Democrats slam door on poll

[Lite Beer]

Democrats slam door on poll
The Sunday Nation:

Democrat Party leader Abhisit Vejjajiva, seated right, announces the party

BANGKOK: -- Abhisit says election without reforms would not restore public confidence

The Democrat Party, previously the main opposition party, announced yesterday it would not be contesting the February 2 general elections, citing the need for political reform to restore public confidence in Thai politicians and political parties.

Democrat leader Abhisit Vejjajiva said the decision was reached by the party's executive committee following careful consideration, with "genuine participation" from party members. He said the party's branches all over the country were sounded out and they all agreed that the party should not field candidates in the upcoming election.

He apologised to the party supporters for this decision but he also added that he had a feeling the Democrats had a good chance of winning if it contested this election.

Abhisit said the country's politics has been a failure over the past eight to nine years because the democratic process has been distorted. This has led to distrust in political parties and elections. He said that without reform, the politics would be mired in corruption.

He also blamed the political failure on the country's lost opportunities.

Abhisit said the caretaker government, when it came to power with a strong majority, had ignored an opportunity to rectify the problems and take the country out of the political failure. Instead, the government focused on personal benefit rather than national interest. He pointed to the government's support for a blanket amnesty bill that led to widespread public outrage.

"The crisis of faith caused by the government has affected other parties in general. The Feb 2 election is unlikely to solve the problem and bring the country out of the vicious cycle," Abhisit said.

"The country has come to this point because the government betrayed the public trust," he said.

The former prime minister said that the Democrat boycott would not affect the election's legitimacy directly. It would depend on the eligible voters whether they view this election as legitimate.

He said that if up to 70 or 80 per cent of voters turn out and vote, the resultant House of Representatives and government should be considered legitimate. But if there is a large number of votes for no particular candidates, that would point to lack of legitimacy.

Abhisit said an election that would be an answer to the country must be free and fair, as well as acceptable to the people. He did not think the February 2 election would have these qualities. He accused the ruling politicians of intimidating their political rivals.

Party seniors and key figures, including former leader and ex-prime minister Chuan Leekpai were also present at the press conference held at the Democrat headquarters yesterday evening.

Democrat Nipit Intrasombat said 95 per cent of party members were opposed to contesting the election. The party will reform along with the people. Nipit, however, added that Democrats would not accept the 100-member People's Council handpicked by the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC). Pheu Thai leader Jarupong Ruangsuwan yesterday said the ruling party supported the February 2 election and would also push for national reform.

Meanwhile, the Election Commission yesterday expressed concern that protesters from the anti-government PDRC might attempt to disrupt the election candidacy registration starting tomorrow.

EC member Somchai Srisuthiyakorn said the five election commissioners would call an urgent meeting if such an incident takes place.

Issara Somchai, a PDRC leader, told the demonstrators on stage yesterday that protesters might march to the Thai-Japanese Sports Stadium, the registration venue. He said the protesters won't be preventing candidates from registering their candidacy but merely want to apply pressure and "look at the faces" of the candidates.

Five major stages are to be set up today, including 10 minor demonstration points. All points will install LCD monitors to broadcast the address at 6pm by Suthep Thaugsuban, the PDRC secretary-general.

The five major stages will be at Democracy Monument, the Pathumwan intersection, the Ratchaprasong intersection, the Silom and Asoke intersections. The 10 minor protest spots include the Pratunam area, the Hua Lamphong intersection, the Phloenchit intersection, Thong Lor, Rajthevi. Protesters from upcountry have also begun to arrive and appeared to be prepared to stay for at least a few nights. A group of women protesters also planned to go to the house of caretaker Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra.

The EC, meanwhile, said it is 90 per cent ready to conduct the election and has chosen 10 secret spots as alternatives in case of some violence. EC secretary-general Puchong Nutrawong said additional police officers will be guarding the premises tomorrow but all things will proceed to enable candidates to register themselves. He said 45 parties had informally expressed their intention to field candidates for the snap election.

The district-based candidacy registration period is from December 23 to 27 while party-list candidacy registration period is from December 28 to January 1, 2014.

Puchong said although the five election commissioners are new, they're ready to hold the election and he expects the snap election to interest the public, who are now alert about the political situation.

Asked if a boycott by the opposition Democrat Party would have an impact on the election, Puchong said all political parties are equally important and even if the Democrat Party boycotted, it would not have an impact on the work of the EC. Puchong urged all sides, including the PDRC to send observers in order to reduce the level of electoral fraud. He added that vote-buying is on the decrease, however.

In a related development, the National Human Rights Commission yesterday urged police to desist from using force against the demonstrators and for both sides of the conflict to seek a peaceful resolution.

-- The Nation 2013-12-22

[Nibbles48]

They can have their tainted one sided election.

It won't change the feeling on the streets and will almost certainly make it worse.

Dems may well have sacrificed their best chance of winning, especially with the definite votes lost from red shirts who seem to be turning, especially the ones in the swing areas, thanks to the ludicrous amnesty bill. We even have the rice growers association protesting today. Add to that the fact YL only got 49% of a popularity poll that was conducted in their most dominant provinces (isaan).

So I doubt PTP would have walked this one.

I admire the Dems for their sacrifice, it must not have been an easy decision. But they are all about reform before elections as are the majority of the population. Anyone NOT for this, you really have to question their motives.

[Briggsy]

I would like to hear people's views on Abhisit's quote, "the democratic process has been distorted."

What does that mean to people?

[chainarong]

One could hardly find any common ground with either major party to restore public confidence , Thailand has now become a basket case political, the Democrats have done a disservice to the good People of Thailand , whatever happens from now on the people will have to sort out themselves ,just who runs the country while this reform process takes centre stage is anybody's guess, the democrats have shown poor judgement , regardless of the hype, the ball is now in their court , Thailand's future is in limbo.

[Chupup]

Looking at this from another side, who the fk in thei right minds would want to govern now, the country is in deep sht thanks to the last goverment and will take ages to get back on track, with this move i see big problems for the future.

[geriatrickid]

They can have their tainted one sided election.

It won't change the feeling on the streets and will almost certainly make it worse.

Dems may well have sacrificed their best chance of winning, especially with the definite votes lost from red shirts who seem to be turning, especially the ones in the swing areas, thanks to the ludicrous amnesty bill. We even have the rice growers association protesting today. Add to that the fact YL only got 49% of a popularity poll that was conducted in their most dominant provinces (isaan).

So I doubt PTP would have walked this one.

I admire the Dems for their sacrifice, it must not have been an easy decision. But they are all about reform before elections as are the majority of the population. Anyone NOT for this, you really have to question their motives.

Sacrifice? hardly. The democrats gambled when they backed an attempt to bring down the democratically elected government of Thailand and did not achieve the desired result. Now, they see that the strategy has faltered and would most likely result in another punishing defeat. The Democrats don't have to run. it's their right in a democracy. however, they lose the right to complain if they sit on the sidelines whinging and complaining. The democrats bungled and the country pays the price.

[Thailand]

Restoring peoples confidence in politicians by all resigning their elected posts and then refusing to take part in an election they wanted?

Am I missing something?

[boomerangutang]

I would like to hear people's views on Abhisit's quote, "the democratic process has been distorted."

What does that mean to people?

I can't speak for Mr. Abhisit, but would venture to say, the democratic process has been distorted mainly due to vote-buying. Both sides do it, but the Shinawatre bloc do it more effectively and pervasively than the Dems. There is also the lack of real debate during election campaigns (pols too afraid of defamation suits), plus there's bloc thinking. I found it interesting that there was an admission some % of the Dem leaders didn't agree with boycotting the election. In PT, that would be impossible, because all members are absolutely required to think like Thaksin. That's their motto. So any policy by PT will always be unanimously agreed upon by them. Here are some other 100% agreeable political parties: China's politburo, Iraq under Saddam Hussein, and N.Korea's assemblies. Get the picture? Edited December 22, 2013 by boomerangutang

[harrry]

They can have their tainted one sided election.

It won't change the feeling on the streets and will almost certainly make it worse.

Dems may well have sacrificed their best chance of winning, especially with the definite votes lost from red shirts who seem to be turning, especially the ones in the swing areas, thanks to the ludicrous amnesty bill. We even have the rice growers association protesting today. Add to that the fact YL only got 49% of a popularity poll that was conducted in their most dominant provinces (isaan).

So I doubt PTP would have walked this one.

I admire the Dems for their sacrifice, it must not have been an easy decision. But they are all about reform before elections as are the majority of the population. Anyone NOT for this, you really have to question their motives.

Sacrifice? hardly. The democrats gambled when they backed an attempt to bring down the democratically elected government of Thailand and did not achieve the desired result. Now, they see that the strategy has faltered and would most likely result in another punishing defeat. The Democrats don't have to run. it's their right in a democracy. however, they lose the right to complain if they sit on the sidelines whinging and complaining. The democrats bungled and the country pays the price.

Why should they lose their right to complain. You do so and you sit on the sidelines. Everyone has a right to complain.

[FangFerang]

Black and white thinking is a fallacy.

"Instead, the government focused on personal benefit rather than national interest." This pretty much sums up every Thai administration since 1973...

Old Blue Eyes Frank Sinatra could have sang "1973, it was a very bad year...it was a very bad year no one could forget and we all should regret....

Resume rants.

Edited December 22, 2013 by FangFerang

[FangFerang]

I am very ambivalent about all this.

Even in my own country, conservatives like the democrats here in Thailand seek stability and fiscal responsibility -- which are very, very important issues. I also support democracy and voter rights and having mechanisms in place to help the poor.

It seems to me that both sides have very valid points. And they are both lying.

Minority stakeholdders, like the democrats here, need a say in policy everywhere on earth.

But there is no mechanism either side will support in Thailand because that means when the pendulum swings and the democrats regain power, they will also have to negotiate policy. Allow me to elucidate.

"(Kuhn Abhisit said) that if up to 70 or 80 per cent of voters turn out and vote, the resultant House of Representatives and government should be considered legitimate. But if there is a large number of votes for no particular candidates, that would point to lack of legitimacy."

The voter turnout in 2011 was only 75.01%. If only half of the democrat voters boycott the election, turnout will be about 45%. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy. And circular reasoning, ergo : "If I do not play, the game is rigged. I am not going to play; therefore, the game is rigged."

Kuhn Yingluck is saying there will be 'reforms' after her party retains power in February. That is like saying, "I know we will win the game, so the game must go on." Really?

It seems to me that both sides have very valid points. And they are also both lying.

Edited December 22, 2013 by FangFerang

[LomSak27]

"Abhisit says election without reforms would not restore public confidence"

I.E. We will lose the election so NO!

[spare5]

"Abhisit said an election that would be an answer to the country must be free and fair, "

I suspect the current rules that govern the election must be written by Thaksin, hence it is unfair and Thaksin keeps winning.

The Thai election rules must be change, to allow the minority to win sometimes, just like USA & UK.

Just a trivial question: If the poor and uneducated cannot even look after themselves, come could be truth them to look after the welfare of the country.

[mjef]

They had a good chance of winning. But this time they're not gonna risk! When you can get to power without any elections why bother! Let's call it national reform in the name of people!!!

[metisdead]

Just a reminder that posts using derogatory nicknames or intentional misspelling of people’s names will be removed. If you don’t want your post to be removed, spell people’s names correctly.

[binjalin]

I would like to hear people's views on Abhisit's quote, "the democratic process has been distorted."

What does that mean to people?

well it clearly means "we will lose - so we won't take part - so there!" and that's all it means as if they thought they could/would win their constant whining would miraculously cease

[whybother]

I would like to hear people's views on Abhisit's quote, "the democratic process has been distorted."

What does that mean to people?

well it clearly means "we will lose - so we won't take part - so there!" and that's all it means as if they thought they could/would win their constant whining would miraculously cease

Yet, they took part in the 2007 and 2011 elections when they didn't have much chance. Try again.

[mikemac]

Sacrifice? hardly. The democrats gambled when they backed an attempt to bring down the democratically elected government of Thailand and did not achieve the desired result. Now, they see that the strategy has faltered and would most likely result in another punishing defeat. The Democrats don't have to run. it's their right in a democracy. however, they lose the right to complain if they sit on the sidelines whinging and complaining. The democrats bungled and the country pays the price.

Ahh, there's that word again............."democratically".

Amazing how a word can be misused by so many and so often. A bit like the term "self exile".

[fab4]

Sacrifice? hardly. The democrats gambled when they backed an attempt to bring down the democratically elected government of Thailand and did not achieve the desired result. Now, they see that the strategy has faltered and would most likely result in another punishing defeat. The Democrats don't have to run. it's their right in a democracy. however, they lose the right to complain if they sit on the sidelines whinging and complaining. The democrats bungled and the country pays the price.

Ahh, there's that word again............."democratically".

Amazing how a word can be misused by so many and so often. A bit like the term "self exile".

Or "Democrat Party"

[kingstonkid]

OK So both parties want reform. Both parties think that things should change. Both parties want them to change. both parties say they speak for the people.

Then it should be reasonable to say that both parties should be able to sit down and sort out some reasonable grounds of discussion.

AGAIN the solution is simple. BUT will never be done. Take 5 people picked by the PTP 5 from the DEMS and 5 from the PDRC. take them to a military location where o one knows they are there. bar all communication with the outside press and media. Have the military on behalf of the people provide everything that is needed and moderate the discussions with a constitutional court judge.

Come up with different reform ideas that can be presented as a joint paper with no one saying this is our idea or they did not like this or that by all sides to the people.

Have all parties come back to the government adn vote on them and pass them unanimously. Put them in action and then hold an election.

Simple sort of Will it happen not a chance too many egos and greedy palms

[tx22cb]

"Abhisit said an election that would be an answer to the country must be free and fair, "

I suspect the current rules that govern the election must be written by Thaksin, hence it is unfair and Thaksin keeps winning.

The Thai election rules must be change, to allow the minority to win sometimes, just like USA & UK.

Just a trivial question: If the poor and uneducated cannot even look after themselves, come could be truth them to look after the welfare of the country.

I'm a bit of a novice, so pardon this question.

"The Thai election rules must be change, to allow the minority to win sometimes, just like USA & UK." I don't follow what you are trying to say.

To help me understand, can you elaborate, or at least give some examples of when such events happened in the US or UK?

Ta.

[ratcatcher]

Sacrifice? hardly. The democrats gambled when they backed an attempt to bring down the democratically elected government of Thailand and did not achieve the desired result. Now, they see that the strategy has faltered and would most likely result in another punishing defeat. The Democrats don't have to run. it's their right in a democracy. however, they lose the right to complain if they sit on the sidelines whinging and complaining. The democrats bungled and the country pays the price.

Ahh, there's that word again............."democratically".

Amazing how a word can be misused by so many and so often. A bit like the term "self exile".

Or "Democrat Party"

Or Puea Thaksin Party?

[fab4]

Sacrifice? hardly. The democrats gambled when they backed an attempt to bring down the democratically elected government of Thailand and did not achieve the desired result. Now, they see that the strategy has faltered and would most likely result in another punishing defeat. The Democrats don't have to run. it's their right in a democracy. however, they lose the right to complain if they sit on the sidelines whinging and complaining. The democrats bungled and the country pays the price.

Ahh, there's that word again............."democratically".

Amazing how a word can be misused by so many and so often. A bit like the term "self exile".

Or "Democrat Party"

Or Puea Thaksin Party?

But there's no such political party as the Puea Thaksin Party so your post is nonsense.

[tomacht8]

The people are fed up fully by all corrupt parties only to thinking itself and divide the country.

The people want a change – Now - and are constantly annoyed to see the same predisposed faces.

May that is the Thai way to postpone the elections.

- Parliament is dissolved

- One of the two major parties declared they will not participate in the elections.

- At the last moment the other major party will be relegate with their 312 candidates from the election.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/688132-nacc-meets-to-decide-fate-of-312-lawmakers-december-13/

[toybits]

Is the Democrat Party boycotting the Feb 02, 2014 election to avoid being proven wrong if they do not perform well?

If Suthep and the Democrat Party are so sure of their position - why hesitate to let the people speak?

If they do not - the that is a sure sign of the Tyranny of the Minority!

[ratcatcher]

Or Puea Thaksin Party?

crifice? hardly. The democrats gambled when they backed an attempt to bring down the democratically elected government of Thailand and did not achieve the desired result. Now, they see that the strategy has faltered and would most likely result in another punishing defeat. The Democrats don't have to run. it's their right in a democracy. however, they lose the right to complain if they sit on the sidelines whinging and complaining. The democrats bungled and the country pays the price.

Ahh, there's that word again............."democratically".

Amazing how a word can be misused by so many and so often. A bit like the term "self exile".

Or "Democrat Party"

But there's no such political party as the Puea Thaksin Party so your post is nonsense.

Indeed it is fabby, rather like some of yours.

But the Puea Thai Party is supposed to be For Thai Party and is not, it is for Thaksin as most p[eople will admit.

[jpeg]

Sacrifice? hardly. The democrats gambled when they backed an attempt to bring down the democratically elected government of Thailand and did not achieve the desired result. Now, they see that the strategy has faltered and would most likely result in another punishing defeat. The Democrats don't have to run. it's their right in a democracy. however, they lose the right to complain if they sit on the sidelines whinging and complaining. The democrats bungled and the country pays the price.

Ahh, there's that word again............."democratically".

Amazing how a word can be misused by so many and so often. A bit like the term "self exile".

Or "Democrat Party"

Or, "For Thais". Only themselves.

[catmac]

So there we have it in a nutshell - 2006 all over again. Suthep organises the mayhem on the streets, the Dems refuse to join in the election that they were calling for, and they can then rely on their fellows in either the Army or the Courts to pave the way for an unelected Dem Government yet again.

Abhisit's comment "that he had a feeling the Democrats had a good chance of winning if it contested this election" is such obvious bs - no political party would boycott an election that they genuinly thought they were going to win.

[tx22cb]

I would like to hear people's views on Abhisit's quote, "the democratic process has been distorted."

What does that mean to people?

well it clearly means "we will lose - so we won't take part - so there!" and that's all it means as if they thought they could/would win their constant whining would miraculously cease

Yet, they took part in the 2007 and 2011 elections when they didn't have much chance. Try again.

I suspect Abhisit is sh*t scared of his former subordinate, Mr Suthep. This is the only difference between 2014 and 2011.

Abhisit saw what happened to Korn when Korn criticised Suthep .... Korn got a humiliating public dressing down from Suthep from the stage (televised live), and a few weeks later Korn had to step down from his Deputy Leader position with the Dems.

Pity - I liked Korn.

[Asiantravel]

Is the Democrat Party boycotting the Feb 02, 2014 election to avoid being proven wrong if they do not perform well?

If Suthep and the Democrat Party are so sure of their position - why hesitate to let the people speak?

If they do not - the that is a sure sign of the Tyranny of the Minority!

Whoever wins the election on 2 February would have won again as a result of being voted in by the majority which is surely the way normal democracies are meant to run?

At least the Prime Minister had the guts to call an election quickly (unlike Abhisit who when he was PM used every excuse under the sun as to why an election should not be held ).

Some one has to govern the country while reforms of being debated. Who are the Democrats proposing should do undertake this role? If the Democrats were trusted with this they might do the same again as they did last time i.e. looks at every excuse possible why now " wasn't the right time to hold an election " and stretch out the reform process for years.