Democrat Party Rebuilds Strength

[ColPyat]

To overturn an election is about as undemocratic as you can get.

May I ask you Lukamar, what you think of these Snap-Elections in the first place??

Was is not triggered by a very undemocratical selfserving tactic/move by one Man only (as far as I know he didn't even consult - as usual - his own party?)

We all can guess that his tricks:

- Snap Elections

- and step back as PM (when and how long noone knows)

was basically a very undemocratic move, to whitewash and reduce the possibility of any corruption charges on behalf of his very own?

Agree? S

So why do you call these Elections in the first place democratic?

I think Mr. Abhisit and many others (8-11million No Votes and/or spoiled votes) made it clear, that they can't agree with these moves anymore, right?

Whatever you may think about those snap elections - they were within the constitutional right. Just because the opposition parties were simply not ready to campaign does not make them illegal. Laws simply cannot be made up and invented on the spot without even the slightest resemblence of due process.

The elections were lawful elections, it was lawful that the opposition parties decided to boycot them, but it is not lawful to declare the elections as null and void by opponents without any due process.

The ongoing mess we have now, is the equal doing of all parties involved, parliamentary and extra parliamentary.

[Plus]

TRT's party list MPs were elected by the majority, their constituency MPs in many places were not.

Reportedly one winning candidate in Nakhon is Thammarat got only 2% of eligible votes against perhaps 80% who didn't want to see him.

Majority of people (in Bangkok) feel that TRT candidates who didn't win against "no vote" should not take their parliament seats.

About a third of the future Parliament does not represent the majority of the voters. Now THAT's a good reason to call snap elections again.

ECs credibility is at the all time low, especially in the South. Yesterday's scenes in Songkla where people blockaded EC's offices is just a sign of the things to come. South does not have political clout of Bangkokians, but they have geography on their side, and "11 joining 3" is a possible scenario which no one wants to see.

Democrats WERE the best government in the past decade, easily. There is only Chavalit and Thaksin to compare.

[sushiman]

Quote - Lukamar: To overturn an election is about as undemocratic as you can get.

and

Black (as usual joking not flaming... = Colpyat and Blue = Sushiman

Whatever you may think about those snap elections - they were within the constitutional right.

* yawn ...Colpyat off the book....... big excuse to waste a lot of money. Clearly if you don't even ask your own party members for a combined group action, you are not representing your own party, nor your Country I would say, and you are rulling very selfish I believe

Just because the opposition parties were simply not ready to campaign does not make them illegal.

* why should they have been ready? Was there a reason for any Snap Elections? Do they have the financial corrupt support, which also comes from years of profits by blinding and cheating the Thai people?

Laws simply cannot be made up and invented on the spot without even the slightest resemblence of due process.

* Right that's why he shouldn't have gone alone in the first place. Immense misuse of the laws and powers in my eyes. If he gave the opposition more time I think all wouldn't have been so obvious; you think it was coincedence he wanted the elections to be held

- Before Songkarn (the rural folks wouldn't get the news from Bangkok)

and

- before the 90days rules could have been applied (period were people could switch to another party)

- before any asked corruption allegations where oppenley discussed (up to today he never explained or gave the chance to anyone to talk about this still ongoing headache which the Thai people now have to carry around for months)

etc.

Why don't you come to Bangkok, and ask some ordinary folks what they think about this?

Colpyat follow the flow of the facts, and not only stick to the book orelse you don't make a human impression. Also court rulings are sometimes not been followed always by the book (see the ongoing TRT/Thaksins court victories and the oppostions troubles they are now into, because they had the guts to open their mouth.

The elections were lawful elections, it was lawful that the opposition parties decided to boycot them, but it is not lawful to declare the elections as null and void by opponents without any due process.

* If election frauds "now and then" were obvious, wouldn't you also be fed up, if your opponent always cheat towards victory (not only but also mainly) and yourself are trying to play by the book and the laws. One day you have to oppress the system yourself, orelse you will be cheated a life time.

The ongoing mess we have now, is the equal doing of all parties involved, parliamentary and extra parliamentary.

* This mess is in my opinion, mainly because lack of morals and ethics, also misuse (combined with shorterm goodies) of rural folks by mainly one side and mainly or often misuse of power by only one man and one party which is enjoying benefits from these actions.

Belarus II is waiting for Thailand (read the Human rights rapports and other Rapports, you often post yourself), thanks to this one-man ruler here.

If you call this legal what is going here, than keep on sticking to the books Polycat and well get to no-where with the fight against corruption. Especially if the laws are in the hands of the very same group.

Let the Thai people decide, or let TRT open the doors, and let other people try to help to reform, this mess that TRT has done by themselves, and than you will see...the only ones who don't want to change are the TRT themselves.....at this very moment...but I think it could change once a Puppet PM is here and this next one follows more the voice of the NON-TRT outside world, which in my sense would be the next good step. I now i'm dreaming...

Another note: What was the name of this book by your posting name? I would enjoy reading some otherthings than these mind-boggeling news

Edited April 10, 2006 by sushiman

[sushiman]

TRT's party list MPs were elected by the majority, their constituency MPs in many places were not.

Reportedly one winning candidate in Nakhon is Thammarat got only 2% of eligible votes against perhaps 80% who didn't want to see him.

Majority of people (in Bangkok) feel that TRT candidates who didn't win against "no vote" should not take their parliament seats.

About a third of the future Parliament does not represent the majority of the voters. Now THAT's a good reason to call snap elections again.

ECs credibility is at the all time low, especially in the South. Yesterday's scenes in Songkla where people blockaded EC's offices is just a sign of the things to come. South does not have political clout of Bangkokians, but they have geography on their side, and "11 joining 3" is a possible scenario which no one wants to see.

Democrats WERE the best government in the past decade, easily. There is only Chavalit and Thaksin to compare.

Thanks Plus, well posted. Vote again the Democrats, and TRT please give them a chance now to join an election with time, not with haste, for covering up other means.

[ColPyat]

Another note: What was the name of this book by your posting name? I would enjoy reading some otherthings than these mind-boggeling news

1) Byzantium endures..

2) ...the laughter of Carthage

3) Jerusalem commands...

4) ...the vengeance of Rome

by Michael Moorcock

By the way, no need for me to come to Bangkok, i live here already. And i do speak with ordinary folks about politics constantly. And i go upcountry often, to my farm, and speak with ordinary folks there about politics as well.

Edited April 10, 2006 by ColPyat

[sushiman]

Another note: What was the name of this book by your posting name? I would enjoy reading some otherthings than these mind-boggeling news

1) Byzantium endures..

2) ...the laughter of Carthage

3) Jerusalem commands...

4) ...the vengeance of Rome

by Michael Moorcock

By the way, no need for me to come to Bangkok, i live here already. And i do speak with ordinary folks about politics constantly. And i go upcountry often, to my farm, and speak with ordinary folks there about politics as well.

1) Byzantium endures..

2) ...the laughter of Carthage

3) Jerusalem commands...

4) ...the vengeance of Rome

by Michael Moorcock

thanks mate... which one do you recommend to read first?

Nice to hear you are in Bangkok too. If you have time and wanna join for a drink, and some hot debate, drop me an e-mail! Maybe we could meet up on the next PAD rally, and we go both and have a glimpse on Thailands Political situation first-hand! With a view from the mobbers

I think would be interesting (last time I had some great talks with some Thais there) and by the way not all demonstraters as you might know agree with all PAD points of views.

Same as with TRT, there most be some great (and vice-versa too) politicians there too, but unfortunatelly there are just out-shadowed by one person only, at this moment.

Enjoy your eve guys!

cheerio

Andy

Edited April 10, 2006 by sushiman

[Plus]

Read them in that order - it's a trilogy (four books, though)

Problem is none of them is available in Bangkok, Amazon wants $40 for new copies and apparently doesn't deliver second hand in Thailand.

If you are interested I can send you other Moorcock's books in e-format

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Moorcock

Choose here what you want, almost all of them are available except Colonel Pyat series.

[sushiman]

Read them in that order - it's a trilogy (four books, though)

Problem is none of them is available in Bangkok, Amazon wants $40 for new copies and apparently doesn't deliver second hand in Thailand.

If you are interested I can send you other Moorcock's books in e-format

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Moorcock

Choose here what you want, almost all of them are available except Colonel Pyat series.

thanks mate! send if you can what is not to big (please)

nice to spend some time reading during Songkarn

[sushiman]

back to the news:

Thai Rak Thai alleges radio talk show host behind blockade

The Thai Rak Thai Party Monday alleged that a radio talk show host seen as close to the Democrat Party was the organiser for the blockade of a candidacy registration centre in Songkhla on Sunday.

"Community radio host Chalee Noppawong na Ayutthaya is close to Democrat deputy leader Trairong Suwankhiri, and his crony Maj-General Khattiya Sawasdipol," Thai Rak Thai deputy spokesman Jatuporn Phromphan said.

Jatuporn said Chalee mobilised a crowd of Songkhla residents in an attempt to prevent aspiring candidates from small parties to contest a second round of voting.

Jatuporn said Thai Rak Thai deputy leader Bhokin Bhalakula was reviewing whether to initiate legal proceedings.

He also stated he had evidence to suspect supporters of anti-Thaksin campaigner Sondhi Limthongkul of being involved in the attempted disruption of the candidacy registration.

Source - Nation 10 April 2006

[sushiman]

A Democrat ally is behind blockage in Songkhla : TRT

The Thai Rak Thai Party alleged on Monday that a radio talk show host seen as close to the Democrat Party was the organiser for the blockade of a candidacy registration centre in Songkhla on Sunday.

"Community radio host Chalee Noppawong na Ayutthaya is close to Democrat deputy leader Trairong Suwankhiri, and his crony MajGeneral Khattiya Sawasdipol," Thai Rak Thai deputy spokesman Jatuporn Phromphan said.

Jatuporn said Chalee mobilised a crowd of Songkhla residents in an attempt to prevent aspiring candiฌdates from small parties to contest a second round of voting.

The Election Commission has called for byelections in conฌstituencies where lone Thai Rak Thai candidates failed to muster 20 per cent of the eligible votes. Its decision to allow additional candidates to contest the repeat vote was seen as a ploy to overcome the 20 percent rule.

Jatuporn said Thai Rak Thai deputy leader Bhokin Bhalakula was reviewing whether to initiate legal proceedings.

He also stated he had evidence to suspect supporters of anti-Thaksin campaigner Sondhi Limthongkul of being involved in the attempted disruption of the candidacy registration.

Former Democrat MP Jua Rachasee said authorities should not draw a hasty judgement against Songkhla residents.

Residents were exercising their democratic right to protest what they viewed as favouritism toward the Thai Rak Thai Party, Jua said.

They wanted to vent their frusฌtration after learning that a smallparty candidate switched to run in constituency 4 after helping a Thai Rak Thai candidate to secure vicฌtory in the first round in constituency 5, he said.

Source - The Nation 10. April 2006

Edited April 10, 2006 by sushiman

[Siripon]

I remember when the last constitution was written by several 'prominent' persons, Parliament couldn't abridge it, no meddling was allowed, it was a plain vote for or against. Public sentiment was so for it that no politician at the time dared oppose it, though I remember rumblings from the dinosaurs such as Chavalit and Sanoh.

The same needs to happen now- the problem I see is the Senate.

If they are not truly neutral, free from political interference, then their role in selection of candidates for independent organisations is hopelessly compromised.

In the Senate election on April 19, over 100 candidates have links to TRT MPs, either family or job related!

[Plus]

Right, with all lights on Thaksin, Senate election campaign rolls on, quetly.

Candidates can't actively campaign, but what about media? Can the print candidates profiles and issues surrounging them? Would it be against the law?

A couple of months ago The Nation wrote about many of the senators, but then Thaksin with his Shin sale came up and we get nothing since.

Senate elections are more important for Thai democracy than lower House.

[Plus]

Three Moorcock's books are available from Kinokunia

http://bookweb.kinokuniya.co.jp/guest/cgi-...F%63%6B&AREA=07

[ColPyat]

thanks mate! send if you can what is not to big (please)

nice to spend some time reading during Songkarn

I have to say though that the 4 ColPyat books are his most outstanding work, and completely off the wall.

[lukamar]

I guess I'll be red...

May I ask you Lukamar, what you think of these Snap-Elections in the first place??

Section 116. The King has the prerogative to dissolve the House of Representatives for a new election of members of the House. The dissolution of the House of Representatives shall be made in the form of a Royal Decree in which the day for a new general election must be fixed within sixty days and such election day must be the same throughout the Kingdom.

The election date was fast but within the constitution. You have to look at the calender and see all the holidays and the Senate election date in the time frame. This may well have been the best date for a general election and was Decreed by the King.

A lot of people are calling foul that he called the elections to stop party members from jumping ship. That would be a valid point except that under the constitution they would have to jump ship 30 days or more before any election call by dissolution and they would have to jump ship 45 days prior to a normal house dissolution (section 115).

The fact remains that the Opposition parties were not ready for an election, they knew they would get trounced once again and they elected to try another route, the 90 day membership rule would have had no bearing on the election as party members could not have moved parties anyway according to the constitution as it is written. The people that actually lost most to the 90 day rule were the small parties, and that is a shame. The Democrats have worked hard to have as many small party members disallowed as possible, actually swamping the courts and EC with protests. It's too bad they did not expend that energy in a more productive way, like fielding candidates.

[jdinasia]

oi

[samran]

I can't see why many of you don't realise that there will be another set of elections with-in the next couple of months.

Yes, the elections we just had were relatively free and fair.

Yes, TRT 'won' a majority, as they were the only ones who contested the elections.

But, the parliament that we have now isn't a represetative parliament.

The powers that be, the ones who's job it is to maintain and guard the consitution won't allow this current parliament to live for long. A one partly parliament is in nobody's interest.

Now, if I was the Democrat leader, what I'd do right now is let TRT and the ego's inside it try it on with each other. See where the dust settles. Whatever happens their public image is diminished with out Dear Leader at the visible helm. TRT was Thaksin. Without him, it is a lesser party. This is quite different to the Democrats, who the public view as a party rather than a person/ego.

Once the dust settles on that, I'd recontest the election, offering to support a raft of TRT's 'populist' policies. The 30 baht health care scheme is a great one. The recent ammendments to education funding (similar to Australia's HEC's system) is another. I'd take those policies, support them so as to depoliticise them and with this the democrats may have a chance to become more than a rump in parliament.

[lukamar]

I can't see why many of you don't realise that there will be another set of elections with-in the next couple of months.

You may well be correct but I don't see it happening that way.

Yes, the elections we just had were relatively free and fair.

I agree with you on this.

Yes, TRT 'won' a majority, as they were the only ones who contested the elections.

But, the parliament that we have now isn't a represetative parliament.

You have to sit back and look at the situation as a lawyer would or as the constitutional court would to make it's ruling. The TRT did run unopposed, except for some minor parties, and won a majority There is no provision that there must be an opposition and the opposition must win "X" number of seats in the constitution. There is an opposition as the results are now albeit of only one. "Representative" in the constitution relates to areas of the country not as split in the parties, A full house of 500 from any one party is not good but it is representative if they are all elected.

The powers that be, the ones who's job it is to maintain and guard the Constitution won't allow this current parliament to live for long. A one partly parliament is in nobody's interest.

You are very right in a one party Parliament is in no ones interest, but it has been elected by the majority of the people, in what you described as "relatively free and fair". Because of the constitution they must let the house sit, that would be in the best interests of the country, by dissolving parliament it would open up a complete other can of worms and allow every new election to be dissolved by groups that do not like the party that wins power. This is not "Them vs US" it's about Thailand, the constitution and the rule of law.

Now, if I was the Democrat leader, what I'd do right now is let TRT and the ego's inside it try it on with each other. See where the dust settles. Whatever happens their public image is diminished with out Dear Leader at the visible helm. TRT was Thaksin. Without him, it is a lesser party. This is quite different to the Democrats, who the public view as a party rather than a person/ego.

I'd also stop some of the disruptive comments coming out of the Democrat party at the moment, like in ThaiDay. They (Democrats) also do not fear a public backlash if the party’s refusal to participate in the by-elections prompts the political tension to spill over into celebrations for the revered monarch in June. That's counterproductive.

offering to support a raft of TRT's 'populist' policies. The 30 baht health care scheme is a great one.

The problem with that approach is that the TRT would just counter, "See we told you we were doing everything right and now the Democrats even support all our ideas, because they have none of their own." The Democrats have to come up with a policy that everyone will be happy with, not an easy task. If they woo the Northern voters they may alienate the southern and Bangkok ones and without the north you can't win a majority, it's just a numbers game.

[lukamar]

Double post deleted

Edited April 10, 2006 by lukamar

[jdinasia]

I can't see why many of you don't realise that there will be another set of elections with-in the next couple of months.

You may well be correct but I don't see it happening that way.

You don't see much the way it has been discussed by the people in Thailand. It is relatively clear that there will be new elections soon.

Yes, the elections we just had were relatively free and fair.

I agree with you on this.

Yes, TRT 'won' a majority, as they were the only ones who contested the elections.

But, the parliament that we have now isn't a represetative parliament.

You have to sit back and look at the situation as a lawyer would or as the constitutional court would to make it's ruling. The TRT did run unopposed, except for some minor parties, and won a majority There is no provision that there must be an opposition and the opposition must win "X" number of seats in the constitution. There is an opposition as the results are now albeit of only one. "Representative" in the constitution relates to areas of the country not as split in the parties, A full house of 500 from any one party is not good but it is representative if they are all elected.

Yes you do have to look like it as a constitutional lawyer. 31 + Constituencies do NOT have an elected representative. That means they are unrepresented. There is no fulll Parlaiment elected by the people. The TRT did NOT win a majority in even more areas yet are being put forward to represent people that did NOT elect them. You cry and cry about it not being democratic etc for the Opposition (yeah remember opposition) not to have run. Since Thailand IS a democracy of sorts that means there can be no government without elected representation of the people. (remember Democracy? ... like the US or Canada?)

The powers that be, the ones who's job it is to maintain and guard the Constitution won't allow this current parliament to live for long. A one partly parliament is in nobody's interest.

You are very right in a one party Parliament is in no ones interest, but it has been elected by the majority of the people, in what you described as "relatively free and fair". Because of the constitution they must let the house sit, that would be in the best interests of the country, by dissolving parliament it would open up a complete other can of worms and allow every new election to be dissolved by groups that do not like the party that wins power. This is not "Them vs US" it's about Thailand, the constitution and the rule of law.

The people of the South did not elect this Parlaiment ... nor the MP's ... nor did the people of Bangkok. This IS about the rule of law ... not fair to have people unrepresented by people they voted for

Now, if I was the Democrat leader, what I'd do right now is let TRT and the ego's inside it try it on with each other. See where the dust settles. Whatever happens their public image is diminished with out Dear Leader at the visible helm. TRT was Thaksin. Without him, it is a lesser party. This is quite different to the Democrats, who the public view as a party rather than a person/ego.

I'd also stop some of the disruptive comments coming out of the Democrat party at the moment, like in ThaiDay. They (Democrats) also do not fear a public backlash if the party’s refusal to participate in the by-elections prompts the political tension to spill over into celebrations for the revered monarch in June. That's counterproductive.

offering to support a raft of TRT's 'populist' policies. The 30 baht health care scheme is a great one.

The problem with that approach is that the TRT would just counter, "See we told you we were doing everything right and now the Democrats even support all our ideas, because they have none of their own." The Democrats have to come up with a policy that everyone will be happy with, not an easy task. If they woo the Northern voters they may alienate the southern and Bangkok ones and without the north you can't win a majority, it's just a numbers game.

Oi ... someone missed the ministry of Health's response to TRT's claim to own the 30 baht health scheme .... etc.

The Demos won't get 50% of the Parlaiment in the next election ... they will probably get enough to censure the PM and require that they be listened to. Hopefully things will continue to progress.

[Plus]

Lukamar, you seem to ignore that the Opposition parties boycotted elections because they called it a "whitewash" of Thaksin's corruption charges and they didn't want to play a party to this whitewash.

And so reasoned PAD - they didn't recognise the snap elections as legitimate. You seem to be fixed on "they knew they'd lose" mantra. It might be ONE of the reasons they let it go, but not the main one.

The Parliament that is in the process of being formed is not acceptable to a large segment of the population. It's different from the last year when the losers (Democrat supporters) simply accepted TRT's victory.

It's not being representative in any sense but legal, yet don't forget that legally it doesn't even exist, and it won't exist until some legal wringling is undertaken. Legal here is being what EC and Thaksin wants, the actual law is of secondary consideration.

Just look at the recent EC's admission that the booth arrangements should be changed because people didn't have privacy during vote casting, but in EC's opinion it doesn't mean that they undermined the Constitutional demand for privacy in the first round.

[lukamar]

Has absent Thai PM turned the tables on his foes?

Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:37 AM ET Reuters

By Ed Cropley

BANGKOK (Reuters) - Be careful what you wish for -- you might just get it.

The old adage is looking ominously prescient for the enemies of Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who got much of what they wished for when he stepped aside a week ago after an embarrassing and incomplete election result.

But in boycotting the snap poll that ultimately forced the telecoms billionaire from power, the opposition parties triggered a constitutional mess that now threatens the very democracy they said they were fighting to preserve.

And, by stepping aside, the man who held Thailand's largest-ever majority only a year ago has put the onus on the opposition, led by the Democrats, and the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD), an ad hoc anti-Thaksin street campaign, to sort it out.

"The PAD and Democrats need to take a long view and see Thailand beyond Thaksin," said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a politics lecturer at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University.

"But they are so fixated with extirpating Thaksin and everything he stood for that they have disregarded the overall well-being of Thai democracy and constitutional rule.

"It's not over -- that's the problem. We may have only seen the end of the beginning. I wish it was the end, but I think Thaksin's standing down was only the initial phase."

A roller-coaster week for the stock market tells a similar tale.

The day after he quit, Bangkok's bourse jumped three percent on hopes a peaceful solution would emerge soon to end the crisis, which started seven months ago with demonstrations accusing Thaksin of corruption, cronyism and abuse of power.

But after the initial euphoria, the main SET index has back-tracked as the power vacuum has become ever more plain to see. With the paralysis set to continue for months, worries about risks to economic growth are only likely to grow.

The Nation newspaper, critical of Thaksin ever since he swept to power in 2001 on a platform of cheap healthcare and rural handouts, sounded a cautious note on Tuesday with a front-page headline: "Can we get out of this jam?"

CONSTITUTIONAL YAWN

The Democrats are demanding reform of the 1997 constitution -- the country's 16th in 74 years of on-off democracy -- before they lift their poll boycott, which left parliament with empty seats and therefore unable to convene.

They argue Thaksin systematically gutted all the neutral bodies that are meant to act as checks and balances on the government, and so at the very least want a review of how the people on such commissions are selected.

"There has to be a revamping of the process of selection and maybe there has to be some form of check on the way power is exercised," Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva told Reuters.

But for the Eton- and Oxford-educated head of the country's oldest political party, it will be a tough message to sell in the countryside, where most of Thailand's 63 million people spend more of their time worrying about putting food on the table.

By-elections on April 23 are meant to plug some of the 40 gaps in parliament, but nobody expects all 500 seats to be filled by May 2, the date by which the constitution says parliament must meet.

The Democrats, whose support is mainly in the south, could end up shouldering the blame, especially from the millions who see Thaksin as the first leader ever to cater to the needs and aspirations of those living beyond the bright lights of Bangkok.

"Thaksin's government is no comparison to the Democrats. When Democrats were in power, all the benefits went down south," said Sitichai Buacharoen, a 42-year-old store vendor in the central province of Nakhon Pathom.

"Before, nothing seemed to be getting done here," he said.

Even in Thailand's far south, where anti-Thaksin sentiment is deep-rooted after two years of bloody Muslim separatist unrest, the opposition suffer from perceptions their election boycott has hindered, not helped, democracy.

"The people who will suffer from this the most are the Democrats," said Bae, a social worker in his 40s from Pattani, a southern provincial capital.

"They are the people who brought Thailand to a halt and have torn up democracy. People won't forget that."

(Additional reporting by Chawadee Nualkhair)

© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.

[lukamar]

Bangkok residents want to pay respect to PM Thaksin most during Songkran festival

BANGKOK, April 11 (TNA) -

People living in this Thai capital say they want to pay respect to caretaker Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra most during the ongoing Songkran festival, the traditional Thai New Year, by pouring perfumed water on his palms, according to a recent poll.

The ABAC Poll of Assumption University, conducted from April 8-10, found that the caretaker premier is still the most popular politician, with 52.9 per cent of respondents saying they want to pour perfumed water on Mr. Thaksin's hands and being blessed in return.

Former prime minister Chuan Leekpai of the former opposition Democrat Party and incumbent Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva came second and third, or 13.2 per cent and 12.8 per cent respectively.

Bangkok Governor Apirak Kosayodhin, also a Democrat, and former prime minister Banharn Silpa-archa of the Chart Thai Party came the fourth and fifth, or 9.2 per cent and 5 per cent respectively.

ABAC pollsters interviewed 1,540 people in the capital and surrounding provinces, aged 18 years upward, on the random basis.

Among male artists, Thongchai McIntai, one of Thailand's most popular singer known widely among youngsters as "Pee Bird"--his nickname, wins the hearts of most respondents who want to pour water on his palms (13.8 per cent), followed by Saksit Tangthong (12.6 per cent) and Jesadaporn Phondee (9.7 per cent).

The most popular female artist whom the capital residents want to pour water on her palm is Suwanan Kongying (27.9 per cent), followed by Woranuj Wongsawan (26 per cent) and Patcharapha Chaichua (22.8 per cent).

The majority of the respondents, or 74.8 per cent, spoke of the significance of the Songkran festival, saying they would definitely observe the traditonal Thai New Year.

The survey also found that Chiang Mai and Chonburi, Thailand's famous northern and eastern resort provinces, are top destinations for Songkran revellers from Bangkok this year,

Most of the respondents, or 30.3 per cent, plan to celebrate the traditional Thai New Year in Chiang Mai, followed by Chonburi (23.1 per cent).

Some other respondents, or 17.6 per cent, said they would celebrate the Songkran festival in the eastern Rayong Province, while 16.9 per cent would enjoy the festival in the capital and 15.3 per cent in the kingdom's old capital of Ayutthaya.

The respondents said they would spend on food and beverage most during the Songkran festival (33.6 per cent), followed by transport costs (24.9 per cent), merit makings (15.9 per cent), souvenirs for relatives (12.2 per cent) and accommodation (8 per cent).

(TNA)--E002

[jdinasia]

That's funny!!!

Could read .... of the 50% that want to throw water at the former caretaker PM ... 70% would aim for his face ....

oh and 30% of the Capital city residents are going to Chiang Mai this week .... more than tripling the population of the province!

[lukamar]

oh and 30% of the Capital city residents are going to Chiang Mai this week ....

Well........... They won't have to worry about some PAD rally blocking up the streets over the holidays in Chiang Mai. It's a beautiful old city with friendly people, you should visit there sometime it would do you good to see the upcountry area. Just don't wear your yellow Pad bandanna or they may drown you in the moat or chase you out of the province.

[samran]

"They are the people who brought Thailand to a halt and have torn up democracy. People won't forget that."

This is the most absurd quote of that article, which shows the journo know nothing. The Thai electorate is renowned for forgetting things. Afterall, he was part of the failed administration which set the policies which led to the 1997 financial crisis, and yet was able to still come back and get re-elected.

Thai's forget when it comes to politics, they always do. Which is what Dear Leader is banking on.

[jdinasia]

oh and 30% of the Capital city residents are going to Chiang Mai this week ....

Well........... They won't have to worry about some PAD rally blocking up the streets over the holidays in Chiang Mai. It's a beautiful old city with friendly people, you should visit there sometime it would do you good to see the upcountry area. Just don't wear your yellow Pad bandanna or they may drown you in the moat or chase you out of the province.

That's Sad that you think Chiang Mai'ians are violent killers and so reactionary!

But I would bet that ... actually LIVING here in Thailand that I have been to CNX much more recently than you have

But this Songkran I'll be positioned with a bottle of beer and my super-soaker in Kanchanaburi. (After having gone to temple first!)

Edited April 12, 2006 by jdinasia

[thedude]

Thailand's top opposition party fails to win hearts despite Thaksin ouster

BANGKOK : Thailand's top opposition party scored a win by helping to oust Premier Thaksin Shinawatra, but this has done little for the fortunes of a party that lacks a vision for the kingdom's future, analysts say.

The Democrat Party boycotted the April 2 elections, a snap poll called by Thaksin in a bid to end weeks of street rallies demanding his resignation over alleged abuse of power and corruption and to gain a new mandate.

But during the two-month deadlock, the People's Alliance for Democracy, a broad coalition of protest groups who took centre stage in the move against Thaksin, never called on Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva to replace him.

Instead, they asked revered King Bhumibol Adulyadej to appoint a new prime minister.

Analysts say the country's oldest political party, which marked its 60th anniversary last week, has failed to win the confidence of voters during the five years Thaksin has been in office.

"After five years, we still don't have a policy platform from the party. I haven't heard what they are going to do with Thailand," said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political science professor at Chulalongkorn University.

"It's very frustrating because they have no policy. The Democrat Party has failed to present themselves as a credible alternative. So far in this crisis, we have Thaksin or nothing," Thitinan said.

Thaksin said last Tuesday he would not accept the post of prime minister when parliament convenes, even though his Thai Rak Thai (Thais Love Thais) party won 56 percent of the vote in the troubled elections.

Bhokin Balakula, the speaker of the house in the outgoing parliament who is tipped as a possible successor to Thaksin, attacked the Democrat Party for giving voters no clear alternatives.

"The Democrat Party should come up with concrete policies. It would benefit the public," Bhokin said on Friday.

Ruengrawee Tichaikul, an expert on Thai politics at the Asia Foundation in Bangkok, agreed.

"I have not seen any creative, concrete proposals in terms of moving against Thaksin's party," she said.

"In the past five years, the Democrat Party did not win the hearts and minds of Thai people. The party is so slow in taking steps because they are conservative. They are fighting inside until they come to a consensus."

Ruengrawee said the party's boycott was effective in forcing Thaksin out of office but even that decision took two days to reach.

"It's so frustrating," she said. "This is very different from Thaksin's party. When Thaksin makes a decision, he can make it in five minutes."

Even with calls mounting for constitutional reform to weaken the power of the prime minister, the Democrat Party has yet to present any concrete ideas.

"The negative outcome of the boycott is that the Democrat Party was not represented in parliament, and the party will have no input in the constitutional reforms because you have to do it in parliament," Thitinan said.

The professor said the party should focus more on presenting a clear platform on the future of Thailand instead of attacking Thaksin.

"They have to stop negative talk about Thaksin because we all know what Thaksin stands for. They should stop telling us what's wrong with Thaksin. Start telling us what's right with the Democrats," Thitinan said.

"What's their policy? Where is the future of Thailand?"

During the 2005 elections which helped Thaksin's party capture 377 of 500 seats in the lower house of parliament, the Democrat Party lost one quarter of its seats, leaving it only 96.

"The Democrats were badly beaten in the election last year and they have not recovered," one Western diplomat told AFP, asking not to be named.

"They also have a money problem," the diplomat added, stressing that the party founded by the telecoms tycoon Thaksin had easily outspent the Democrats in election campaigns.

After last Sunday's polls, the Thai Rak Thai party is expected to win some 460 seats. The Election Commission has yet to release official results.

The Asia Foundation's Ruengrawee was skeptical whether the opposition party that ruled Thailand during much of the 1990s was ready for government again.

"Even after this crisis, the party did not emerge as a strong, credible party," she said. "I'm not sure if they are ready to run the country."

- AFP

[jdinasia]

Thailand's top opposition party fails to win hearts despite Thaksin ouster

BANGKOK : Thailand's top opposition party scored a win by helping to oust Premier Thaksin Shinawatra, but this has done little for the fortunes of a party that lacks a vision for the kingdom's future, analysts say.

The Democrat Party boycotted the April 2 elections, a snap poll called by Thaksin in a bid to end weeks of street rallies demanding his resignation over alleged abuse of power and corruption and to gain a new mandate.

But during the two-month deadlock, the People's Alliance for Democracy, a broad coalition of protest groups who took centre stage in the move against Thaksin, never called on Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva to replace him. [/b] oi ... who is reporting this? the PAD was not a pro-Democratic Party group

Instead, they asked revered King Bhumibol Adulyadej to appoint a new prime minister.

Analysts say the country's oldest political party, which marked its 60th anniversary last week, has failed to win the confidence of voters during the five years Thaksin has been in office.

"After five years, we still don't have a policy platform from the party. I haven't heard what they are going to do with Thailand," said Thitinan Pongsudhirak, a political science professor at Chulalongkorn University.

"It's very frustrating because they have no policy. The Democrat Party has failed to present themselves as a credible alternative. So far in this crisis, we have Thaksin or nothing," Thitinan said.

Thaksin said last Tuesday he would not accept the post of prime minister when parliament convenes, even though his Thai Rak Thai (Thais Love Thais) party won 56 percent of the vote in the troubled elections.

Bhokin Balakula, the speaker of the house in the outgoing parliament who is tipped as a possible successor to Thaksin, attacked the Democrat Party for giving voters no clear alternatives.

"The Democrat Party should come up with concrete policies. It would benefit the public," Bhokin said on Friday.

Ruengrawee Tichaikul, an expert on Thai politics at the Asia Foundation in Bangkok, agreed.

"I have not seen any creative, concrete proposals in terms of moving against Thaksin's party," she said.

"In the past five years, the Democrat Party did not win the hearts and minds of Thai people. The party is so slow in taking steps because they are conservative. They are fighting inside until they come to a consensus."

Ruengrawee said the party's boycott was effective in forcing Thaksin out of office but even that decision took two days to reach.

"It's so frustrating," she said. "This is very different from Thaksin's party. When Thaksin makes a decision, he can make it in five minutes."

Even with calls mounting for constitutional reform to weaken the power of the prime minister, the Democrat Party has yet to present any concrete ideas. The Demos are not putting forward the ideas for Constitutional reform ... that is an independant group

"The negative outcome of the boycott is that the Democrat Party was not represented in parliament, and the party will have no input in the constitutional reforms because you have to do it in parliament," Thitinan said. HUH? what Parlaiment ... did I miss something?

The professor said the party should focus more on presenting a clear platform on the future of Thailand instead of attacking Thaksin.

"They have to stop negative talk about Thaksin because we all know what Thaksin stands for. They should stop telling us what's wrong with Thaksin. Start telling us what's right with the Democrats," Thitinan said.

"What's their policy? Where is the future of Thailand?"

During the 2005 elections which helped Thaksin's party capture 377 of 500 seats in the lower house of parliament, the Democrat Party lost one quarter of its seats, leaving it only 96. Are the numbers here accurate?

"The Democrats were badly beaten in the election last year and they have not recovered," one Western diplomat told AFP, asking not to be named.

"They also have a money problem," the diplomat added, stressing that the party founded by the telecoms tycoon Thaksin had easily outspent the Democrats in election campaigns.

After last Sunday's polls, the Thai Rak Thai party is expected to win some 460 seats. The Election Commission has yet to release official results.

The Asia Foundation's Ruengrawee was skeptical whether the opposition party that ruled Thailand during much of the 1990s was ready for government again.

"Even after this crisis, the party did not emerge as a strong, credible party," she said. "I'm not sure if they are ready to run the country."

- AFPWhats is the AFP?

[britmaveric]

AFP = Agence France-Presse (French press agency)