Democrats Surprise With Victory In Pheu Thai Stronghold

[Buchholz]

Amazing Thaivisa rolls on...

untyped words - "most recent" are somehow supposed to be magically filled in by readers.

being accurate is called "word play"

"Dems" are absolutely intentionally left off of statements because accuracy is intended when half of a declarative statement "AV and Dems" is shown to be inaccurate.

and then concluded with further inaccuracies requiring reiteration, yet again, of the original statement some 15 posts ago...

that answered a question from someone seemingly unfamiliar with even the basics of how a PM is elected....

Abhisit won the election for PM in 2008.

I await the next comical confabulation of that basic fact that evidently sticks in the craw of some posters.

.

"Dems" are absolutely intentionally left off of statements because accuracy is intended when half of a declarative statement "AV and Dems" is shown to be inaccurate.

Classic.

You must need braces to keep your trousers up, the amount of twisting and turning you do.

It was your tampering with philws actual words that enabled your argument - "AV and the dems" suddenly became in your version of events, just "AV".

buchholz - never knowingly wrong (in his mind at least). Spin on buchholz, we ain't listenin'...............

"Abhisit won the election for PM in 2008. I await the next comical confabulation of that basic fact that evidently sticks in the craw of some posters."

Wasn't arguing with that fact buchholz, just your spin. (Just how he won it is the subject of much discussion and rightly so - it seems once faced with getting elected by the Electorate rather than his peers (bought or otherwise) that there is still a lot of work to be done. One wonders if he is too tainted now to ever win an election).

comical confabulation = check

addressing a specific portion of a post as inaccurate is now somehow considered "twisting and turning"

addressing the inaccurate portion of a longer statement is now somehow considered "tampering"

a short, definitive, and factual statement is now somehow considered "spin"

as for "we ain't listening"..... it's painfully obvious that the tiny but vocal contingent of revisionists doesn't listen nor care about accuracy.

.

Edited September 5, 2012 by Buchholz

[Thaddeus]

The pedantry is amazing. ( and childish )

AV and the Dems have not won a recent election.

YS and her party have.

That is the point being made by binjalin.

Simple really.

Yes, I think he could be.

[Nickymaster]

The pedantry is amazing. ( and childish )

AV and the Dems have not won a recent election.

YS and her party have.

That is the point being made by binjalin.

Simple really.

So the translation from English to Spin of "I mean by the Thai ELECTORATE - he has never, ever been voted in by the Thai people" is "AV and the Dems have not won a recent election."

Thanks for clearing that up.

I can understand why you're so touchy on this subject. If I thought that the democrat party could be the saviour of Thailand, I'd be upset too. I mean it can't be much fun supporting a political party that hasn't worked out how to convince the populace to vote it into power for 20 years.

I'd be looking at that leader, especially as he'd said he would step down from being leader if he didn't achieve the number of seats he had promised, and realise I was looking at a loser.

Where is the demcrat party successful? Bangkok. There's been 3 democrat Bangkok Governors since 2004. This coming one may be of interest as both sides are seen as contributing to the Bangkok floods and a whiff of scandal blowing around the present incumbent - no wonder why he want's to extend his tenure, more of the same please.

How much longer the Bangkok dynasty will stand, who knows..................

Dem party is successful in regions the IQ of its people tend to be the highest country average. Unfortunately only 40% of the voters tend to fall under that group. 40%, there is still hope.

But then again, PT isn't really interested in educating people. They rather just make them dependent on them by giving handouts and buying their products at above market prices. It seems.

[philw]

"People in Bangkok have a higher level of intelligence than in the North and North East strongholds of the red shirts."

Hellodolly, On what basis do you make what seems to be an incredibly stupid statement?

I suspect it is based on personal prejudice. But I could be wrong.

How hypocrite to call this a personal prejudice and than in the next post, without any evidence, you blame the Dem's for vote buying! Don't you get tired of yourself?

Ps; read these interesting statistics about intelligence distribution in Thailand. It seems that the strongholds of the red shirts are indeed a lot less intelligent than in Bangkok in a country that has a lower intelligence than many other countries! After reading your and your buddies posts I can only conclude you live in the North-East.

http://www.thaivisa....global-average/

That is an Irish flag is not ???

[philw]

The pedantry is amazing. ( and childish )

AV and the Dems have not won a recent election.

YS and her party have.

That is the point being made by binjalin.

Simple really.

So the translation from English to Spin of "I mean by the Thai ELECTORATE - he has never, ever been voted in by the Thai people" is "AV and the Dems have not won a recent election."

Thanks for clearing that up.

I can understand why you're so touchy on this subject. If I thought that the democrat party could be the saviour of Thailand, I'd be upset too. I mean it can't be much fun supporting a political party that hasn't worked out how to convince the populace to vote it into power for 20 years.

I'd be looking at that leader, especially as he'd said he would step down from being leader if he didn't achieve the number of seats he had promised, and realise I was looking at a loser.

Where is the demcrat party successful? Bangkok. There's been 3 democrat Bangkok Governors since 2004. This coming one may be of interest as both sides are seen as contributing to the Bangkok floods and a whiff of scandal blowing around the present incumbent - no wonder why he want's to extend his tenure, more of the same please.

How much longer the Bangkok dynasty will stand, who knows..................

Dem party is successful in regions the IQ of its people tend to be the highest country average. Unfortunately only 40% of the voters tend to fall under that group. 40%, there is still hope.

But then again, PT isn't really interested in educating people. They rather just make them dependent on them by giving handouts and buying their products at above market prices. It seems.

" Well, Brian, I wish I was intelligent enough or sufficiently well educated, to vote for the Democrats, but my team won "

Your post is pythonesque, though not made in jest.

[binjalin]

The pedantry is amazing. ( and childish )

AV and the Dems have not won a recent election.

YS and her party have.

That is the point being made by binjalin.

Simple really.

Yes, I think he could be.

Let's get it straight

1/ a PARTY led BY 'AV' aka 'Abhisit' aka 'Mark' etc.

has

(step two coming for the intellectually challenged)

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

clear now?

edit: nearly forgot - Yingluck went to the country and WON

Edited September 5, 2012 by binjalin

[KireB]

The pedantry is amazing. ( and childish )

AV and the Dems have not won a recent election.

YS and her party have.

That is the point being made by binjalin.

Simple really.

Yes, I think he could be.

Let's get it straight

1/ a PARTY led BY 'AV' aka 'Abhisit' aka 'Mark' etc.

has

(step two coming for the intellectually challenged)

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

clear now?

edit: nearly forgot - Yingluck went to the country and WON

Let me get this straight as I must be intellectually challenged, the Democrats were handed power by the courts? Are you sure, as I have never heard of the court being the institution to do so. Which court are you referring to?

[tlansford]

"People in Bangkok have a higher level of intelligence than in the North and North East strongholds of the red shirts."

Hellodolly, On what basis do you make what seems to be an incredibly stupid statement?

I suspect it is based on personal prejudice. But I could be wrong.

How hypocrite to call this a personal prejudice and than in the next post, without any evidence, you blame the Dem's for vote buying! Don't you get tired of yourself?

Ps; read these interesting statistics about intelligence distribution in Thailand. It seems that the strongholds of the red shirts are indeed a lot less intelligent than in Bangkok in a country that has a lower intelligence than many other countries! After reading your and your buddies posts I can only conclude you live in the North-East.

http://www.thaivisa....global-average/

Actually, I get rather tired of you trolling my posts, KireB.

Your link points to IQ scores which are not intelligence. It is a sad attempt to justify someone else's, and I presume your own as well, unfounded prejudices. IQ tests are just that - tests - and they have been shown over and over to have biases based on education systems - ie: they do not measure intelligence objectively.

Glad we can clear up that one and dismiss your sad insult, as well.

FYI there are reports of the meetings which arranged that vote in parliament (no, it was not an "election" as some seem to claim, it was a parliamentary vote - others would do well to figure out the difference) - so please keep your "no evidence" BS to yourself and while it is not possible for me to enforce it, you should feel free to stop trolling as well...

[RegularReader]

BTW, I had read that this woman is a former TRT politician. Does anyone have a reference for that by chance?

Yes, she was with one of the TRT reincarnations. If I recall it was during the multi- member electorate time and she lost out to Karun when they reverted to single members at the last election, becasue he was the chosen one.

"Crude" payment for votes has as far as I can tell, never been used much in this area. Karun learnt how to do it the Barnharn way - "build then eat". But it seems in the last couple of years he seems to have taken his constituents for granted, as he spent more time with the Red Shirts and having scuffles in parliament. So when the Dems came up with a familiar candidate who was quite visual during the floods doing good deeds and not fighting with authroiries about flood walls and getting into trouble on jet-ski, they were on a winner. I doubt the Don Muang area has all of a sudden moved a large amount of support to the Dems. That will be easier to see if Karun loses his current appeal and they have to have a bi-election. The likely Dem candidate for the seat was very prominent during Kanoknuch's campaign, so they are already off and running. All in all it could be good for the punters because they are not likely to be neglected - especially if the floods return.

And, that's democracy in action isn't it ?

[KireB]

Actually, I get rather tired of you trolling my posts, KireB.

Your link points to IQ scores which are not intelligence. It is a sad attempt to justify someone else's, and I presume your own as well, unfounded prejudices. IQ tests are just that - tests - and they have been shown over and over to have biases based on education systems - ie: they do not measure intelligence objectively.

Glad we can clear up that one and dismiss your sad insult, as well.

FYI there are reports of the meetings which arranged that vote in parliament (no, it was not an "election" as some seem to claim, it was a parliamentary vote - others would do well to figure out the difference) - so please keep your "no evidence" BS to yourself and while it is not possible for me to enforce it, you should feel free to stop trolling as well...

Intelligence is indeed rather subjective to measure. There are, as you know, at least 9 recognized forms of intelligence. Intelligence is also culturally biased and, unfortunately, synonymous to the Stanford Binet test. Nevertheless, many people around the world see the present IQ test as a standard and a globally accepted form of IQ assessment.

Even in Thailand many parents pay a lot of money to have their kids' IQ's measured using this standardized instrument. The fact that the scores are not on par with the rest of the world does not make the IQ test invalid dear Tlansford and the fact that you don't like that the IQ of the people living in the North East of Thailand is lower than in the rest of the country doesn't make me a ...troll!

the fact that I ask you for some documentation, or evidence/proof, of your slanderous opinion that the Democrats bought their way into parliament is not BS nor trollling. I am sincerely interested in your sources as you have stated so many times that you don't like opinion or slandering. So enlighten us with reason.

[rixalex]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

[jayboy]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

It's not a parallel that fits I'm afraid.The suggestion is that the courts in Thailand are often subject to political direction:there is plenty of evidence for this over the years and not only in connection with the attempt to destroy Thaksin.The unelected elites knew they could not defeat Thaklsin in a fair election and therefore tried a coup initially but in view of that method's disastrous impact opted for the time tested measure of co-opting the judicial system.There is plenty of irrefutable evidence for this.Incidentally the use of capital letters in posts is discouraged.It's considered "shouting" and I'm afraid as in this instance often suggests blustering as opposed to hard analysis and transparent reasoning.

Edited September 5, 2012 by jayboy

[Nickymaster]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

It's not a parallel that fits I'm afraid.The suggestion is that the courts in Thailand are often subject to political direction:there is plenty of evidence for this over the years and not only in connection with the attempt to destroy Thaksin.The unelected elites knew they could not defeat Thaklsin in a fair election and therefore tried a coup initially but in view of that method's disastrous impact opted for the time tested measure of co-opting the judicial system.There is plenty of irrefutable evidence for this.Incidentally the use of capital letters in posts is discouraged.It's considered "shouting" and I'm afraid as in this instance often suggests blustering as opposed to hard analysis and transparent reasoning.

There has never been a fair election in Thailand so let's not go that way. You have a winner and loser, yes, but has to whole election been "fair"..? Be honest!

[rixalex]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

It's not a parallel that fits I'm afraid.The suggestion is that the courts in Thailand are often subject to political direction:there is plenty of evidence for this over the years and not only in connection with the attempt to destroy Thaksin.The unelected elites knew they could not defeat Thaklsin in a fair election and therefore tried a coup initially but in view of that method's disastrous impact opted for the time tested measure of co-opting the judicial system.There is plenty of irrefutable evidence for this.Incidentally the use of capital letters in posts is discouraged.It's considered "shouting" and I'm afraid as in this instance often suggests blustering as opposed to hard analysis and transparent reasoning.

If you want to make an argument against a court ruling, make the argument based on what the flaws were on the specific case. Making sweeping general derisory comments about the whole system is a lazy counter argument that seems to be applied in a very selective manner.

As for the shouting thing, sorry about that, but it was intended purely by way of making a point to the person who shouted the initial comments to which i responded. And yes, i agree, it is indicative of those things you mention.

[rubl]

begin removed ...

BTW, I had read that this woman is a former TRT politician. Does anyone have a reference for that by chance?

If you had read that, you might remember where you had read it, dear Tom ?

For now it almost looks like character assassination. IMHO

[OzMick]

It's not a parallel that fits I'm afraid.The suggestion is that the courts in Thailand are often subject to political direction:there is plenty of evidence for this over the years and not only in connection with the attempt to destroy Thaksin.The unelected elites knew they could not defeat Thaklsin in a fair election and therefore tried a coup initially but in view of that method's disastrous impact opted for the time tested measure of co-opting the judicial system.There is plenty of irrefutable evidence for this.Incidentally the use of capital letters in posts is discouraged.It's considered "shouting" and I'm afraid as in this instance often suggests blustering as opposed to hard analysis and transparent reasoning.

The court decision was quite straight-forward with clear evidence of a crime committed. But no, it must be a politically influenced decision.

Have you considered that if TRT/PPP/PTP have such an overwhelming political advantage, there should be no need to break electoral law? Yet they do repeatedly, get caught and suffer the consequences. Perhaps it's just the nature of the beast.

BTW IMHO the only reason PTP has not been disbanded for the sins in the last election is the fear of the violence likely to be inflicted on the country by the brainwashed red mob who happily swallow the dreck you put forward.

Edited September 5, 2012 by OzMick

[philw]

begin removed ...

BTW, I had read that this woman is a former TRT politician. Does anyone have a reference for that by chance?

If you had read that, you might remember where you had read it, dear Tom ?

For now it almost looks like character assassination. IMHO

Sorry................

THE NATION September 4, 2012 1:00 am

The victory by Kanoknuch Naksuwanpha in the Bangkok city council election on Sunday has surprised many, including Pheu Thai Party, whose people believed that Don Muang district was deeply red and part of "their turf".

On closer examination, however, it is clear that Kanoknuch built her political base in the area over a long time, along with Pheu Thai local politicians like Karun Hosakul, even back at the time when the late Hangthong Thammaawattana was the influential political figure there.

Kanoknuch was formerly with the Chart Thai Party and helped Janista Liewchalermwong secure her MP seat in the district for the first time. Kanoknuch then transferred to Thai Rak Thai and assisted MR Damrongdit Disakul to win an MP seat there.

After the dissolution of Thai Rak Thai, Kanoknuch then joined the Democrats along with canvasser Chutidej Suwannakerd, who was shot and killed earlier this year. Kanoknuch was defeated in the same contest for a city council seat back in 2010 to a brother of Karun, but not his time around.

[OzMick]

begin removed ...

BTW, I had read that this woman is a former TRT politician. Does anyone have a reference for that by chance?

If you had read that, you might remember where you had read it, dear Tom ?

For now it almost looks like character assassination. IMHO

Sorry................

THE NATION September 4, 2012 1:00 am

The victory by Kanoknuch Naksuwanpha in the Bangkok city council election on Sunday has surprised many, including Pheu Thai Party, whose people believed that Don Muang district was deeply red and part of "their turf".

On closer examination, however, it is clear that Kanoknuch built her political base in the area over a long time, along with Pheu Thai local politicians like Karun Hosakul, even back at the time when the late Hangthong Thammaawattana was the influential political figure there.

Kanoknuch was formerly with the Chart Thai Party and helped Janista Liewchalermwong secure her MP seat in the district for the first time. Kanoknuch then transferred to Thai Rak Thai and assisted MR Damrongdit Disakul to win an MP seat there.

After the dissolution of Thai Rak Thai, Kanoknuch then joined the Democrats along with canvasser Chutidej Suwannakerd, who was shot and killed earlier this year. Kanoknuch was defeated in the same contest for a city council seat back in 2010 to a brother of Karun, but not his time around.

Oscar Wilde - "With age comes wisdom, but sometimes age comes alone."

[binjalin]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

IF the Courts had dissolved and then held an election THAT would have been fairer - but to ban a party? can you IMAGINE the Rep's in USA banned because of Nixon? it's an absurdity that power is handed to another party (unelected)

my case STANDS Abhisit has NEVER won an election - just admit it I have called it right and posters claiming 2008 was democratic should be ashamed. I'd far rather you just argue why it should have happened not saying it was elected - it just ain't true

[rubl]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

IF the Courts had dissolved and then held an election THAT would have been fairer - but to ban a party? can you IMAGINE the Rep's in USA banned because of Nixon? it's an absurdity that power is handed to another party (unelected)

my case STANDS Abhisit has NEVER won an election - just admit it I have called it right and posters claiming 2008 was democratic should be ashamed. I'd far rather you just argue why it should have happened not saying it was elected - it just ain't true

It would indeed have been better if PM Somchai had dissolved parliament and called for new general elections. It was in his powers to do so, AFAIK. Ask him why he didn't

Edited September 5, 2012 by rubl

[OzMick]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

IF the Courts had dissolved and then held an election THAT would have been fairer - but to ban a party? can you IMAGINE the Rep's in USA banned because of Nixon? it's an absurdity that power is handed to another party (unelected)

my case STANDS Abhisit has NEVER won an election - just admit it I have called it right and posters claiming 2008 was democratic should be ashamed. I'd far rather you just argue why it should have happened not saying it was elected - it just ain't true

" it's an absurdity that power is handed to another party (unelected)"

The MPs of a banned party are free to form a new party (as in TRT to PPP) and retain power, if necessary by forming a coalition. Your "handover" was in fact caused by BJT withdrawing from their coalition with PPP/PTP and forming a governing coalition with the Democrats.

This has been misrepresented by Thaksin's propagandists as a judicial coup - it just ain't true.

[rixalex]

IF the Courts had dissolved and then held an election THAT would have been fairer - but to ban a party? can you IMAGINE the Rep's in USA banned because of Nixon?

Banning isn't as drastic as you make it sound, because all that happens is the next day, they all merrily register under a new incarnation. TRT, PPP, PTP... all the same thing. A bit daft i agree, but spare us the violins for the poor politicians that are being robbed of acronyms.

it's an absurdity that power is handed to another party (unelected)

Problem with not handing power to another party, is it gives little incentive for a party to not cheat. If they know that if they are caught, it'll be ok because they can just stand again in a new election, then i guess you may as well cheat and see if you can get away with it.

my case STANDS Abhisit has NEVER won an election - just admit it I have called it right and posters claiming 2008 was democratic should be ashamed. I'd far rather you just argue why it should have happened not saying it was elected - it just ain't true

Problem is, the way that you make your case against Abhisit having never won an election, could be made against numerous Thai PMs. The important question is whether the government of the day was formed in compliance with parliamentary processes. And the Dem government was.

[h90]

So now "the reds " are guilty of not buying votes...............

Am I missing something re comments like this ???

I think you will find that they had, prior to the ballot, "secured" around ten thousand votes, which they thought would be enough to see them accross the line on a 30 - 35% turnout.

And interesting on 10,224, 224 voted for them without being "secured".

Fortunately another 10% of the electorate turned out, and not surprisingly, gave their votes to the Democrat party for at least looking like they cared about the constituents during the floods.

Typical case of greed. If the would have "secured" 2 thousand more, they would have won. So also the "efforts" to "secure" the 10.000 votes are lost.

[h90]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

It's not a parallel that fits I'm afraid.The suggestion is that the courts in Thailand are often subject to political direction:there is plenty of evidence for this over the years and not only in connection with the attempt to destroy Thaksin.The unelected elites knew they could not defeat Thaklsin in a fair election and therefore tried a coup initially but in view of that method's disastrous impact opted for the time tested measure of co-opting the judicial system.There is plenty of irrefutable evidence for this.Incidentally the use of capital letters in posts is discouraged.It's considered "shouting" and I'm afraid as in this instance often suggests blustering as opposed to hard analysis and transparent reasoning.

So you are telling us that Thaksin wasn't corrupt and all the many pending cases at court are only invented. All the 3000 death on the war against drugs, aren't dead, it is just a big conspiracy.

That he put various family members in key positions at army, police airport etc etc etc wasn't because they are family members, it was because they were the best available in Thailand.

[Ricardo]

It would indeed have been better if PM Somchai had dissolved parliament and called for new general elections. It was in his powers to do so, AFAIK. Ask him why he didn't

Perhaps Thaksin couldn't reach him, on the phone from Dubai, or thought he'd rather have the Dems in-power for a bit, and take the democratic arguments to-the-barricades instead ?

But former-PM Somchai was pretty disinterested, by that stage of the game, did he ever really want the job that much anyway ?

Meanwhile, back to the thread, where the local voters have sent a clear signal to the government, that their performance in-office ain't that good thus far, "Extract Digit" as the saying goes !

[h90]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

IF the Courts had dissolved and then held an election THAT would have been fairer - but to ban a party? can you IMAGINE the Rep's in USA banned because of Nixon? it's an absurdity that power is handed to another party (unelected)

my case STANDS Abhisit has NEVER won an election - just admit it I have called it right and posters claiming 2008 was democratic should be ashamed. I'd far rather you just argue why it should have happened not saying it was elected - it just ain't true

Can you imagine, that the Rep's in USA visit towns and hand out 100 USD if they vote for them and make a photo of the card with the mobile phone? While I don't think that USA is the very democratic, Thaksin made things, specially vote buying that is unthinkable in USA.

[philw]

2/ NEVER (it's that word again) WON (that means won?) an ELECTION - they were handed power by the COURTS

Saying that they were handed power by the COURTS is like a criminal saying that he is in prison because of the COURTS. Criminals are in prison because they do CRIME. The Dems were handed power because PPP COMMITTED ELECTORAL FRAUD and then the PPP decided against having a general election.

IF the Courts had dissolved and then held an election THAT would have been fairer - but to ban a party? can you IMAGINE the Rep's in USA banned because of Nixon? it's an absurdity that power is handed to another party (unelected)

my case STANDS Abhisit has NEVER won an election - just admit it I have called it right and posters claiming 2008 was democratic should be ashamed. I'd far rather you just argue why it should have happened not saying it was elected - it just ain't true

Can you imagine, that the Rep's in USA visit towns and hand out 100 USD if they vote for them and make a photo of the card with the mobile phone? While I don't think that USA is the very democratic, Thaksin made things, specially vote buying that is unthinkable in USA.

Were you here before the Thaksin years ??

If so, you will know vote buying was endemic long before he and TRT arrived on the scene.

With regard to the war on drugs, personally I believe all involved should be investigated and charged.

However,that would lead to some serious trauma for Thai society,given where it might lead and who could be implicated.

[rubl]

After the nice party political broadcast, and before we start lie-ing about how much we did or did not receive for cooking some nice dish, can we go back to the topic of

"Democrats win with Pheu Thai candidate" ?

[Scott]

Post with comments about the judiciary has been deleted. Please review the rules and post with discretion.

[jayboy]

" it's an absurdity that power is handed to another party (unelected)"

The MPs of a banned party are free to form a new party (as in TRT to PPP) and retain power, if necessary by forming a coalition. Your "handover" was in fact caused by BJT withdrawing from their coalition with PPP/PTP and forming a governing coalition with the Democrats.

This has been misrepresented by Thaksin's propagandists as a judicial coup - it just ain't true.

You are right.That episode was not a judicial coup (never seen anyone argue that point actually).It was however another example of the unelected elites thwarting the views of the Thai people as expressed in a general election.In this instance it involved old fashioned political bribery and skulduggery to lure one of the least appetising factions over to the Democrats side.Strictly speaking this isn't illegal - just so some genius doesn't feel the need to give a lecture on parliamentary democracy (This is how its done in Belgium etc).The reality is that the amart was desperate and prepared to strike a deal with any available low life.Didn't do them much good as the Thai people made clear in the last general election and of course lost Abhisit the moral high ground.