Democrats Will Never Join Pheu Thai Government: Former Premier Abhisit

[nurofiend]

...the absence of a 'like' speaks a thousand words

do any of ye have an opinion as to why suthep kept shtum about this big event until now?

for any of ye who are taking sutheps word, does that point seem odd at all?

Edited June 19, 2012 by nurofiend

[whybother]

...the absence of a 'like' speaks a thousand words

do any of ye have an opinion as to why suthep kept shtum about this big event until now?

for any of ye who are taking sutheps word, does that point seem odd at all?

Maybe because this "big event" just happened?

[nurofiend]

...the absence of a 'like' speaks a thousand words

do any of ye have an opinion as to why suthep kept shtum about this big event until now?

for any of ye who are taking sutheps word, does that point seem odd at all?

Maybe because this "big event" just happened?

since january

[whybother]

Maybe because this "big event" just happened?

since january

OK ... maybe because he got sick of being approached.

[nurofiend]

Maybe because this "big event" just happened?

since january

OK ... maybe because he got sick of being approached.

so now that you've been proven wrong on your attempt to score a cheap point, you respond with such a flimsy answer.

do you not think this would have been good ammo for the dems as soon as it happened?

you think we know about this now only 'because he got sick of being approached'?

or maybe the dems were contemplating it and took all this time to decline... <--- an equally ridiculous suggestion.

Edited June 19, 2012 by nurofiend

[whybother]

so now that you've been proven wrong on your attempt to score a cheap point, you respond with such a flimsy answer.

do you not think this would have been good ammo for the dems as soon as it happened?

you think we know about this now only because he got sick of being approached?

or maybe the dems were contemplating it and took all this time to decline... <--- an equally ridiculous suggestion.

You asked a question. I gave a possible answer. I hadn't read all the OP so I didn't realise it first happened in January. Sue me.

You pointed it out, and I gave another possible answer. The most probable answer is that they were waiting for the best time to use it.

[nurofiend]

so now that you've been proven wrong on your attempt to score a cheap point, you respond with such a flimsy answer.

do you not think this would have been good ammo for the dems as soon as it happened?

you think we know about this now only because he got sick of being approached?

or maybe the dems were contemplating it and took all this time to decline... <--- an equally ridiculous suggestion.

You asked a question. I gave a possible answer. I hadn't read all the OP so I didn't realise it first happened in January. Sue me.

You pointed it out, and I gave another possible answer. The most probable answer is that they were waiting for the best time to use it.

sue you? how much 'you holding?

anyway, it was the (thinking i was wrong) sarcastic, 'answer in a question,' style that you replied with that made me point out your attempt at point scoring,

as for your latest answer, it's probably the best so far but it still seems odd to me.

what makes now the best time?

[volk666]

The latest approach was just on Wednesday, two days before Suthep went public, if I remember the OP correctly. He even gave the time of the phone call.

How Democrats can stop amnesty bill legally? - Misleading question. All they have to do is convince Thaksin to back off and they succeeded for now. The bill doesn't have a life on its own, you know...

Under Abhisit Democrats added several million to their voter tally and if not for Yingluck phenomenon they could have had the same number of votes as in 2007. They lost quite a few votes in 2011 but it's still far better than the party did under previous leadership.

[nurofiend]

The latest approach was just on Wednesday, two days before Suthep went public, if I remember the OP correctly. He even gave the time of the phone call.

How Democrats can stop amnesty bill legally? - Misleading question. All they have to do is convince Thaksin to back off and they succeeded for now. The bill doesn't have a life on its own, you know...

Under Abhisit Democrats added several million to their voter tally and if not for Yingluck phenomenon they could have had the same number of votes as in 2007. They lost quite a few votes in 2011 but it's still far better than the party did under previous leadership.

"He even gave the time of the phone call."

oh well then it must be true, sorry to have asked ye about it.

"How Democrats can stop amnesty bill legally? - Misleading question. All they have to do is convince Thaksin to back off and they succeeded for now. The bill doesn't have a life on its own, you know..."

not misleading, pretty straightforward actually.

i'm not sure if that last part has any relevance to anything i've said or not but it is something i am aware of.

birds can fly, you know...

[phiphidon]

Maybe because this "big event" just happened?

since january

OK ... maybe because he got sick of being approached.

[lannarebirth]

Maybe because this "big event" just happened?

since january

OK ... maybe because he got sick of being approached.

so now that you've been proven wrong on your attempt to score a cheap point, you respond with such a flimsy answer.

do you not think this would have been good ammo for the dems as soon as it happened?

you think we know about this now only 'because he got sick of being approached'?

or maybe the dems were contemplating it and took all this time to decline... <--- an equally ridiculous suggestion.

I think you're wrong and representative of the mindset that keeps this nation mired in shit.

When this kind of thing occurs, overtures from other parties, the party always listens. Maybe, just maybe they could set up a Unity government. Then through a series of back and forth negotiations the parties begin to learn what each wants for that to happen. Maybe the Dems would have said yes if Abhisit was named PM and Thaksin came back and did his time. maybe that was a cost too steep for PTP. Anyhow we'll not know as both parties will have said things they would never would have wanted their core supporters to know about. That's the nature of politics.

Edited June 20, 2012 by lannarebirth

[Siripon]

Thaksin tried to persuade Suthep to consider merging the Democrats with Palang Dhamma, the party he inherited from Chamlong, (what was Chamlong thinking, giving a party of so called righteous uncorrupt souls to Thaksin?!) many years ago,

Chavalit, rumoured to be the middle man between Thaksin and the Democrats, has frequently raised the call for a government of national unity.

The reason Suthep revealed Thaksin's offer now is because he was angry with the Defence Minister's claim that no one, including the army, wanted to work with the Democrats at present.

[Siripon]

Every MP has already signed an undated letter of resignation, which is kept by him.

Are you sure about that? Can you prove it?

As to your post, despite the ratty tone, I'm not sure there's anything new there.I wouldn't quarrel with the general diagnosis but it's hardly unusual for ambitious politicians to use their parties for personal advancement.Lust for power goes with the territory.Putting feelers out to possible allies is hardly unusual, nor is the denial of such feelers when rejected - as seems to be the case here.I can think of umpteen examples in other countries.What's interesting to me is the presumption that the unelected elites might be interested in compromise - don't really buy the Shaun Crispin line.I

It might be comforting to defenders of the status quo that the Redshirt movement would wither and die without Thaksin's cash and organising ability.Too early to say in my view.

young husband, surely with your personal knowledge and relationships with various prominent members of Thai society, you have heard of Thaksin's condition for prospective Pheua Thai MPs prior to the election?

[ThaiOats]

I personally think Suthep fudged this one up and didn't think it through all the way. Whether it's true or not, he didn't think out all the possible scenarios that can occur by making such accusations. Since both sides are calling each other liars, we're at a moot point and even when Abhisit was asked he said "we should just stop it here".

Suthep only told his party members that he was approached by people, to which they cannot confirm first hand. I sometimes even think that he's lying to his own party. The only reason Suthep would not reveal the names, if it's true, it would be if the people who approached him asked to keep it a secret which he ignored. If he was going this route, if true, he should've went all the way and revealed names otherwise he should've kept his mouth shut.

- 1 for Suthep and the rest of the Dems for not putting a hand over his mouth.

Edited June 20, 2012 by ThaiOats

[volk666]

"He even gave the time of the phone call."

oh well then it must be true, sorry to have asked ye about it.

"How Democrats can stop amnesty bill legally? - Misleading question. All they have to do is convince Thaksin to back off and they succeeded for now. The bill doesn't have a life on its own, you know..."

not misleading, pretty straightforward actually.

i'm not sure if that last part has any relevance to anything i've said or not but it is something i am aware of.

birds can fly, you know...

God knows what standard of proof you need in this case, just as everybody knows you won't admit that Suthep was not lying no matter what. For me - Suthep gave a lot of details here and his version make enough sense. I don't see the reason to doubt it.

PTP might deny any knowledge of it but people like Chavalit can approach Suthep without asking Yingluck.

"How Democrats can stop amnesty bill legally?" is like asking "When did you stop beating your wife?"

Democrats need to stop Thaksin from trying to return home without serving his sentence and amnesty bill on its own is just one indicator in a greater struggle - trying to influence Thaksin's mind, and in this mind game talking legalities is inapplicable.

What you probably mean is how Dems can send a message to Thaksin without getting in legal trouble themselves. Not their utmost concern, will sort it out later.

[volk666]

I personally think Suthep fudged this one up and didn't think it through all the way. Whether it's true or not, he didn't think out all the possible scenarios that can occur by making such accusations. Since both sides are calling each other liars, we're at a moot point and even when Abhisit was asked he said "we should just stop it here".

Suthep only told his party members that he was approached by people, to which they cannot confirm first hand. I sometimes even think that he's lying to his own party. The only reason Suthep would not reveal the names, if it's true, it would be if the people who approached him asked to keep it a secret which he ignored. If he was going this route, if true, he should've went all the way and revealed names otherwise he should've kept his mouth shut.

- 1 for Suthep and the rest of the Dems for not putting a hand over his mouth.

Suthep doesn't have to give the names to anybody and doesn't have to prove anything. People who approached him know the score and those who are not in the loop don't really matter.

It's up to Thaksin to assure his fanclub that he didn't send people to talk to Suthep. Some of them will believe Thaksin, some will have their doubts - Suthep's mission accomplished!

[metisdead]

Inflammatory posts and replies have been removed.

[lannarebirth]

I personally think Suthep fudged this one up and didn't think it through all the way. Whether it's true or not, he didn't think out all the possible scenarios that can occur by making such accusations. Since both sides are calling each other liars, we're at a moot point and even when Abhisit was asked he said "we should just stop it here".

Suthep only told his party members that he was approached by people, to which they cannot confirm first hand. I sometimes even think that he's lying to his own party. The only reason Suthep would not reveal the names, if it's true, it would be if the people who approached him asked to keep it a secret which he ignored. If he was going this route, if true, he should've went all the way and revealed names otherwise he should've kept his mouth shut.

- 1 for Suthep and the rest of the Dems for not putting a hand over his mouth.

Suthep doesn't have to give the names to anybody and doesn't have to prove anything. People who approached him know the score and those who are not in the loop don't really matter.

It's up to Thaksin to assure his fanclub that he didn't send people to talk to Suthep. Some of them will believe Thaksin, some will have their doubts - Suthep's mission accomplished!

If it's true it would serve Suthep and the Democrats interests to let Thaksin talk himself out on a limb here and just keep their mouths shut, at least for the time being.

[ThaiOats]

I personally think Suthep fudged this one up and didn't think it through all the way. Whether it's true or not, he didn't think out all the possible scenarios that can occur by making such accusations. Since both sides are calling each other liars, we're at a moot point and even when Abhisit was asked he said "we should just stop it here".

Suthep only told his party members that he was approached by people, to which they cannot confirm first hand. I sometimes even think that he's lying to his own party. The only reason Suthep would not reveal the names, if it's true, it would be if the people who approached him asked to keep it a secret which he ignored. If he was going this route, if true, he should've went all the way and revealed names otherwise he should've kept his mouth shut.

- 1 for Suthep and the rest of the Dems for not putting a hand over his mouth.

Suthep doesn't have to give the names to anybody and doesn't have to prove anything. People who approached him know the score and those who are not in the loop don't really matter.

It's up to Thaksin to assure his fanclub that he didn't send people to talk to Suthep. Some of them will believe Thaksin, some will have their doubts - Suthep's mission accomplished!

You may be right but if you noticed the recent strategy that the Democrats are using, they're trying to create disunity within the government and Red ranks. Whether it's the result of facts or fabrication, the government and Red leaders are using it to unite the Red-shirts even stronger. It's like saying "see what the Democrats are trying to do? First the timely court cases against Thaksin, Yongyudth, Karun, then the PM's Four Seasons issue, and now Suthep making up stories to try to create disunity. We must show them that we're smarter than that and unite even stronger!", to which the Red shirts might say "heeeeeeey, that's riiiight!, we won't be fooled!".

If you listen to the Democrats in their rallies and Bluesky channels, they're trying to sympathize with the Red Shirts and convince them that they're being used by Thaksin, which is good. On the other hand, this onslaught of sympathy and all these accusations can backfire on them. The game is being read, and I assure you, the Red shirt supporters are more than likely watching Red channels and believing what their propagandists are telling them.

[visionchaser45]

Don't ask me, ask them.

They keep on losing election after election but they keep the same leaders.

Do you know the definition of insanity ? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

But you seem to be so close to them. You're the one saying how much they don't like Abhisit.

It seems that the Thaksin proxy parties don't seem to learn much either. Thaksin tried to change laws to suit himself ... got dumped. PPP tried to change laws to suit Thaksin ... got dumped. PTP ... on the same track, it seems.

It is one thing to get "dumped" by the electorate and quite another to get "dumped" by a military coup or creative courtroom wrangling. The Democrats couldn't win a general election if they paid everybody twice what the majority party was ever accused of paying out. That is a cold hard fact that the opposition party fails to acknowledge.

It didn't stop them from being dumped ... and they're going in the same direction now with trying to whitewash Thaksin's crimes.

And if they are dumped by a coup or more courtroom wrangling, they will be voted right back in when another election is held. The only way to keep them out is to ban elections and impose dictatorship. That is a cold hard fact that is colder and harder than any iceberg.

[volk666]

I personally think Suthep fudged this one up and didn't think it through all the way. Whether it's true or not, he didn't think out all the possible scenarios that can occur by making such accusations. Since both sides are calling each other liars, we're at a moot point and even when Abhisit was asked he said "we should just stop it here".

Suthep only told his party members that he was approached by people, to which they cannot confirm first hand. I sometimes even think that he's lying to his own party. The only reason Suthep would not reveal the names, if it's true, it would be if the people who approached him asked to keep it a secret which he ignored. If he was going this route, if true, he should've went all the way and revealed names otherwise he should've kept his mouth shut.

- 1 for Suthep and the rest of the Dems for not putting a hand over his mouth.

Suthep doesn't have to give the names to anybody and doesn't have to prove anything. People who approached him know the score and those who are not in the loop don't really matter.

It's up to Thaksin to assure his fanclub that he didn't send people to talk to Suthep. Some of them will believe Thaksin, some will have their doubts - Suthep's mission accomplished!

You may be right but if you noticed the recent strategy that the Democrats are using, they're trying to create disunity within the government and Red ranks. Whether it's the result of facts or fabrication, the government and Red leaders are using it to unite the Red-shirts even stronger. It's like saying "see what the Democrats are trying to do? First the timely court cases against Thaksin, Yongyudth, Karun, then the PM's Four Seasons issue, and now Suthep making up stories to try to create disunity. We must show them that we're smarter than that and unite even stronger!", to which the Red shirts might say "heeeeeeey, that's riiiight!, we won't be fooled!".

If you listen to the Democrats in their rallies and Bluesky channels, they're trying to sympathize with the Red Shirts and convince them that they're being used by Thaksin, which is good. On the other hand, this onslaught of sympathy and all these accusations can backfire on them. The game is being read, and I assure you, the Red shirt supporters are more than likely watching Red channels and believing what their propagandists are telling them.

I don't know about reds warming up to Democrats, that's not going to happen any time soon, but even the reds themselves are starting to doubt Thaksin's commitment to the cause and it wasn't Democrats who started telling reds that it's time to forget about 2010 and part ways.

We should also see calls for unity coming from the rank and files, not from PTP or Thaksin's lackey, for the lack of a better word.

I bet some of the reds must see that amnesty bill is against everything they sacrificed their lives for and the "unity" PTP is pushing forward is the unity with ammarts, not with the reds.

Maybe the fact that PTP switched to a damage control mood is a sign that they really sense signs of discomfort coming from the trenches.

[ThaiOats]

And if they are dumped by a coup or more courtroom wrangling, they will be voted right back in when another election is held. The only way to keep them out is to ban elections and impose dictatorship. That is a cold hard fact that is colder and harder than any iceberg.

I'd have to disagree. This whole military, PAD and Democrats are in cahoots to take over the government thing is propaganda that the government and Red Shirt leaders are using. It would be too simplistic to say they're bedding with each other just because they oppose the Thaksin regime which divides it into an US vs THEM mentality.

The Democrats are trying to assimilate by dis-assimilating the Red Shirts into regular non color coded Thai citizens. I'm hopeful that surely but slowly that they will succeed in their campaign because if Thai people do not get out of this color coded politics, it will split the country even further. It's a long road yet but without an opposition, Democracy cannot flourish and one often over look the fact that it is the Democrats responsibility to represent their own voters, 11 million of them. For the opposition to sit back and do nothing would tantamount to letting the voters down and supporting a one party state which you know where that will lead.

Edited June 20, 2012 by ThaiOats

[Moruya]

Don't ask me, ask them.

They keep on losing election after election but they keep the same leaders.

Do you know the definition of insanity ? Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

But you seem to be so close to them. You're the one saying how much they don't like Abhisit.

It seems that the Thaksin proxy parties don't seem to learn much either. Thaksin tried to change laws to suit himself ... got dumped. PPP tried to change laws to suit Thaksin ... got dumped. PTP ... on the same track, it seems.

True, most democrats don't like Abhisit. It's nothing new. He is a loser, who like losers ? Actually the democrats knew they were going to lose the July 2011 election and Abhisit was the perfect fall guy .

Why he is still here ? Probably too early to introduce the new guy. All the fights the democrats are engaged in are lost battles. They have the perfect fall guy for that.

Jurgen, my dear man, you're not getting much support with this idea.

Now climb out of the hole you have dug before someone fills it with concrete! It wouldn't be the same without you!

[Buchholz]

Every MP has already signed an undated letter of resignation, which is kept by him.

Are you sure about that? Can you prove it?

As to your post, despite the ratty tone, I'm not sure there's anything new there.I wouldn't quarrel with the general diagnosis but it's hardly unusual for ambitious politicians to use their parties for personal advancement.Lust for power goes with the territory.Putting feelers out to possible allies is hardly unusual, nor is the denial of such feelers when rejected - as seems to be the case here.I can think of umpteen examples in other countries.What's interesting to me is the presumption that the unelected elites might be interested in compromise - don't really buy the Shaun Crispin line.I

It might be comforting to defenders of the status quo that the Redshirt movement would wither and die without Thaksin's cash and organising ability.Too early to say in my view.

young husband, surely with your personal knowledge and relationships with various prominent members of Thai society, you have heard of Thaksin's condition for prospective Pheua Thai MPs prior to the election?

It's certainly been mentioned enough that one would think insiders would have heard of it, whether young or old husbands.

It makes sense as well for Thaksin to have learned from past experiences when he didn't have them.

.