No-Confidence Debate To Target Yingluck And Thaksin

[TheKrayTriplet]

I am fully aware that the software may exist, it just bothers me that a member would use it to somehow prove a point.

If you were truly "fully aware", you would know it's just a quick and simple method to highlight the reality of someone's misleading statement.

In that regard, it is a very easy way to prove a point.

,

Or it could just show that the poster has spent an inordinate amount of time dealing with yours and others posts.

Lets just say for arguments sake that there is a certain political leaning on this forum which attracks similar type "thinkers", a large number thereof. In "opposition" are a correspondingly lower number of posters.

If they post on a thread, this can and does attract the "hordes" all in support of the common doctrine (usually of the anti- Thaksin, Yingluck, PTP, Red Shirt variety) to retaliate. This leaves the original poster to decide to give up or stay and fight his/her position.

By taking into account the rato between the two groups it stands to reason that the "non anti-" will have posted a greater number of times and registers a number of hits

This does not

"highlight the reality of someone's misleading statement."

as you allege

but instead merely shows the number of posts the "non anti-" has to post in their defence of the twisting and misrepresentation of facts which can unfortunately be the standard operating procedure on here at times.

Edited October 5, 2012 by TheKrayTriplet

[MunterHunter]

so do you see it more of an intention to get yingluck in to answer for herself, or just because the dems feel they don't get heard unless they put a no confidence vote in place?

Well considering what was happening with the Charter re-write/amnesty stuff - where the Dems were pretty much ignored until they took drastic action - the second point would seem more appropriate - but actually both points get adequately addressed at the same time... so perhaps the No-Confidence movement is not so much a waste of time after all... the Dems get heard in Parliment and they get YL in to finally answer some direct questions... i call that a perfects good use of time and resources

Edited October 5, 2012 by MunterHunter

[Nickymaster]

Cleopatra might have to deal with accountability (after 1 year in office).

That's democracy for you!! Like it or not.

Will she collapse?

Will she start crying?

Will she be absent because she has to inspect.....uhhh....something very urgent?

Will she call for numerous timeouts in order to call her brother?

Will she let others do the talking for her?

Will she say 90% of the time: “you have to ask the relevant department, I don’t know any details”?

Exciting times!!

Edited October 5, 2012 by Nickymaster

[MunterHunter]

Exiting times!!

Slip of the tounge (finger) or did you mean to say Exiting instead of Exciting?

Edited October 5, 2012 by MunterHunter

[Nickymaster]

Is TheKrayTriplet the person formerly known as Phiphidon? Was Phiphidon the person formerly known as C......?

Is it allowed to re-join under a different name when banned?

Edited October 5, 2012 by Nickymaster

[Buchholz]

I am fully aware that the software may exist, it just bothers me that a member would use it to somehow prove a point.

If you were truly "fully aware", you would know it's just a quick and simple method to highlight the reality of someone's misleading statement.

In that regard, it is a very easy way to prove a point.

,

Lets just say for arguments sake

that we go back to the topic of the thread....

Exhilarating as it is to discuss posters, notwithstanding, perhaps we could shift to the players in the OP.

For example, perhaps part of the no-confidence debate with Foreign Minister Surapong is his ignoring the Office of the Ombudsman ruling that the Foreign Ministry was guilty of breaking its own own regulations for returning the passport to Thaksin last October when Surapong first became Foreign Minister.

.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Buchholz

[Nickymaster]

Exiting times!!

Slip of the tounge (finger) or did you mean to say Exiting instead of Exciting?

Thanks. Yes meant exciting but...

[Robby nz]

Wow the reds have really got their BS sidetracks in action on this one.

[ManOnTheRoad]

Are they going to show the debate live on TV with HD ? hehehe

[kawaiimomo]

Despite being a political novice, Yingluck has relied on a defensive strategy of hiding in plain sight in an attempt to evade the wrath of the Democrats.

LOL

Edited October 5, 2012 by kawaiimomo

[ballpoint]

How many times, in how many different venues, has Thaksin said that he is through with politics? Is he through?, doesn't look like it to me. Mend your own fences first.

yeah and he was lying, flip flopping etc etc... i make no excuses.

but if i was someone else i'd put it to you like this

You've never changed plans?

but i don't defend thaksin in such fashions.

That's right. Saying you'll do something and then not doing it is as big a lie as saying you won't do something, and then going ahead and doing it anyway.

...anyway, resignation must mean something different to you than it does to me, and that's my final word on the matter.

[Skywalker69]

Didn't AV promise to resign as Dem leader if Dems got less seats in the election? He is the best thing that ever happened to PT

Just as Thaksin promised his family he will stop with politics.

[OzMick]

IMHO the no confidence motion will certainly NOT be a waste of time if it forces the PM to actually attend parliament and answer questions - something that in other Westminster systems is considered part of the normal duties of PM.

I can't recall ANY other PM that, after more than a year in office, has never attended Question Time.

[Noistar]

The Democrats are fully aware that at this juncture, they have no chance of making a dent in either Yingluck's leadership or confidence in the government.

but let's waste some time anyway....

Either that, or attempt to perform the legitimate role of a democratically Opposition.

Seems you share the ruling party's opinion that parliamentary democracy has no place for the Opposition.

Anyone for a dictatorship?

[metisdead]

A number of off topic posts and replies have been removed. Let's try harder to stay on topic please.

[nurofiend]

How many times, in how many different venues, has Thaksin said that he is through with politics? Is he through?, doesn't look like it to me. Mend your own fences first.

yeah and he was lying, flip flopping etc etc... i make no excuses.

but if i was someone else i'd put it to you like this

You've never changed plans?

but i don't defend thaksin in such fashions.

That's right. Saying you'll do something and then not doing it is as big a lie as saying you won't do something, and then going ahead and doing it anyway.

...anyway, resignation must mean something different to you than it does to me, and that's my final word on the matter.

well it's a difficult promise to keep to myself with people such as yourself around.

[nurofiend]

so do you see it more of an intention to get yingluck in to answer for herself, or just because the dems feel they don't get heard unless they put a no confidence vote in place?

Well considering what was happening with the Charter re-write/amnesty stuff - where the Dems were pretty much ignored until they took drastic action - the second point would seem more appropriate - but actually both points get adequately addressed at the same time... so perhaps the No-Confidence movement is not so much a waste of time after all... the Dems get heard in Parliment and they get YL in to finally answer some direct questions... i call that a perfects good use of time and resources

it's the hero's and villains stuff that annoys me on this forum and your first point reminds me of that type of posting.

the dems were pretty much ignored how, because they weren't getting their way?

because they were complaining of being ignored and this is just taking as gospel truth?

'drastic action' is one way of describing what they did, yes.

they play dirty politics and blame the system, a system that they were quite content to rule under themselves.

it's always we did this because "we had to"

tbh, i still think it will be total waste of time and nothing will come of it.

of course that last line will automatically read as me thinking governments in power should have free reign to do as it pleases without question, but i wouldn't accuse yourself as being that simple minded as you seem quite a reasonable poster.

[rubl]

Even though some seem to wonder about a no confidence debate and why bother, some support for the holy democratic principles has come from a (for me) totally unexpected corner.

"Posted Today, 17:39

RT @tulsathit: Nuttawut: Only requirement for new Pheu Thai leader is that he must have a democratic heart. - matichon"

http://www.thaivisa....25#entry5727337

[nurofiend]

Even though some seem to wonder about a no confidence debate and why bother, some support for the holy democratic principles has come from a (for me) totally unexpected corner.

"Posted Today, 17:39

RT @tulsathit: Nuttawut: Only requirement for new Pheu Thai leader is that he must have a democratic heart. - matichon"

http://www.thaivisa....25#entry5727337

do you not think that's in relation to yongyuth?

[MAJIC]

Didn't AV promise to resign as Dem leader if Dems got less seats in the election? He is the best thing that ever happened to PT

he did but he went back on his word within about a month.

Well if we count up the times Thaksin has gone back on his word,(lied) we would need to start a Topic on it's own.

Oh I forgot he's already promised to quit Politics about 5 times,and didn't he promise to make every Thai Rich in six months? and cure all the Traffic Jams in Bangkok? and of course these are only 3 of the good promises he renaded on! when it comes to lying, no one can compete with the Master of the Forked Tongue,from Dubai!

Edited October 5, 2012 by MAJIC

[473geo]

look, he resigned as the dem leader (everyone took this to mean for good)... i took him at his word.

he reclaimed the leadership around a month later.... guess we shouldn't have took him at his word.

unless you're suggesting his intention was to resign for a month, otherwise i see it as going back on his word... but of course ye don't why would ye, it is abhisit afterall

YOU took it as meaning for good. Now you're pissed off because he didn't do what you misunderstood him to mean.

pissed off!! haha, not likely

"misunderstood him to mean"... did you really forget already the part where he "insisted that when he announced his resignation he had no plans to return to the party leadership"

HE took it as meaning for good too.

lol.

"he had no plans to return" but the membership convinced him that he should. He was elected leader. Obviously the party membership had no issue with him changing his plans.

Or maybe as desparate as the leadership situation was, and even though there was a big chance of losing the upcoming election......there was nobody better to lead them to defeat

[473geo]

Didn't AV promise to resign as Dem leader if Dems got less seats in the election? He is the best thing that ever happened to PT

he did but he went back on his word within about a month.

Well if we count up the times Thaksin has gone back on his word,(lied) we would need to start a Topic on it's own.

Oh I forgot he's already promised to quit Politics about 5 times,and didn't he promise to make every Thai Rich in six months? and cure all the Traffic Jams in Bangkok? and of course these are only 3 of the good promises he renaded on! when it comes to lying, no one can compete with the Master of the Forked Tongue,from Dubai!

Indeed similar to Abhisit........in all but the result of subsequent elections.....there seems to be a polar opposite in their success

Edited October 5, 2012 by 473geo

[MAJIC]

Didn't AV promise to resign as Dem leader if Dems got less seats in the election? He is the best thing that ever happened to PT

he did but he went back on his word within about a month.

Well if we count up the times Thaksin has gone back on his word,(lied) we would need to start a Topic on it's own.

Oh I forgot he's already promised to quit Politics about 5 times,and didn't he promise to make every Thai Rich in six months? and cure all the Traffic Jams in Bangkok? and of course these are only 3 of the good promises he renaded on! when it comes to lying, no one can compete with the Master of the Forked Tongue,from Dubai!

Indeed similar to Abhisit........in all but the result of subsequent elections.....there seems to be a polar opposite in their success

Fortunately 473geo,there is no comparison with the two Politicians,which gives some hope for Thailand!

[473geo]

Well if we count up the times Thaksin has gone back on his word,(lied) we would need to start a Topic on it's own.

Oh I forgot he's already promised to quit Politics about 5 times,and didn't he promise to make every Thai Rich in six months? and cure all the Traffic Jams in Bangkok? and of course these are only 3 of the good promises he renaded on! when it comes to lying, no one can compete with the Master of the Forked Tongue,from Dubai!

Indeed similar to Abhisit........in all but the result of subsequent elections.....there seems to be a polar opposite in their success

Fortunately 473geo,there is no comparison with the two Politicians,which gives some hope for Thailand!

You mean as long as the Democrats are unsuccessful in their attempts to be elected there is hope.......well I wouldn't quite have said that, but you are welcome to your opinion......

Actually probably a good idea for the dems to get a bit of practice at censure debate from the opposition benches don't you think, if they are destined to make a career of it

Edited October 5, 2012 by 473geo

[kimamey]

Didn't AV promise to resign as Dem leader if Dems got less seats in the election? He is the best thing that ever happened to PT

he did but he went back on his word within about a month.

He didn't go back on his word. He said he'd resign and he did. The party voted him back, I assume because they thought he was best for the job. This is common practice as it gives a party a chance to get rid of a leader they don't want without the damage caused by a sacking. If that's not what they want then they can re elect the same leader again as long as they are prepared to stand again. the other option is to refuse the resignation but I think that requires a quick decision by a few people whereas the re election route gives time for longer discussion and a wider vote.

Going back on your word is when you say you'll abide by a court's decision and then run away. I'm pretty certain someone did that but if I'm wrong I'm sure I'll be corrected.

Edited October 5, 2012 by kimamey

[whybother]

Or maybe as desparate as the leadership situation was, and even though there was a big chance of losing the upcoming election......there was nobody better to lead them to defeat

Or maybe we're talking about after the election and not before it. Keep up.

[Noistar]

Highest number of votes cast does not equal Democracy. It represents the democratic process in action.

Having achieved the 'highest number of votes cast', the ruling party cannot maintain the pretext of Democracy if it doesn't follow the same democratic process which got them elected..

Opposition is entitled to perform their Democratic role, without needing to cost-justify it. I'm sure the ruling party would be horrified at even the suggestion that a parliamentary majority does not mean the democratic process can be abandoned.

Posters should come clean. Is the electoral mandate a 'do what the ruling party wants, without question'?

Or is it perhaps, a more mature, means of following parliamentary process?

If the ruling party follow a path of removing any checks to their definition, they will be stopped.

Then it will be down to another ruling party to take over.

Grow up PTP. The future is in your hands. If you want to throw it all away (again), don't come bleating about democracy being taken away.

[rixalex]

Didn't AV promise to resign as Dem leader if Dems got less seats in the election? He is the best thing that ever happened to PT

he did but he went back on his word within about a month.

It's one thing to say you are quitting politics, but another to say you are stepping down. And that is what he did say: if i lose the election, i will stand down and let someone else have the chance to be leader.

He stood down, he let someone else have the chance to be leader, his party wanted him back as leader, he accepted. How is that going back on his word? He said he would stand down. He did.

[473geo]

Or maybe as desparate as the leadership situation was, and even though there was a big chance of losing the upcoming election......there was nobody better to lead them to defeat

Or maybe we're talking about after the election and not before it. Keep up.

I am, the upcoming election......or are you expecting a different selection process for the next government

[whybother]

Or maybe as desparate as the leadership situation was, and even though there was a big chance of losing the upcoming election......there was nobody better to lead them to defeat

Or maybe we're talking about after the election and not before it. Keep up.

I am, the upcoming election......or are you expecting a different selection process for the next government

Upcoming??

Sent from my HTC phone.