i am surprised another question was not asked.

which is " how does one manage to be pm and run a country without attending any parliament sessions"

Now that is really creative, almost impossible to beat

Oh, that is easy with all the Apps you can install on your smartphone now days.

hide and seek one of them?

i am surprised another question was not asked.

which is " how does one manage to be pm and run a country without attending any parliament sessions"

Now that is really creative, almost impossible to beat

Oh, that is easy with all the Apps you can install on your smartphone now days.

Spot on. And one can sit and watch porn wile parliament is in session. Speaking of that does anyone know the outcome of the high level investigation on the last porn episode in parliament?

They still have a long way to go to catch up with Taiwanese Parliament sessions

i am surprised another question was not asked.

which is " how does one manage to be pm and run a country without attending any parliament sessions"

Now that is really creative, almost impossible to beat

Oh, that is easy with all the Apps you can install on your smartphone now days.

hide and seek one of them?

Updated to Hide & Skype.

They could have asked who was the most inovative and the results would have probably been the same. But, this lady seems to be following the instructions from Big Brother and both seem to be following examples set by infamous people before them, so creative would not seem to be descriptive, at all.

I will have to say she is much more apealing to look at than most of the 'Boss Tweeds' of history, but the financial outcomes will be probably be similar.

Who the hell comes up with these ridiculous surveys???

I would like to know who was surveyed. Clearly they were friendlies.

Who's the politician most people want to survive after apocalypse? Yingluck.

Who's the politician most people want to stay with in Loy Kratong day? Yingluck.

Haven't we had enough of these stupid politician-promoting surveys? I'm really sure she can be named as smartest politician by one of these surveys, because the voters care of how she would look like on the survey result rather than trying to answer it truthfully.

Yingluck voted most creative politician

I have no doubts about that. What she has conjured out of her magic hat in a attempt to make a convicted fugitive criminal look like the messias, would make any magician blush.

The most 'creative' politician.........is that supposed to be a compliment?

how much would the results differ with a larger sample? lets say twice as many

I don't know.

then maybe its accurate

then definitely we don't know

not true.

Who the hell comes up with these ridiculous surveys???

I would like to know who was surveyed. Clearly they were friendlies.

thai people

and it seems that youre right

I did not know that the definition of "creative" was useless and ineffective

then maybe its accurate

then definitely we don't know

not true.

maybe accurate or definitely don't know. same same.

then maybe its accurate

then definitely we don't know

not true.

maybe accurate or definitely don't know. same same.

alright man, misread your post - technically correct but there is no reason to think it is not representative making the logical assumption that the polling company knows how to poll and run the numbers.

you "seemed" to want to cast some shadow of doubt on the results with a comment "only x people" but that is then entire purpose of polling and theres no reason dude to doubt the results based on that. double the numbers, same result, triple the numbers the same result, ask every thai the same result. within the margin of error of the polling. basic stats.

alright man, misread your post - technically correct but there is no reason to think it is not representative making the logical assumption that the polling company knows how to poll and run the numbers.

you "seemed" to want to cast some shadow of doubt on the results with a comment "only x people" but that is then entire purpose of polling and theres no reason dude to doubt the results based on that. double the numbers, same result, triple the numbers the same result, ask every thai the same result. within the margin of error of the polling. basic stats.

there is 1 reason to think this is not representative of the whole population - the sample is so small.

It maybe accurate, but the uncertainty at this sample size is so huge you'd really be stretching to draw conclusions from it.

Bluespunk: Yes it does mean lies, and making up stuff on the spot.

OF course the ones who had a A NEGATIVE view were WEEDED OUT On The SPOT.

Just more Bullshit from the biggest hub of bullshit on the planet.

alright man, misread your post - technically correct but there is no reason to think it is not representative making the logical assumption that the polling company knows how to poll and run the numbers.

you "seemed" to want to cast some shadow of doubt on the results with a comment "only x people" but that is then entire purpose of polling and theres no reason dude to doubt the results based on that. double the numbers, same result, triple the numbers the same result, ask every thai the same result. within the margin of error of the polling. basic stats.

there is 1 reason to think this is not representative of the whole population - the sample is so small.

It maybe accurate, but the uncertainty at this sample size is so huge you'd really be stretching to draw conclusions from it.

not true man

a sample size of 1000 gives a margin of error of 3% when measuring over 200 million adults in america

http://www.publicagenda.org/pages/best-estimates-guide-sample-size-and-margin-error

the results should be solid

solid

really solid

Creativity is not an aspect of this culture. As this poll shows.

Thanks to Hugo6 for providing a link about polls. Interesting is

"Of course, in both general samples and oversamples, who is asked is as important as how many are asked. Reputable survey organizations go to great lengths to make sure their interview sample is random and representative of whomever they are surveying, be it retired people, young black men, or all Americans. For more information on random sampling techniques and other important aspects of polling, see 20 Questions Journalists Should Ask About Poll Results."

Those 20 questions are listed here:

"http://www.publicage...t-poll-results"

alright man, misread your post - technically correct but there is no reason to think it is not representative making the logical assumption that the polling company knows how to poll and run the numbers.

you "seemed" to want to cast some shadow of doubt on the results with a comment "only x people" but that is then entire purpose of polling and theres no reason dude to doubt the results based on that. double the numbers, same result, triple the numbers the same result, ask every thai the same result. within the margin of error of the polling. basic stats.

there is 1 reason to think this is not representative of the whole population - the sample is so small.

It maybe accurate, but the uncertainty at this sample size is so huge you'd really be stretching to draw conclusions from it.

From a ststistical point of view

alright man, misread your post - technically correct but there is no reason to think it is not representative making the logical assumption that the polling company knows how to poll and run the numbers.

you "seemed" to want to cast some shadow of doubt on the results with a comment "only x people" but that is then entire purpose of polling and theres no reason dude to doubt the results based on that. double the numbers, same result, triple the numbers the same result, ask every thai the same result. within the margin of error of the polling. basic stats.

there is 1 reason to think this is not representative of the whole population - the sample is so small.

It maybe accurate, but the uncertainty at this sample size is so huge you'd really be stretching to draw conclusions from it.

From a purely statistical point of view the sample size would render the poll results most inconclusive, and basicaly useless however, the crux of the mater lies in the validation of the perception of accuracy.

With regard to the Government and the media, such publications are simply a futile attempt, a red herring, to manipulate public opinion and keep them in the public eye. After many years here I am of the opinion that there is no such beast as accurate reporting from either of these entities. Accuracy relies on truth and integrity. Need I say more.

I wonder if the people they polled actually understood what the word creative means. Anyhow #1 was the rice-pledging scheme?? Maybe they mean scam not scheme in that case yes it definitely was the most creative scam!

only because its more polite to say "creative"

alright man, misread your post - technically correct but there is no reason to think it is not representative making the logical assumption that the polling company knows how to poll and run the numbers.

you "seemed" to want to cast some shadow of doubt on the results with a comment "only x people" but that is then entire purpose of polling and theres no reason dude to doubt the results based on that. double the numbers, same result, triple the numbers the same result, ask every thai the same result. within the margin of error of the polling. basic stats.

there is 1 reason to think this is not representative of the whole population - the sample is so small.

It maybe accurate, but the uncertainty at this sample size is so huge you'd really be stretching to draw conclusions from it.

not true man

a sample size of 1000 gives a margin of error of 3% when measuring over 200 million adults in america

http://www.publicage...nd-margin-error

the results should be solid

solid

really solid

Spme how the statement

"alright man, misread your post - technically correct but there is no reason to think it is not representative making the logical assumption that the polling company knows how to poll and run the numbers."

Leaves me to believe the poster is new to Thailand the hub of what do you want to prove and we have a trained staff of 3,000 ready to prove it.

The other paper is reporting YS as being voted "constructive". Is it just the Nation being "creative" here?

alright man, misread your post - technically correct but there is no reason to think it is not representative making the logical assumption that the polling company knows how to poll and run the numbers.

you "seemed" to want to cast some shadow of doubt on the results with a comment "only x people" but that is then entire purpose of polling and theres no reason dude to doubt the results based on that. double the numbers, same result, triple the numbers the same result, ask every thai the same result. within the margin of error of the polling. basic stats.

there is 1 reason to think this is not representative of the whole population - the sample is so small.

It maybe accurate, but the uncertainty at this sample size is so huge you'd really be stretching to draw conclusions from it.

not true man

a sample size of 1000 gives a margin of error of 3% when measuring over 200 million adults in america

http://www.publicage...nd-margin-error

the results should be solid

solid

really solid

a very arbitrary conclusion to draw from a very tenuous reference.

alright man, misread your post - technically correct but there is no reason to think it is not representative making the logical assumption that the polling company knows how to poll and run the numbers.

you "seemed" to want to cast some shadow of doubt on the results with a comment "only x people" but that is then entire purpose of polling and theres no reason dude to doubt the results based on that. double the numbers, same result, triple the numbers the same result, ask every thai the same result. within the margin of error of the polling. basic stats.

there is 1 reason to think this is not representative of the whole population - the sample is so small.

It maybe accurate, but the uncertainty at this sample size is so huge you'd really be stretching to draw conclusions from it.

not true man

a sample size of 1000 gives a margin of error of 3% when measuring over 200 million adults in america

http://www.publicage...nd-margin-error

the results should be solid

solid

really solid

a very arbitrary conclusion to draw from a very tenuous reference.

the reference is hardly tenuous, there are many many many similar references

and therefore the conclusion is hardly arbitrary

but yours was. If 1000 is a decent sample size to measure 200 million then 1200 is not too small, is it.

the only position to take to invalidate the poll would be that the polling company did not use a random sample.

the reference is hardly tenuous, there are many many many similar references

and therefore the conclusion is hardly arbitrary

but yours was. If 1000 is a decent sample size to measure 200 million then 1200 is not too small, is it.

the only position to take to invalidate the poll would be that the polling company did not use a random sample.

sigh. I said something about arbitrary and tenuous before, denied, rinsed then repeated.

You draw the conclusions you want. I'll take it all with 1kg of salt.

I think creative was a bad translation and the more appropriate translation was 'constructive'.

Does anybody else on here find it hilarious to read posts on here from citizens of the USA and the UK criticising the Thailand politicians for their "Lack of integrity"? This from nationals that elected G W Bush as president TWICE, Ok admittedly the first time was probably an affront to democracy but a second time!! Probably generally acknowledged by anybody with a few working brain cells that he was an embarrassment every time he opened his mouth. Then we have Mr Blair, probably the most despised man in Britain, who since standing down as Prime Minister has prostituted this great office of state to personally enrich himself to the tune of millions of pounds every year, all of it stashed away in secret 'trusts' which means that he doesn't have to account for the source, and pays less tax proportionally than the average worker. Both of them by any definition are war criminals, responsible for hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths due to their lies. By comparison Yingluck and her ilk are mere beginners in the corruption stakes.