What he actually said was:

"Respect my aaauuthoritaay...!

If Suthep and his loonies get their way you won't have a vote.

In numbers: The TRT and Dems had respectively: 15,744,190 and 11,433,762 people vote for them. A difference in % of the population of resp. (TRT, Dems) 48.41% and 35.15%. (say 13%) This was NOT reflected in the seats in Parliament by the self dividing rule of the TRT who changed the constituencies. (TRT/ Dems) 265 seats against 159 seats or in seats 106 (!!). If this had been in the range of anything like 225 to 196 this would have been a fair and acceptable result. (the difference being about 13%) or in seats 29. Read that again: The difference in what would have been an acceptable and fair divide in seats was 29 but it became 106 !!! This would have allowed (just an example) the Democrats to team up with some other parties and still form a Government. Besides in the opposition it would have given them lots more control. Any more questions??

If Suthep and his loonies get their way you won't have a vote.

In numbers: The TRT and Dems had respectively: 15,744,190 and 11,433,762 people vote for them. A difference in % of the population of resp. (TRT, Dems) 48.41% and 35.15%. (say 13%) This was NOT reflected in the seats in Parliament by the self dividing rule of the TRT who changed the constituencies. (TRT/ Dems) 265 seats against 159 seats or in seats 106 (!!). If this had been in the range of anything like 225 to 196 this would have been a fair and acceptable result. (the difference being about 13%) or in seats 29. Read that again: The difference in what would have been an acceptable and fair divide in seats was 29 but it became 106 !!! This would have allowed (just an example) the Democrats to team up with some other parties and still form a Government. Besides in the opposition it would have given them lots more control. Any more questions??

Is there any reason why you are repeating this same post hijacking topics around? Even when your comment is not related to the post you are replying?

I understand your point of view, besides that electoral law was not changed by the democrats. If it was so unfair, why they did not make an electoral reform during their government?

Anyway... I expressed my

Posts with messed up quotes have been removed.

If Suthep and his loonies get their way you won't have a vote.

In numbers: The TRT and Dems had respectively: 15,744,190 and 11,433,762 people vote for them. A difference in % of the population of resp. (TRT, Dems) 48.41% and 35.15%. (say 13%) This was NOT reflected in the seats in Parliament by the self dividing rule of the TRT who changed the constituencies. (TRT/ Dems) 265 seats against 159 seats or in seats 106 (!!). If this had been in the range of anything like 225 to 196 this would have been a fair and acceptable result. (the difference being about 13%) or in seats 29. Read that again: The difference in what would have been an acceptable and fair divide in seats was 29 but it became 106 !!! This would have allowed (just an example) the Democrats to team up with some other parties and still form a Government. Besides in the opposition it would have given them lots more control. Any more questions??

Is there any reason why you are repeating this same post hijacking topics around? Even when your comment is not related to the post you are replying?

I understand your point of view, besides that electoral law was not changed by the democrats. If it was so unfair, why they did not make an electoral reform during their government?

Anyway... I expressed my

Actually TRT didn't change anything. They were elected according to the rules set out in the 1997 Constitution. However the electoral laws have been modified twice twice since TRT, once by the junta and once by the Democrats. So Rebelplatoon isn't even correct yet still keeps posting the same thing in nearly every thread. lol.

If Suthep and his loonies get their way you won't have a vote.

In numbers: The TRT and Dems had respectively: 15,744,190 and 11,433,762 people vote for them. A difference in % of the population of resp. (TRT, Dems) 48.41% and 35.15%. (say 13%) This was NOT reflected in the seats in Parliament by the self dividing rule of the TRT who changed the constituencies. (TRT/ Dems) 265 seats against 159 seats or in seats 106 (!!). If this had been in the range of anything like 225 to 196 this would have been a fair and acceptable result. (the difference being about 13%) or in seats 29. Read that again: The difference in what would have been an acceptable and fair divide in seats was 29 but it became 106 !!! This would have allowed (just an example) the Democrats to team up with some other parties and still form a Government. Besides in the opposition it would have given them lots more control. Any more questions??

I didn't ask a question and don't understand your reply.

well done Mr. Unknown....That is the point. Hopefully Mr. A and his brainless Suthep will respect everbody's vote and will respect even Yingluck will win again. That's how democracy works!

If Suthep and his loonies get their way you won't have a vote.

In numbers: The TRT and Dems had respectively: 15,744,190 and 11,433,762 people vote for them. A difference in % of the population of resp. (TRT, Dems) 48.41% and 35.15%. (say 13%) This was NOT reflected in the seats in Parliament by the self dividing rule of the TRT who changed the constituencies. (TRT/ Dems) 265 seats against 159 seats or in seats 106 (!!). If this had been in the range of anything like 225 to 196 this would have been a fair and acceptable result. (the difference being about 13%) or in seats 29. Read that again: The difference in what would have been an acceptable and fair divide in seats was 29 but it became 106 !!! This would have allowed (just an example) the Democrats to team up with some other parties and still form a Government. Besides in the opposition it would have given them lots more control. Any more questions??

I didn't ask a question and don't understand your reply.

To be honest, Khun Chooka, I think the majority of protesters don't want quite the proposals that Suthep & his loonies want. The same could be said of the PAD/NPP followers in the past and certain UDD-aligned events like Seh Daeng's "we want a battle". Most PAD followers didn't want to eradicate voting rights, most Red Shirts didn't want to trade bullets with the army.

Personally I think they have chosen such a partizan route to give balance to the partizan route offered by many voices within the government camp. I suppose this is another example of "Thainess"... it's about bargaining postures. That's why Thai market/street vendors often give an unrealistic price when you ask "how much" - the final agreed price is a middle ground that leaves both parties relatively happy. Of course however, if the buyer agrees to the unrealistic price...!

In my opinion, this bargaining stance is also why the UDD leaders were told by SMS to retract their agreement to Abhisit's proposals in the TV debate in April 2010. It wasn't just about peace or democracy at that stage, there were other things that had to be negotiated (and that's why Veera Musikapong got so miffed).

I would have answered, "Sir, I'll respect your vote when your elected representatives respect the Constitution, the Constiturional Court, the NACC, the EC and other checks and balances underpinning a functioning demoncracy."

I would have answered, "Sir, I'll respect your vote when your elected representatives respect the Constitution, the Constiturional Court, the NACC, the EC and other checks and balances underpinning a functioning demoncracy."

'demon-cracy'

spot on!!!

I would have answered, "Sir, I'll respect your vote when your elected representatives respect the Constitution, the Constiturional Court, the NACC, the EC and other checks and balances underpinning a functioning demoncracy."

... Says someone who support the unconstitutional overthrowing of an elected government, support an unelected "council", supports the unconstitutional delay of elections, ...

Ah ah ah

Sent from my HTC One using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

I would have answered, "Sir, I'll respect your vote when your elected representatives respect the Constitution, the Constiturional Court, the NACC, the EC and other checks and balances underpinning a functioning demoncracy."

The elected officials are the only group that has respected the constitution. They have followed the procedures exactly. It is the Constitutional Court that trampled on the constitution and ruled on something it had no authority to rule on. Once you read the constitution, it becomes very clear.

For some reason, most think that the name Constitutional Court implies power over every thing related to the constitution, but this is not the case. Their jurisdiction stops at charter amendments (constitutional amendments).

We can try again..?