Abhisit Urges End To House Session

[gand]

Abhisit is the closest that Thailand has to someone who even looks half like a Prime Minister. Unfortunately, he is backed by a shabby political party who are the champions of nothing much in particular, except for possibly helping themselves and their connections. Peua Thai are no better, and in fact worse as they don't have a person who is truly capable of leading the country and solving problems effectively for the good of the people.

If Abhisit and Chuwit could form an independent partnership, like 'Starsky & Hutch', 'Tom & Jerry', 'Ant & Dec' or 'Batman & Robin', then I would have greater confidence in this country being turned upside down overnight, and waking up tomorrow in a corruption free hardworking state where real law could be applied and upheld. Just fantasy ...

There are no politicians in Thailand, just crooks, thieves, gangsters and thugs.

Strange. But well worthy of consideration.

I think most of us would take Dastardly and Muttley over this crew

Sent from my dog.

And play 'good cop, bad cop'?

[Skywalker69]

Why is it, I can't find anything to complain about the way words come out of Abhisit's mouth? Either he's the true essence of a politician (lies VERY convincingly) or he's just really a class about the rest of the clods that call themselves 'politicians'.

Is it just me or does everyone else think Abhisit speaks convincingly, coherently and without the typical self-indoctrinated clout?

No it´s not just you.

[philw]

Why is it, I can't find anything to complain about the way words come out of Abhisit's mouth? Either he's the true essence of a politician (lies VERY convincingly) or he's just really a class about the rest of the clods that call themselves 'politicians'.

Is it just me or does everyone else think Abhisit speaks convincingly, coherently and without the typical self-indoctrinated clout?

No it´s not just you.

I do like the way "theajarn" speaks English like what she is really spoke.

Of what does AV speak "convincingly, coherently and without the typical self-indoctrinated clout?"

Normally it's the RTA, yellow shirts or a man with a pipe speaking on his behalf.

[Thaddeus]

So why doesn't Abhisit champion the cause of the poor, I'm sure he could do so much more convincingly (if not actually genuinely) than the Thaksins.

Take away their power base in legitimate democratic campaigning and take power over the next few years?

Because the Democrats lack any empathy, compassion and could not give a toss about the less fortunate. As far as they are concerned they are only useful as domestic slaves and drivers and are entirely inconsequential to their pampered lives in Bangkok.

The PTP are so bad its embarrassing, yet the Democrats even now cannot come up with some decent PR/marketing/policies to make decent inroads into the PTP polls advantage. The Democrats are just dinosaurs who cannot adapt, which is why they always need alternative means than a democratic vote to actually come into power.

Some good points, and quite well made, however you are applying a western thought process on to a culture that is totally different to your expectations, and it just doesn't work that way.

We westerners have grown up in a political climate that we don't trust, we know that the promises are false, and most will have a 'yeh right' attitude when the new political kid on the block comes out with something that anyone with a grain of sense knows is unachievable, and as such we vote for the one with the most believable promises.

That doesn't work here, the one sweet now or three sweets later question will always be one sweet now, and until the electorate realise that the one sweet now is just a turd in a fancy wrapper, nothing will change.

[cardholder]

Why is it, I can't find anything to complain about the way words come out of Abhisit's mouth? Either he's the true essence of a politician (lies VERY convincingly) or he's just really a class about the rest of the clods that call themselves 'politicians'.

Is it just me or does everyone else think Abhisit speaks convincingly, coherently and without the typical self-indoctrinated clout?

I saw Abhisit speak at the Foreign Correspondents Club in Bangkok last month. He is coherent, articulate, humerous and quite convincing - something that cannot be easy for someone who's party is unelectable. I came to the conclusion that I was watching a man in waiting - and one who would run out of time before his destiny would be fulfilled.

The margin of voting numbers, between the Democrats and the series of populist parties, is simply too wide a gap to bridge in the near future. I fail to see how Abhisit can ever appeal to the voters of the North East. It would be like Liverpool dockers voting for Maggie Thatcher!

[smutcakes]

So why doesn't Abhisit champion the cause of the poor, I'm sure he could do so much more convincingly (if not actually genuinely) than the Thaksins.

Take away their power base in legitimate democratic campaigning and take power over the next few years?

Because the Democrats lack any empathy, compassion and could not give a toss about the less fortunate. As far as they are concerned they are only useful as domestic slaves and drivers and are entirely inconsequential to their pampered lives in Bangkok.

The PTP are so bad its embarrassing, yet the Democrats even now cannot come up with some decent PR/marketing/policies to make decent inroads into the PTP polls advantage. The Democrats are just dinosaurs who cannot adapt, which is why they always need alternative means than a democratic vote to actually come into power.

Some good points, and quite well made, however you are applying a western thought process on to a culture that is totally different to your expectations, and it just doesn't work that way.

We westerners have grown up in a political climate that we don't trust, we know that the promises are false, and most will have a 'yeh right' attitude when the new political kid on the block comes out with something that anyone with a grain of sense knows is unachievable, and as such we vote for the one with the most believable promises.

That doesn't work here, the one sweet now or three sweets later question will always be one sweet now, and until the electorate realise that the one sweet now is just a turd in a fancy wrapper, nothing will change.

Maybe so, but as far as I can see in the past 10 years they have hardly made a serious attempt at getting more voters on side, and seem to spend a huge amount of time trying to discredit/dissolve the opposition rather than looking at ways to increase their voting share through policy or any other method they may want to try. So what you are saying is that they have resigned themselves to not winning an election for the forseeable future? Perhaps if they were as clever as they think they are, then they would have foreseen some of these problems with populist policies prior to someone actually undertaking them, rather than always taking what they had for granted.

As unpalatable as the PTP are, I dont think the Dems have anyone to blame but themselves in this mess. They simply took there finger off the ball at some point and are now trying to play catch up.

[Thaddeus]

So why doesn't Abhisit champion the cause of the poor, I'm sure he could do so much more convincingly (if not actually genuinely) than the Thaksins.

Take away their power base in legitimate democratic campaigning and take power over the next few years?

Because the Democrats lack any empathy, compassion and could not give a toss about the less fortunate. As far as they are concerned they are only useful as domestic slaves and drivers and are entirely inconsequential to their pampered lives in Bangkok.

The PTP are so bad its embarrassing, yet the Democrats even now cannot come up with some decent PR/marketing/policies to make decent inroads into the PTP polls advantage. The Democrats are just dinosaurs who cannot adapt, which is why they always need alternative means than a democratic vote to actually come into power.

Some good points, and quite well made, however you are applying a western thought process on to a culture that is totally different to your expectations, and it just doesn't work that way.

We westerners have grown up in a political climate that we don't trust, we know that the promises are false, and most will have a 'yeh right' attitude when the new political kid on the block comes out with something that anyone with a grain of sense knows is unachievable, and as such we vote for the one with the most believable promises.

That doesn't work here, the one sweet now or three sweets later question will always be one sweet now, and until the electorate realise that the one sweet now is just a turd in a fancy wrapper, nothing will change.

Maybe so, but as far as I can see in the past 10 years they have hardly made a serious attempt at getting more voters on side, and seem to spend a huge amount of time trying to discredit/dissolve the opposition rather than looking at ways to increase their voting share through policy or any other method they may want to try. So what you are saying is that they have resigned themselves to not winning an election for the forseeable future? Perhaps if they were as clever as they think they are, then they would have foreseen some of these problems with populist policies prior to someone actually undertaking them, rather than always taking what they had for granted.

As unpalatable as the PTP are, I dont think the Dems have anyone to blame but themselves in this mess. They simply took there finger off the ball at some point and are now trying to play catch up.

Possibly, but when faced with a larger and stronger opponent, one of the best and most successful options is to let them punch themselves out.

[Chupup]

Why is it, I can't find anything to complain about the way words come out of Abhisit's mouth? Either he's the true essence of a politician (lies VERY convincingly) or he's just really a class about the rest of the clods that call themselves 'politicians'.

Is it just me or does everyone else think Abhisit speaks convincingly, coherently and without the typical self-indoctrinated clout?

I would doubt very much if it was just you, imo i think he is a good man, who, given the chance i am sure would have pulled Thailand forward as opposed to the government who do nothing and a PM who does even less

[OzMick]

So why doesn't Abhisit champion the cause of the poor, I'm sure he could do so much more convincingly (if not actually genuinely) than the Thaksins.

Take away their power base in legitimate democratic campaigning and take power over the next few years?

Actions speak louder than words. Without the blowing of trumpets, the Democrats quietly arranged to pay most of the cost of school uniforms and texts, a policy with a much greater impact on the poorer in society without discriminating. Anything which allows these peoples' children to improve themselves does more for the poor than any flash toy.

IMHO this policy may have been overlooked during the election, but will be remembered every year at return to school by every parent affected.

The B500 old age payment also was a boon for the poorest, so much that it was claimed as a gift from Thaksin.

[pakorn7]

Why is it, I can't find anything to complain about the way words come out of Abhisit's mouth? Either he's the true essence of a politician (lies VERY convincingly) or he's just really a class about the rest of the clods that call themselves 'politicians'.

Is it just me or does everyone else think Abhisit speaks convincingly, coherently and without the typical self-indoctrinated clout?

I would doubt very much if it was just you, imo i think he is a good man, who, given the chance i am sure would have pulled Thailand forward as opposed to the government who do nothing and a PM who does even less

He is a good man, but a poor PM.

He should stick with his teaching job; he makes a good university professor.