Pheu Thai Outshines Democrats: Poll

[Mosha]

Which 17 provinces? If they are all NE of BKK, the result will be a forgone conclusion.

[Rich teacher]

You're somewhat off, dear rich teacher. Now I can see you signed up only a short time ago, but you might have read posts here for a while longer. It maybe you just looked at other news sources. Some seem to be somewhat flawed though.

For your information there has never been an 'Anupong coalition' forming a government. Only going back to December 2007 we had coalitions with the late k. Samak, k. Somchai, k. Abhisit, but no k. Anupong. I'm afraid that makes point 2. invalid, sorry. Point 3 is an interesting one, especially in Thai history, the late k. Samak really had people in an uproar when he said only one died in 1976. As for vilifying the 'most popular' PM, not sure who is doing that? Also who do you mean, maybe the first PM Thailand ever had, PM Phraya Manopakorn Nititada. June 12th this year the UDD celebrated the transition to a democracy he helped start. ( http://www.pattayama...democracy-13988 ). Probably not the late Samak, even the UDD called the 1976 Thammasat Event a Massacre ( http://thairedshirts...es-udd-leaders/ ).

In all your post seems to reflect your opinion without real proof there's much truth or value in it. Now that's my opinion, of course

PS still looking for that missing Kray Triplet or might it be a quadruplet by now?

My dear Rubi, I can see you signed up in 2002, so you should have been around in November, December 2008 when General Anupong Poachinda was hosting coalition formation meetings at his official residence in the compounds of the First Infantry Regiment off VipawadeeRangsit road. Also a pre-2011 election comment by Chumpol Silpa-archa comes to mind now.

[yoshiwara]

Fortunately opinion polls do not trump criminal convictions for money laundering.

Though Thaksin and his apologists might wish it were not so.

[catmac]

The usual suspects - always the same ones - twist and turn, dishonest, abusive and intellectually bankrupt by turns.They simply cannot accept the reality that the government scores well with the Thai people and that the opposition perfomance is mediocre.Their laughable excuses do provide a measure of entertainment.Actually the more intelligent and perceptive Democrats like Korn understand the problem rather well and it will be interesting to see how his efforts to detoxify his party will succeed.

Moral bankruptcy, I think, is to accept the numbers as a validation of the ethics and performance of the government. A government that is lead by a criminal fugitive, with policies that are on the fast track to bankrupting (financially in this case) the country, that openly disregards the law and stuffed full of gangsters and family members of the previously mentioned criminal fugitive.

But a poll gives them a higher score, so that makes it alright, yes?

As opposed to a Government formed by a party that hasn't won a General Election in 20 odd years, that was cobbled together by the Army top brass after the Courts had decimated the legally elected Government and which still had to rely on that cleanest of clean politician, Newin, to cling to power. Is that what you mean?

[catmac]

Fortunately opinion polls do not trump criminal convictions for money laundering.

Though Thaksin and his apologists might wish it were not so.

So when was Thaksin convicted of "money laundering"? To call a conviction over, in my view, a dubious case of "conflict of interest", money laundering is a prime example of the attempt to demonise Mr T, as mentioned by previous posters, which only tarnish the detracters and not the man himself.

[yoshiwara]

Fortunately opinion polls do not trump criminal convictions for money laundering.

Though Thaksin and his apologists might wish it were not so.

So when was Thaksin convicted of "money laundering"? To call a conviction over, in my view, a dubious case of "conflict of interest", money laundering is a prime example of the attempt to demonise Mr T, as mentioned by previous posters, which only tarnish the detracters and not the man himself.

I assume you and I are are referring to the assets which Thaksin hid in the accounts of his family members and the family chauffeur. The point is, however as far as this thread is concerned, is that legal convictions are neither passed nor revoked in the court of public opinion. This is why we have at the moment an elected PTP government which is unable to clean up Thaksin's convictions and which has been forced to retreat from constitutional changes which stank of focussing on the interests of one man. Yingluck said in her recent speech that 'the rule of law is a fundamental of democracy'. What Thaksin understands by that is that the judiciary needs to be bought and broken but of course that cannot be done openly, publicly. Similarly those government ministers who visit Thaksin have to deny, to lie that they are discussing government business. Now why is that? public opinion? opinion polls? No. It is because government ministers are beholden to certain rules. Those rules are not set by opinion polls. And opinion polls are not a 'get out of jail card'.

[jayboy]

Fortunately opinion polls do not trump criminal convictions for money laundering.

Though Thaksin and his apologists might wish it were not so.

So when was Thaksin convicted of "money laundering"? To call a conviction over, in my view, a dubious case of "conflict of interest", money laundering is a prime example of the attempt to demonise Mr T, as mentioned by previous posters, which only tarnish the detracters and not the man himself.

I assume you and I are are referring to the assets which Thaksin hid in the accounts of his family members and the family chauffeur. The point is, however as far as this thread is concerned, is that legal convictions are neither passed nor revoked in the court of public opinion. This is why we have at the moment an elected PTP government which is unable to clean up Thaksin's convictions and which has been forced to retreat from constitutional changes which stank of focussing on the interests of one man. Yingluck said in her recent speech that 'the rule of law is a fundamental of democracy'. What Thaksin understands by that is that the judiciary needs to be bought and broken but of course that cannot be done openly, publicly. Similarly those government ministers who visit Thaksin have to deny, to lie that they are discussing government business. Now why is that? public opinion? opinion polls? No. It is because government ministers are beholden to certain rules. Those rules are not set by opinion polls. And opinion polls are not a 'get out of jail card'.

In other words there was no money laundering.I would have thought there were enough genuine charges against Thaksin without resorting to lies (again).

Edited November 14, 2012 by jayboy

[yoshiwara]

Fortunately opinion polls do not trump criminal convictions for money laundering.

Though Thaksin and his apologists might wish it were not so.

So when was Thaksin convicted of "money laundering"? To call a conviction over, in my view, a dubious case of "conflict of interest", money laundering is a prime example of the attempt to demonise Mr T, as mentioned by previous posters, which only tarnish the detracters and not the man himself.

I assume you and I are are referring to the assets which Thaksin hid in the accounts of his family members and the family chauffeur. The point is, however as far as this thread is concerned, is that legal convictions are neither passed nor revoked in the court of public opinion. This is why we have at the moment an elected PTP government which is unable to clean up Thaksin's convictions and which has been forced to retreat from constitutional changes which stank of focussing on the interests of one man. Yingluck said in her recent speech that 'the rule of law is a fundamental of democracy'. What Thaksin understands by that is that the judiciary needs to be bought and broken but of course that cannot be done openly, publicly. Similarly those government ministers who visit Thaksin have to deny, to lie that they are discussing government business. Now why is that? public opinion? opinion polls? No. It is because government ministers are beholden to certain rules. Those rules are not set by opinion polls. And opinion polls are not a 'get out of jail card'.

In other words there was no money laundering.I would have thought there were enough genuine charges against Thaksin without resorting to lies (again).

That would be convictions, not charges. Thaksin putting his money through the accounts of his family chauffeur. Maybe you will have better luck dragging that one around than you do with dodging the reality of the Arisman tapes. But the Red Cheerleader attempt to shift the focus of the thread is rather poor. Let is re-state clearly that neither an election nor an opinion poll establishes the right to break the law nor to overrule legal convictions. This is what the rule of law means. A small inconvenience to the reds but an inconvenience nonetheless. When a party is elected to power (which PTP has been) it is perfectly within its remit to pass new laws righting perceived injustices, but it has to both construct and pass those laws and do so under the banner of the common good ie benefit the majority. The PTP has failed abjectly to do this and even had to retreat from its piss-poor attempt to frame new laws which didn't openly represent the interests of Thaksin. That a PM would launder his assets through family and associates represents common criminal activities activated through the use of political position. Financial corruption and conviction for which he did a runner. Opinion polls don't help. The other route to framing laws would be a revolution to smash the state. Now wouldn't that be fun.