OzMick Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) Despite the expert opinions of some TVFers who insist the PTP administration is on the verge of collapse, this suggests otherwise, does it not? If crew members are jumping from a rotten ship at every port, do you sail on short-handed or recruit/press-gang new members? Bit of a desperate attempt to turn this into a "disaster for the PTP" post, isn't it? Haven't noticed any crew members "jumping from a rotten ship". Same complement of MP's they started out with minus a couple of "red carders" and now gaining more. What suggests to you that was a "disaster for PTP" post? I was referring to the PTP members reluctant to endorse the reconciliation/amnesty bills - the obvious solution is to buy a few more votes. You suggest that the Democrats should change leadership like "other" parties - obviously PTP is not like "other" parties which have democratic votes for their leadership. It is a P4P arrangement. Edited June 2, 2013 by OzMick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebelplatoon Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 Its always nice as a voter to know that what you voted for is going to happen. So when you thought voting for these people at least the strangle hold of pheua thai would not be too big and there d be some different opinions voiced....sorry it just does not happen with the money and job opportunities involved....TIT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbamboo Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 why do you guys worry all thai polititians are corrupt,,i defy you to name 1 that isnt,,,,,,none of them care about the welfare of the thai people,,,,there only in it for themselves,, I nominate Yingluck. I think he meant REAL politicians. Yingluck isn't corrupt in the sense that she schemes and scams. She just does the bidding of those who do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amore Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 Despite the expert opinions of some TVFers who insist the PTP administration is on the verge of collapse, this suggests otherwise, does it not? If crew members are jumping from a rotten ship at every port, do you sail on short-handed or recruit/press-gang new members? Bit of a desperate attempt to turn this into a "disaster for the PTP" post, isn't it? Haven't noticed any crew members "jumping from a rotten ship". Same complement of MP's they started out with minus a couple of "red carders" and now gaining more. What suggests to you that was a "disaster for PTP" post? I was referring to the PTP members reluctant to endorse the reconciliation/amnesty bills - the obvious solution is to buy a few more votes. You suggest that the Democrats should change leadership like "other" parties - obviously PTP is not like "other" parties which have democratic votes for their leadership. It is a P4P arrangement. You don't post any other types of post in the political news so it was just a hunch it'll be your usual doom and gloom for the PTP post - I was right, wasn't I. I was referring to parties outside of Thailand. Whatever way they do it, if the dems are serious about contending they need to get rid of the unelectable Abhisit - too much baggage and a damaging obsession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubl Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 Strangely enough k. Abhisit like Ms. Yingluck was party list candidate #1 for their respective parties which according to some seem the same as being unelectable.Anyway, we have here a faction of BJT which may or may not join the Pheu Thai party. Only time (and money) will tell, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amore Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 (edited) Who's defending whats happening now, I'm not. I'm just pointing out the supreme irony / hypocrisy of the dems saying that the transfer of some MP's from one party to another is morally and ethically unfair.I agree about the hypocrisy here, if not about what it is you claim to defend or not defend.The Dems have no real place complaining about this, just as Thaksin's rabble had no place complaining about the MPs who jumped on board with the Dems in 2008, considering how they themselves had just previously welcomed into their government MPs who when campaigning, had promised their voters that they would not. When an unelected body inteferes with the political process in such a critical way and with such indefensible results as the Army did in 2008, damn right Thaksins party MP's (not rabble as you put it) have a right to complain. Where is that arrangement acceptable anywhere in the world? Yes there are backroom talks probably every time a coalition is formed but no legitimate political party uses (or accepts) the Nations Army to broker them. That is the difference between 2008 and this addition of MP's that won't make any difference to a Coalition that already has a sizeable majority in parliament. Edited June 2, 2013 by amore 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rixalex Posted June 2, 2013 Share Posted June 2, 2013 I agree about the hypocrisy here, if not about what it is you claim to defend or not defend. The Dems have no real place complaining about this, just as Thaksin's rabble had no place complaining about the MPs who jumped on board with the Dems in 2008, considering how they themselves had just previously welcomed into their government MPs who when campaigning, had promised their voters that they would not. When an unelected body inteferes with the political process in such a critical way and with such indefensible results as the Army did in 2008, damn right Thaksins party MP's (not rabble as you put it) have a right to complain. Where is that arrangement acceptable anywhere in the world? Yes there are backroom talks probably every time a coalition is formed but no legitimate political party uses (or accepts) the Nations Army to broker them. That is the difference between 2008 and this addition of MP's that won't make any difference to a Coalition that already has a sizeable majority in parliament. As i sais before, unelected is unelected, in my book anyway, and the fact that in 2008 it is alleged that the unelected persons were wearing military uniforms, rather than suits, doesn't really make their participation any less acceptable or any more. You on the other hand seem perfectly happy with unelected persons sticking their noses into the democratic process (as one suspects has happened with this defection) on the one proviso that they not be unelected persons from the military. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzMick Posted June 3, 2013 Share Posted June 3, 2013 I was referring to parties outside of Thailand. Whatever way they do it, if the dems are serious about contending they need to get rid of the unelectable Abhisit - too much baggage and a damaging obsession. Seeming this is THAI visa forum, why don't we discuss parties in Thailand? How does PTP get rid of the man who bought their souls? How does HE compare to Abhisit in regard to baggage and obsession? IMHO the Thaksin sycophants push for Abhisit's removal because he is dangerous when it comes to comparison of almost every character trait. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waza Posted June 8, 2013 Share Posted June 8, 2013 The best coalition money can buy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now