Democrats Claim Seat In Red-Shirt Heartland

[waza]

I'm sure this is actually a secret indication of PTP's popularity, Right GK? Phi? MCA? 5555

Well, I suppose if your political party hasn't won an election in 20 years it's kind of exciting to win a by election by 3000 votes with a 30% turnout, yes.

I think your taking entirely the wrong perspective on this phiphidon, the democracts didnt win this election the PTP lost it, big time

[otherstuff1957]

Actually, I don't think that too much can be read into the results of a by-election. If a Democrat had won in a non-flooded Issan constituency I would be far more impressed!

I don't know if anyone has bothered to do an analysis, but I do get the impression that the opposition usually does well in by-elections, but that doesn't mean much in general elections.

[Buchholz]

"Thaksin urged Sub-lieutenant Sumet Rittakhani to quit the Pheu Thai Party"

Self ambition is not required. ALL ambition should be for the Dear Leader. They'll probably execute the PTP candidate if he loses in CM - well maybe just suggest he hangs himself.

The other paper is reporting that Thaksin has black-listed Sumet from PTP and kicked him out of the Party.

He's quoted as saying, "This person must find another place next time. The party will not accept him back after damaging it."

He went on to warn any other Pheu Thai MP not to follow Sumet's actions.

.

Edited April 24, 2012 by Buchholz

[animatic]

"Kiattisak's main campaign message was the Pheu Thai Party had treated Pathum Thani voters like dummies. He reminded voters about Sumeth's poor performance in assisting flood victims".

Did he tell the voters what he was going to do that was different - or just rely on negativity? Any democrat supporters on the forum like to tell me what his platform was or is that it - rely on knee jerk voting. I shall not be reading to much into this.

Main platform.

'Not being connected with, indebted to or compromised by, the PTP Party Government',

would be more than enough reason to vote for him.

Edited April 24, 2012 by animatic

[philw]

I'm sure this is actually a secret indication of PTP's popularity, Right GK? Phi? MCA? 5555

Well, I suppose if your political party hasn't won an election in 20 years it's kind of exciting to win a by election by 3000 votes with a 30% turnout, yes.

Don't be cruel...........

[lungmi]

I'm sure this is actually a secret indication of PTP's popularity, Right GK? Phi? MCA? 5555

Well, I suppose if your political party hasn't won an election in 20 years it's kind of exciting to win a by election by 3000 votes with a 30% turnout, yes.

No one paid 500 Baht for the 30% turnout.

The elections show the reality.

[phiphidon]

I'm sure this is actually a secret indication of PTP's popularity, Right GK? Phi? MCA? 5555

Well, I suppose if your political party hasn't won an election in 20 years it's kind of exciting to win a by election by 3000 votes with a 30% turnout, yes.

I think your taking entirely the wrong perspective on this phiphidon, the democracts didnt win this election the PTP lost it, big time

Well that would seem to be an unusual trait for the democrats I agree!

Seriously though I do agree with you to a certain extent, not so much as it being the PTP lost it, rather the individual, who having delusions of grandeur decided to resign the post. I can probably assure you that the guy does not have much of a future in PTP politics following antics like that..............

[phiphidon]

"Kiattisak's main campaign message was the Pheu Thai Party had treated Pathum Thani voters like dummies. He reminded voters about Sumeth's poor performance in assisting flood victims".

Did he tell the voters what he was going to do that was different - or just rely on negativity? Any democrat supporters on the forum like to tell me what his platform was or is that it - rely on knee jerk voting. I shall not be reading to much into this.

Main platform.

'Not being connected with, indebted to or compromised by, the PTP Party Government',

would be more than enough reason to vote for him.

But weren't you and yours crowing about no political platform from the PTP - I would have thought you'd know the democrat party one off by heart by now - now what was it.........

[waza]

I'm sure this is actually a secret indication of PTP's popularity, Right GK? Phi? MCA? 5555

Well, I suppose if your political party hasn't won an election in 20 years it's kind of exciting to win a by election by 3000 votes with a 30% turnout, yes.

I think your taking entirely the wrong perspective on this phiphidon, the democracts didnt win this election the PTP lost it, big time

Well that would seem to be an unusual trait for the democrats I agree!

Seriously though I do agree with you to a certain extent, not so much as it being the PTP lost it, rather the individual, who having delusions of grandeur decided to resign the post. I can probably assure you that the guy does not have much of a future in PTP politics following antics like that..............

He obviously wasnt a team player, where do people get these self centered ideas?

[GentlemanJim]

I'm sure this is actually a secret indication of PTP's popularity, Right GK? Phi? MCA? 5555

Well, I suppose if your political party hasn't won an election in 20 years it's kind of exciting to win a by election by 3000 votes with a 30% turnout, yes.

I think your taking entirely the wrong perspective on this phiphidon, the democracts didnt win this election the PTP lost it, big time

Well that would seem to be an unusual trait for the democrats I agree!

Seriously though I do agree with you to a certain extent, not so much as it being the PTP lost it, rather the individual, who having delusions of grandeur decided to resign the post. I can probably assure you that the guy does not have much of a future in PTP politics following antics like that..............

I think the only person we need to be concerned with who has very worrying delusions of Grandeur is Thaksin.

Anyway 3000 votes is a landslide in that part of the country, hell Bush's first term in office was decided on less votes than that for the whole of the US.

[whybother]

Well that would seem to be an unusual trait for the democrats I agree!

Seriously though I do agree with you to a certain extent, not so much as it being the PTP lost it, rather the individual, who having delusions of grandeur decided to resign the post. I can probably assure you that the guy does not have much of a future in PTP politics following antics like that..............

I think the only person we need to be concerned with who has very worrying delusions of Grandeur is Thaksin.

Anyway 3000 votes is a landslide in that part of the country, hell Bush's first term in office was decided on less votes than that for the whole of the US.

53.7% of the vote. A massive landslide.

[TAWP]

I'm sure this is actually a secret indication of PTP's popularity, Right GK? Phi? MCA? 5555

Well, I suppose if your political party hasn't won an election in 20 years it's kind of exciting to win a by election by 3000 votes with a 30% turnout, yes.

Democrats has won many constituency elections. This was one of them. PT has won others. And this one before last - when the voters clearly lost interest.

[MAJIC]

I would like to believe the result of the by Election,had a deep meaning, that the people had finally woken up to the fact that their Party: PTP is not their Saviours after all. But in all honesty,I fear the simple reason was,the normal cash Injection was not available!

Enlightenment of the people,will take some time!

Edited April 24, 2012 by MAJIC

[JurgenG]

So the democrats can win an election.

I'm as surprised as everybody else.

So why don't they focus from now on on winning election instead of trying to disqualify their opponents on technical ground ? Everybody will be a winner.

Edited April 24, 2012 by JurgenG

[rubl]

So the democrats can win an election.

I'm as surprised as everybody else.

So why don't they focus from now on on winning election instead of trying to disqualify their opponents on technical ground ? Everybody will be a winner.

I'm afraid it's much more the Pheu Thai candidate loosing rather than the Democrat's candidate winning. Or as written in the OP:

"The ruling party and its red allies conceded defeat but pinned the blame on candidates, dismissing speculation that the party's popularity was sagging."

"The Democrats, meanwhile, won fair and square. But opposition lawmakers should be mindful that the turnout was low. Only about 30 per cent of voters cast ballots. This implies that the silent majority was disappointed at Pheu Thai but did not want to vote for the main opposition party."

[JurgenG]

^

What's wrong with you ?

They won an election. No military coup, no PAD protest. They won an election fair and square.

Is it something you don't understand about democracy ?

So far Thaksin won because the democrats were unable to mount a credible opposition. Now the democrats win because of some trouble in PT. Fair enough.

For you democrats, an election has to be stolen. Can you just learn the rule of democracy ? The winner is the winner. As long as it was a fair election, the winner is the winner. Is that so difficult to understand ?

[whybother]

^

What's wrong with you ?

They won an election. No military coup, no PAD protest. They won an election fair and square.

Is it something you don't understand about democracy ?

So far Thaksin won because the democrats were unable to mount a credible opposition. Now the democrats win because of some trouble in PT. Fair enough.

For you democrats, an election has to be stolen. Can you just learn the rule of democracy ? The winner is the winner. As long as it was a fair election, the winner is the winner. Is that so difficult to understand ?

They won 165 elections last year.

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

[rubl]

^

What's wrong with you ?

They won an election. No military coup, no PAD protest. They won an election fair and square.

Is it something you don't understand about democracy ?

So far Thaksin won because the democrats were unable to mount a credible opposition. Now the democrats win because of some trouble in PT. Fair enough.

For you democrats, an election has to be stolen. Can you just learn the rule of democracy ? The winner is the winner. As long as it was a fair election, the winner is the winner. Is that so difficult to understand ?

They won 165 elections last year.

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

Yeah, yeah, but this time is really different with even JurgenG saying "They won an election. No military coup, no PAD protest. They won an election fair and square."

Mind you, Ms. Thida doesn't seem to agree, not really that is "Red-shirt leader Thida Thawornseth said the two candidates were "lazy", and thus failed to connect with constituents, including red shirts."

[Thaddeus]

I'm sure this is actually a secret indication of PTP's popularity, Right GK? Phi? MCA? 5555

Well, I suppose if your political party hasn't won an election in 20 years it's kind of exciting to win a by election by 3000 votes with a 30% turnout, yes.

Democrats has won many constituency elections. This was one of them. PT has won others. And this one before last - when the voters clearly lost interest.

Exactly, the low voter turn out means one thing in my opinion, the circus is no fun when all it has is clowns.

[OzMick]

^

What's wrong with you ?

They won an election. No military coup, no PAD protest. They won an election fair and square.

Is it something you don't understand about democracy ?

So far Thaksin won because the democrats were unable to mount a credible opposition. Now the democrats win because of some trouble in PT. Fair enough.

For you democrats, an election has to be stolen. Can you just learn the rule of democracy ? The winner is the winner. As long as it was a fair election, the winner is the winner. Is that so difficult to understand ?

Don't you understand that winning an election on 'technical grounds" means that someone wasn't playing "fair and square." Something like building a resort in a national park perhaps?

[SomTumTiger]

"Kiattisak's main campaign message was the Pheu Thai Party had treated Pathum Thani voters like dummies. He reminded voters about Sumeth's poor performance in assisting flood victims".

Did he tell the voters what he was going to do that was different - or just rely on negativity? Any democrat supporters on the forum like to tell me what his platform was or is that it - rely on knee jerk voting. I shall not be reading to much into this.

Main platform.

'Not being connected with, indebted to or compromised by, the PTP Party Government',

would be more than enough reason to vote for him.

But weren't you and yours crowing about no political platform from the PTP - I would have thought you'd know the democrat party one off by heart by now - now what was it.........

Of course the Democrats don't have a platform - but neither does PTP. Not one of any substance.

[phiphidon]

Well that would seem to be an unusual trait for the democrats I agree!

Seriously though I do agree with you to a certain extent, not so much as it being the PTP lost it, rather the individual, who having delusions of grandeur decided to resign the post. I can probably assure you that the guy does not have much of a future in PTP politics following antics like that..............

I think the only person we need to be concerned with who has very worrying delusions of Grandeur is Thaksin.

Anyway 3000 votes is a landslide in that part of the country, hell Bush's first term in office was decided on less votes than that for the whole of the US.

53.7% of the vote. A massive landslide.

Ah but is it a majority

[JurgenG]

^^^ (answer to OzMicK)

Do you know that Audi bought Ducati ?

There are economic realities in this world you can't escape.

Edited April 24, 2012 by JurgenG

[JAG]

Between PTP MPs being kicked out of office and others trying to win a different post they will lose there majority.

And then a meeting is called in the Officers Mess, and hey presto - Mark is back!

[h90]

Between PTP MPs being kicked out of office and others trying to win a different post they will lose there majority.

And then a meeting is called in the Officers Mess, and hey presto - Mark is back!

Or PTP just continues to rule even they aren't elected, like Thaksin did.....

[mca]

I'm sure this is actually a secret indication of PTP's popularity, Right GK? Phi? MCA? 5555

Well, I suppose if your political party hasn't won an election in 20 years it's kind of exciting to win a by election by 3000 votes with a 30% turnout, yes.

Yeah it's a bit like my team Norwich City. Win the Premier League? 555 I'm just happy they can stay mid table and keep up for another season.

Anyhow I'll wait for the next general election. If the Dems can't pull that one off what with the broken election promises, the Taksin saga, the flood fiasco, the rice sceme, Yingluk looking as if she's sponsored by the minute for gaffes, having a deputy PM who appears bipolar etc then they might as well call it a day.

[Buchholz]

Between PTP MPs being kicked out of office and others trying to win a different post they will lose there majority.

And then a meeting is called in the Officers Mess, and hey presto - Mark is back!

That doesn't make any sense.

If PTP lost their majority, wouldn't Abhisit be back in charge anyway?

Edited April 24, 2012 by Buchholz

[OzMick]

^^^ (answer to OzMicK)

Do you know that Audi bought Ducati ?

There are economic realities in this world you can't escape.

Very strange reply to this

"Don't you understand that winning an election on 'technical grounds" means that someone wasn't playing "fair and square." Something like building a resort in a national park perhaps? "

Only in a PTP supporter's mind would economic realities over-rule laws. Back in the real world, cheating politicians get the boot, illegal resorts get demolished, and red shirt bombers get 35 years. Life is hard, Jugs.

[phiphidon]

Between PTP MPs being kicked out of office and others trying to win a different post they will lose there majority.

And then a meeting is called in the Officers Mess, and hey presto - Mark is back!

That doesn't make any sense.

If PTP lost their majority, wouldn't Abhisit be back in charge anyway?

Doesn't the PM have to voted in, or does Abhisit have different rules? and that would be assuming they could form a coalition............

Edited April 25, 2012 by phiphidon

[animatic]

Between PTP MPs being kicked out of office and others trying to win a different post they will lose there majority.

And then a meeting is called in the Officers Mess, and hey presto - Mark is back!

That doesn't make any sense.

If PTP lost their majority, wouldn't Abhisit be back in charge anyway?

Doesn't the PM have to voted in, or does Abhisit have different rules? and that would be assuming they could form a coalition............

Abhisit was voted in as PM by the Parliament, just as every other one is.

No matter if it's Thaksin or the army saying vote for him. No difference.

Some power broker or the other is doing it in THAILAND as S.O.P.