don't? I would say the majority of Thais are uneducated (not only academically but worldly as well) and majority would take money over morals. There you have it, majority means diddly squat. Just because there's a majority, doesn't mean it's the way it should be.

To really understand what the Thai people want, you need to learn the language and do your own research instead of relying on what others tell you. Learn the language and set up a set of questions that you think are important for Thailand to progress as a nation and draw your own conclusions. Forget politics for a minute and all these BS being thrown about. Go to your rural villages and ask them about the global economy, what are affecting the prices of goods, inflation, and whatever else that you think is important. Ask them about technology and how the education system can be improved, about how their lives can be better, about corruption. Do you realize that the majority can't even answer these questions or care to sit down and discuss these things with you? The majority that gossip day in and day out when they have free time about the evilness that are the military and the Democrats. Their world is the world around them and things that affect them day to day (like prices of pork and eggs) instead of Thailand as a nation.

All the Red apologists on this forum, do you even realize what you're trying to represent? Do you guys really see nothing wrong with Jatuporn or Natthawut being MPs and the decisions on how they got there? I understand the Democrats chose their own ilk to the positions but at least they did it with some sort of standard and sense. You would agree with the populist schemes like the free tablets and rice pledging schemes. Go out and ask your rural red shirt what are the pros and cons of these schemes. Then go out and ask your educated Uni graduate and see who comes up with a better answer. Sad thing is, the Uni graduate is more than likely, the minority. The minority who can probably come up with ideas and help drive Thailand towards progress are instead beaten by the majority who only has more numbers. Remember what I said about majority in reference to the population of Thailand as a whole and those who would take money over morals.

If you think what I'm saying is wrong, then you definately haven't lived in Thailand long enough. Law is thrown out the window when it comes to money. Money is everything in Thailand and only the minority of the people can hold onto their morals and ethics. So really, before you go on spouting nonsense about majority, democratically elected BS, don't turn a blind eye on what is Thailand. You also really, really have to ask yourself... is it okay for the PM to dodge Parliament and debates? Is it really okay if she had no political background and has no thoughts of her own? Would you accept her as a PM in your own country? For those of you who knows Note Udom (a Thai stand up comedian) he made a satire comment about Yingluck and the fact that it's because her brother is rich, she's able to be where she's at. By the way, if you understand Thai, go watch Note Udom 9, it's funny.

Finally, ask your red shirt supporters how have their lives improved ever since Abhisit lost. How much oppression was there under the Abhisit gov't aka Military Junta? Then ask your uni grad in Bangkok the same question. See how many good answers you get and from whom.

What is so comical about the above line of reasoning is the suggestion that Democracy isn't working because the lower classes aren't all global economics experts, and tend to look out for themselves. And that the 'educated' don't behave in the same way . That set of questions would provide the same mixed bag of answers if it were presented to Bangkok's middle classes.

Edited February 9, 2012 by metisdead
Insulting comments removed.

[ThaiOats]

All the pro-government posters bring only one argument to the table and turn a blind eyes towards everything else. The idea that PTP won the election, Yingluck is the PM and the Democrats lost, sucks to be the rest of you who don't agree. Total <deleted> and ignorance. What do you suppose the minority of the voters who didn't vote for PTP and voted for the other parties including the Democrats had in mind? Obviously the whole of Thailand didn't think the Democrats were such losers as you lot put them out to be. Now let me ask you this, what do you yhink the gap is between those who are educated and those who are uneducated? Those who have morals and those who don't? I would say the majority of Thais are uneducated (not only academically but worldly as well) and majority would take money over morals. There you have it, majority means diddly squat. Just because there's a majority, doesn't mean it's the way it should be.

To really understand what the Thai people want, you need to learn the language and do your own research instead of relying on what others tell you. Learn the language and set up a set of questions that you think are important for Thailand to progress as a nation and draw your own conclusions. Forget politics for a minute and all these BS being thrown about. Go to your rural villages and ask them about the global economy, what are affecting the prices of goods, inflation, and whatever else that you think is important. Ask them about technology and how the education system can be improved, about how their lives can be better, about corruption. Do you realize that the majority can't even answer these questions or care to sit down and discuss these things with you? The majority that gossip day in and day out when they have free time about the evilness that are the military and the Democrats. Their world is the world around them and things that affect them day to day (like prices of pork and eggs) instead of Thailand as a nation.

All the Red apologists on this forum, do you even realize what you're trying to represent? Do you guys really see nothing wrong with Jatuporn or Natthawut being MPs and the decisions on how they got there? I understand the Democrats chose their own ilk to the positions but at least they did it with some sort of standard and sense. You would agree with the populist schemes like the free tablets and rice pledging schemes. Go out and ask your rural red shirt what are the pros and cons of these schemes. Then go out and ask your educated Uni graduate and see who comes up with a better answer. Sad thing is, the Uni graduate is more than likely, the minority. The minority who can probably come up with ideas and help drive Thailand towards progress are instead beaten by the majority who only has more numbers. Remember what I said about majority in reference to the population of Thailand as a whole and those who would take money over morals.

If you think what I'm saying is wrong, then you definately haven't lived in Thailand long enough. Law is thrown out the window when it comes to money. Money is everything in Thailand and only the minority of the people can hold onto their morals and ethics. So really, before you go on spouting nonsense about majority, democratically elected BS, don't turn a blind eye on what is Thailand. You also really, really have to ask yourself... is it okay for the PM to dodge Parliament and debates? Is it really okay if she had no political background and has no thoughts of her own? Would you accept her as a PM in your own country? For those of you who knows Note Udom (a Thai stand up comedian) he made a satire comment about Yingluck and the fact that it's because her brother is rich, she's able to be where she's at. By the way, if you understand Thai, go watch Note Udom 9, it's funny.

Finally, ask your red shirt supporters how have their lives improved ever since Abhisit lost. How much oppression was there under the Abhisit gov't aka Military Junta? Then ask your uni grad in Bangkok the same question. See how many good answers you get and from whom.

What is so comical about the above line of reasoning is the suggestion that Democracy isn't working because the lower classes aren't all global economics experts, and tend to look out for themselves. And that the 'educated' don't behave in the same way . That set of questions would provide the same mixed bag of answers if it were presented to Bangkok's middle classes.

Again with the selective responses. I mentioned that people should go out there and ask questions to both rural poor and the uni grads or in your case the Bangkok middle classes and see what responses you get. From those responses draw your own conclusions without all the political hearsay. I did not expect them to be economic experts, but I do expect them to care along for themselves. There's nothing wrong with that, life is hard as it is without thinking for others but there are the minorities who actually DO have good ideas on how to push this country forward, be it from the poor or uni grads. That's why I've also mentioned that they should provide feedback on how their lives can be improved, how the education system can be improved and so forth. You're just trying to twist my words to make as if this is some sort of middle class vs the poor. That's not it at all.

You're right in stating that you'd get the same mixed bag of answers if you ask the Bangkok middle classes but at the same time, it's not the Bangkok middle classes behind the driving force of the Red Shirt movement / PTP voters. To put it into perspective, my father's family was from Hua Hin and they were poor while my mother's family was from Koraat and they too were poor. My relatives in Koraat worked on farms, while relatives in Hua Hin sold noodles on the street. Life was hard but they didn't place the blame on the government for oppressing them. They believed in hard work and eventually it paid off because now they're considered the "middle class". People had the same opportunities just as everyone else wouldn't you agree? So what is it about this Red Shirt movement that they feel they needed to come out and burn the city down? Go and ask what they think about the key issues being debated today and get their feedback on how things can improve among other things.

You're just as good as Yingluck when it comes to dodging questions but I can guess that you support every move this government makes. Had they elected a block of wood as the PM, the likes of you wouldn't oppose it as long as it's democratically elected and not the Democrats. Thats their excuse for burning down Bangkok... to bring down the military junta and bring back Thaksin. How stupid.

[Siam Simon]

All the pro-government posters bring only one argument to the table and turn a blind eyes towards everything else. The idea that PTP won the election, Yingluck is the PM and the Democrats lost, sucks to be the rest of you who don't agree. Total <deleted> and ignorance. What do you suppose the minority of the voters who didn't vote for PTP and voted for the other parties including the Democrats had in mind? Obviously the whole of Thailand didn't think the Democrats were such losers as you lot put them out to be. Now let me ask you this, what do you yhink the gap is between those who are educated and those who are uneducated? Those who have morals and those who don't? I would say the majority of Thais are uneducated (not only academically but worldly as well) and majority would take money over morals. There you have it, majority means diddly squat. Just because there's a majority, doesn't mean it's the way it should be.

To really understand what the Thai people want, you need to learn the language and do your own research instead of relying on what others tell you. Learn the language and set up a set of questions that you think are important for Thailand to progress as a nation and draw your own conclusions. Forget politics for a minute and all these BS being thrown about. Go to your rural villages and ask them about the global economy, what are affecting the prices of goods, inflation, and whatever else that you think is important. Ask them about technology and how the education system can be improved, about how their lives can be better, about corruption. Do you realize that the majority can't even answer these questions or care to sit down and discuss these things with you? The majority that gossip day in and day out when they have free time about the evilness that are the military and the Democrats. Their world is the world around them and things that affect them day to day (like prices of pork and eggs) instead of Thailand as a nation.

All the Red apologists on this forum, do you even realize what you're trying to represent? Do you guys really see nothing wrong with Jatuporn or Natthawut being MPs and the decisions on how they got there? I understand the Democrats chose their own ilk to the positions but at least they did it with some sort of standard and sense. You would agree with the populist schemes like the free tablets and rice pledging schemes. Go out and ask your rural red shirt what are the pros and cons of these schemes. Then go out and ask your educated Uni graduate and see who comes up with a better answer. Sad thing is, the Uni graduate is more than likely, the minority. The minority who can probably come up with ideas and help drive Thailand towards progress are instead beaten by the majority who only has more numbers. Remember what I said about majority in reference to the population of Thailand as a whole and those who would take money over morals.

If you think what I'm saying is wrong, then you definately haven't lived in Thailand long enough. Law is thrown out the window when it comes to money. Money is everything in Thailand and only the minority of the people can hold onto their morals and ethics. So really, before you go on spouting nonsense about majority, democratically elected BS, don't turn a blind eye on what is Thailand. You also really, really have to ask yourself... is it okay for the PM to dodge Parliament and debates? Is it really okay if she had no political background and has no thoughts of her own? Would you accept her as a PM in your own country? For those of you who knows Note Udom (a Thai stand up comedian) he made a satire comment about Yingluck and the fact that it's because her brother is rich, she's able to be where she's at. By the way, if you understand Thai, go watch Note Udom 9, it's funny.

Finally, ask your red shirt supporters how have their lives improved ever since Abhisit lost. How much oppression was there under the Abhisit gov't aka Military Junta? Then ask your uni grad in Bangkok the same question. See how many good answers you get and from whom.

What is so comical about the above line of reasoning is the suggestion that Democracy isn't working because the lower classes aren't all global economics experts, and tend to look out for themselves. And that the 'educated' don't behave in the same way . That set of questions would provide the same mixed bag of answers if it were presented to Bangkok's middle classes.

Again with the selective responses. I mentioned that people should go out there and ask questions to both rural poor and the uni grads or in your case the Bangkok middle classes and see what responses you get. From those responses draw your own conclusions without all the political hearsay. I did not expect them to be economic experts, but I do expect them to care along for themselves. There's nothing wrong with that, life is hard as it is without thinking for others but there are the minorities who actually DO have good ideas on how to push this country forward, be it from the poor or uni grads. That's why I've also mentioned that they should provide feedback on how their lives can be improved, how the education system can be improved and so forth. You're just trying to twist my words to make as if this is some sort of middle class vs the poor. That's not it at all.

You're right in stating that you'd get the same mixed bag of answers if you ask the Bangkok middle classes but at the same time, it's not the Bangkok middle classes behind the driving force of the Red Shirt movement / PTP voters. To put it into perspective, my father's family was from Hua Hin and they were poor while my mother's family was from Koraat and they too were poor. My relatives in Koraat worked on farms, while relatives in Hua Hin sold noodles on the street. Life was hard but they didn't place the blame on the government for oppressing them. They believed in hard work and eventually it paid off because now they're considered the "middle class". People had the same opportunities just as everyone else wouldn't you agree? So what is it about this Red Shirt movement that they feel they needed to come out and burn the city down? Go and ask what they think about the key issues being debated today and get their feedback on how things can improve among other things.

You're just as good as Yingluck when it comes to dodging questions but I can guess that you support every move this government makes. Had they elected a block of wood as the PM, the likes of you wouldn't oppose it as long as it's democratically elected and not the Democrats. Thats their excuse for burning down Bangkok... to bring down the military junta and bring back Thaksin. How stupid.

So, tell us how many million people you've interviewed, ThaiOats.

[metisdead]

A post baiting moderation issues has been removed:

If |you delete my post, delete his for the same reason.

Rather than reply to off topic posts and bait moderation issues, use the report button to report off topic/offensive posts.

[ThaiOats]

All the pro-government posters bring only one argument to the table and turn a blind eyes towards everything else. The idea that PTP won the election, Yingluck is the PM and the Democrats lost, sucks to be the rest of you who don't agree. Total <deleted> and ignorance. What do you suppose the minority of the voters who didn't vote for PTP and voted for the other parties including the Democrats had in mind? Obviously the whole of Thailand didn't think the Democrats were such losers as you lot put them out to be. Now let me ask you this, what do you yhink the gap is between those who are educated and those who are uneducated? Those who have morals and those who don't? I would say the majority of Thais are uneducated (not only academically but worldly as well) and majority would take money over morals. There you have it, majority means diddly squat. Just because there's a majority, doesn't mean it's the way it should be.

To really understand what the Thai people want, you need to learn the language and do your own research instead of relying on what others tell you. Learn the language and set up a set of questions that you think are important for Thailand to progress as a nation and draw your own conclusions. Forget politics for a minute and all these BS being thrown about. Go to your rural villages and ask them about the global economy, what are affecting the prices of goods, inflation, and whatever else that you think is important. Ask them about technology and how the education system can be improved, about how their lives can be better, about corruption. Do you realize that the majority can't even answer these questions or care to sit down and discuss these things with you? The majority that gossip day in and day out when they have free time about the evilness that are the military and the Democrats. Their world is the world around them and things that affect them day to day (like prices of pork and eggs) instead of Thailand as a nation.

All the Red apologists on this forum, do you even realize what you're trying to represent? Do you guys really see nothing wrong with Jatuporn or Natthawut being MPs and the decisions on how they got there? I understand the Democrats chose their own ilk to the positions but at least they did it with some sort of standard and sense. You would agree with the populist schemes like the free tablets and rice pledging schemes. Go out and ask your rural red shirt what are the pros and cons of these schemes. Then go out and ask your educated Uni graduate and see who comes up with a better answer. Sad thing is, the Uni graduate is more than likely, the minority. The minority who can probably come up with ideas and help drive Thailand towards progress are instead beaten by the majority who only has more numbers. Remember what I said about majority in reference to the population of Thailand as a whole and those who would take money over morals.

If you think what I'm saying is wrong, then you definately haven't lived in Thailand long enough. Law is thrown out the window when it comes to money. Money is everything in Thailand and only the minority of the people can hold onto their morals and ethics. So really, before you go on spouting nonsense about majority, democratically elected BS, don't turn a blind eye on what is Thailand. You also really, really have to ask yourself... is it okay for the PM to dodge Parliament and debates? Is it really okay if she had no political background and has no thoughts of her own? Would you accept her as a PM in your own country? For those of you who knows Note Udom (a Thai stand up comedian) he made a satire comment about Yingluck and the fact that it's because her brother is rich, she's able to be where she's at. By the way, if you understand Thai, go watch Note Udom 9, it's funny.

Finally, ask your red shirt supporters how have their lives improved ever since Abhisit lost. How much oppression was there under the Abhisit gov't aka Military Junta? Then ask your uni grad in Bangkok the same question. See how many good answers you get and from whom.

What is so comical about the above line of reasoning is the suggestion that Democracy isn't working because the lower classes aren't all global economics experts, and tend to look out for themselves. And that the 'educated' don't behave in the same way . That set of questions would provide the same mixed bag of answers if it were presented to Bangkok's middle classes.

Again with the selective responses. I mentioned that people should go out there and ask questions to both rural poor and the uni grads or in your case the Bangkok middle classes and see what responses you get. From those responses draw your own conclusions without all the political hearsay. I did not expect them to be economic experts, but I do expect them to care along for themselves. There's nothing wrong with that, life is hard as it is without thinking for others but there are the minorities who actually DO have good ideas on how to push this country forward, be it from the poor or uni grads. That's why I've also mentioned that they should provide feedback on how their lives can be improved, how the education system can be improved and so forth. You're just trying to twist my words to make as if this is some sort of middle class vs the poor. That's not it at all.

You're right in stating that you'd get the same mixed bag of answers if you ask the Bangkok middle classes but at the same time, it's not the Bangkok middle classes behind the driving force of the Red Shirt movement / PTP voters. To put it into perspective, my father's family was from Hua Hin and they were poor while my mother's family was from Koraat and they too were poor. My relatives in Koraat worked on farms, while relatives in Hua Hin sold noodles on the street. Life was hard but they didn't place the blame on the government for oppressing them. They believed in hard work and eventually it paid off because now they're considered the "middle class". People had the same opportunities just as everyone else wouldn't you agree? So what is it about this Red Shirt movement that they feel they needed to come out and burn the city down? Go and ask what they think about the key issues being debated today and get their feedback on how things can improve among other things.

You're just as good as Yingluck when it comes to dodging questions but I can guess that you support every move this government makes. Had they elected a block of wood as the PM, the likes of you wouldn't oppose it as long as it's democratically elected and not the Democrats. Thats their excuse for burning down Bangkok... to bring down the military junta and bring back Thaksin. How stupid.

So, tell us how many million people you've interviewed, ThaiOats.

I own an auto-shop and I hear it from both sides, on a daily basis I might add. No pro Dems or pro PTP ever mention how well their side is doing, they only mention how bad the other side is. I'm not going to kid you when I asked "what did you think about the flood and the handling of it?" to both sides, one response was "It was a conspiracy by the Democrats to let Thailand flood" while another's was "It was the incompetence of the appointed ministers and lack of care while the PTP celebrated their victory in Cambodia". Call me bias if you will (at least I admit it), the latter seems a lot more reasonable and by many reports, factual.

If both Yingluck and Abhisit are puppets, then you'd have to compare them accordingly. Abhisit uses his own words, doesn't play the "I don't know card" every time, graduated from Oxford and can communicate to both Thais and foreigners very well. Please tell me what does Yingluck have going for her? Not going to hold my breath on your reply because you've dodged everything so far, why stop now right?

[ThaiOats]

I'm sorry I didn't see the "No Thais Allowed" and that I needed to explain my presence here. Same could be said about what brought you to a forum that talks about Thailand's politics.

I only made suggestions to go and discuss the issues with Thai people like you would discuss them with the TV here. Whatever conclusions you draw from it, that's entirely up to you. From my personal experience and interviews, those are my conclusions and you don't have to believe a word I say of it. I just wanted to put a few things on the table;

- if Thailand's population is roughly 69 million, 15 million voting for PTP (Red Support), 11 million being Democrats, and if it was truly a battle against the elite/amart.. do you really think 11 million + non Red have connection with Elitists? The rest of Thailand didn't think they were being oppressed enough to stand up and join the Red Shirts or maybe I could be wrong and a few years the other 40 million would jump into the Red Shirts.

- Time will tell and if Shinawatras keeps getting themselves (himself) re-elected, then you know what that means. If the day truly comes where I'm convinced that the Red Shirt movement is for the people (whatever their definate goal is), then I too will join them in their cause. Alas, this ongoing political conflict is not the People vs the Military. It's the People vs Thaksin's Regime.

[waza]

I'm sorry I didn't see the "No Thais Allowed" and that I needed to explain my presence here. Same could be said about what brought you to a forum that talks about Thailand's politics.

I only made suggestions to go and discuss the issues with Thai people like you would discuss them with the TV here. Whatever conclusions you draw from it, that's entirely up to you. From my personal experience and interviews, those are my conclusions and you don't have to believe a word I say of it. I just wanted to put a few things on the table;

- if Thailand's population is roughly 69 million, 15 million voting for PTP (Red Support), 11 million being Democrats, and if it was truly a battle against the elite/amart.. do you really think 11 million + non Red have connection with Elitists? The rest of Thailand didn't think they were being oppressed enough to stand up and join the Red Shirts or maybe I could be wrong and a few years the other 40 million would jump into the Red Shirts.

- Time will tell and if Shinawatras keeps getting themselves (himself) re-elected, then you know what that means. If the day truly comes where I'm convinced that the Red Shirt movement is for the people (whatever their definate goal is), then I too will join them in their cause. Alas, this ongoing political conflict is not the People vs the Military. It's the People vs Thaksin's Regime.

<<Previously deleted post edited out>>

Why do you ask SS, its not a dating site and it has nothing to do with the topic. It would have been more polite to ask in a PM, not in an open forum.

[metisdead]

Off topic personal attacks have been removed. Posters are reminded to stay on topic and to refrain from comments concerning the character of other posters.

[ThaiOats]

Sure, I was born in Bangkok and raised in the US since I was 6 years old hence I'm unable to read or write Thai. My verbal and listening skills are excellent so I'm able to listen to the news in Thai, watch Parliament sessions and discuss politics with my Thai customers just because it interests me. The debate on TVF is much more interesting as some people come up with posts that are funny, intelligent, informative, and then there's the propaganda and trolling. Believe me, foreigners have much more substance when discussing politics than Thais (at least from the ones I've met), I wonder why? It really is taboo to discuss politics amongst Thais because you're not really sure who they're supporting, at least from a business owner's perspective, I could lose business. So far I'm playing both sides of the field to try to understand them better but I find myself leaning towards anti-Red/Thaksin.

Now could you politely explain why you're so set upon supporting this government seeing how the PM often claims ignorance, has poor communication skills (even in Thai), had no political interest what-so-ever before being nominated to become a PM, no experience, and selects her cabinet members based on rewards rather than suitability? These are the things that I can see clearly with my eyes without any politicizing. I really, really want to know what the Reds are fighting (rallying) for and how is the PTP going to provide that for them? Please enlighten me on some things that I do not know or have yet to discover.

[z12]

Sure, I was born in Bangkok and raised in the US since I was 6 years old hence I'm unable to read or write Thai. My verbal and listening skills are excellent so I'm able to listen to the news in Thai, watch Parliament sessions and discuss politics with my Thai customers just because it interests me. The debate on TVF is much more interesting as some people come up with posts that are funny, intelligent, informative, and then there's the propaganda and trolling. Believe me, foreigners have much more substance when discussing politics than Thais (at least from the ones I've met), I wonder why? It really is taboo to discuss politics amongst Thais because you're not really sure who they're supporting, at least from a business owner's perspective, I could lose business. So far I'm playing both sides of the field to try to understand them better but I find myself leaning towards anti-Red/Thaksin.

Now could you politely explain why you're so set upon supporting this government seeing how the PM often claims ignorance, has poor communication skills (even in Thai), had no political interest what-so-ever before being nominated to become a PM, no experience, and selects her cabinet members based on rewards rather than suitability? These are the things that I can see clearly with my eyes without any politicizing. I really, really want to know what the Reds are fighting (rallying) for and how is the PTP going to provide that for them? Please enlighten me on some things that I do not know or have yet to discover.

exactly

Edited February 11, 2012 by z12

[whybother]

<<Previously deleted post edited out>>

Off topic personal attacks have been removed. Posters are reminded to stay on topic and to refrain from comments concerning the character of other posters.

Hmmm ... why doesn't that surprise me.