Oust me by voting, Yingluck urges opponents

[virtualtraveller]

She is absolutely correct: If you want to bring down the Shins and the PT government, vote them out. All but 28 seats will be up for grabs on Feb 2nd. Get off the streets, give Bangkok residents their streets back and go back to democtratic campaigning.

Erm Pedr, there's a little question of the missing 200 billion baht unaccounted for from the rice scheme. Even if 30% of that was skimmed off to dish out in the right places, I know where my 'money' would be at the bookies office.

And the way the rice scheme is going, if there was less 'money' involved and more 'common sense', sure we could vote the Shinawatras out!

[JRSoul]

So reforms are needed before an election can come about again.

I hate to break it to you, but Thailand is a democracy, and the Thai people do not want your reforms. If you don't like it, maybe you can go and live in China or North Korea.

I hate to break it to you, but Thailand's democracy is rather flawed, that is why Thai people are asking for reforms. And China or N.Korea would be much more suitable for those who like autocratic government led by unelected criminals growing obscenely wealthy while others live in hovels.

Now you can tell me that Thailand's democracy is perfect, that there is nothing wrong with a criminal being given access to cabinet meetings, and that lies from ministers are normal policy.

[h90]

She is absolutely correct: If you want to bring down the Shins and the PT government, vote them out. All but 28 seats will be up for grabs on Feb 2nd. Get off the streets, give Bangkok residents their streets back and go back to democtratic campaigning.

no are not because the opposition boycott the election and even if they would change their mind now, Yingluck would have to postpone the election like the EC recommends so they can register.

But she told already that she won't do that.

So NOW you can't vote her out, because she and the coalition partners are the only one you can vote.

[diceq]

Democracy is not only about numbers - it is ALSO about the LAW - that is what makes Thaksin unacceptable - otherwise its 2 wolves and a sheep arguing about what to eat for dinner!!

de·moc·ra·cy

diˈmäkrəsē/

noun

1. 1.

   a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

Dictionaries are good. You should learn how to use them.

[Timwin]

Now you can tell me that Thailand's democracy is perfect, that there is nothing wrong with a criminal being given access to cabinet meetings, and that lies from ministers are normal policy.

You mean like this?

"Wikileaks diplomatic cables from the US embassy revealed that many members of his own party have long complained of his corrupt and unethical behavior...After several Criminal court ruling that deaths and injuries sustained by red-shirt protesters during the political unrest in April and May 2010 are the direct result of order to soldier given by Suthep Thaugsuban, the director of the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES), the Department of Special Investigation, public prosecutors and police agreed to file murder charges against him" - wiki

[h90]

If PT win (which of course they will) then they should be the ones running the country, no question. The problem that's happened, the Government abused its position in a huge way. So reforms are needed before an election can come about again.

What exactly are those reforms needed? Compared to decades old nepotism under the yellow rule for the Bangkok elite, the reds have not abused their position anywhere near of their level! The same group of Bangkok elite families are still running the show more or less.

They only bitch about not being the top dog anymore and about the rural Thais having actually power to oppose them! It is so outrageous...!

Please let me know when the Yellows did rule for decades? I need to go back till 1986 to see anything that could be remotely yellow.....

Thaksin

Banharn

Chavalit

?????

[mamypoko]

If PT win (which of course they will) then they should be the ones running the country, no question. The problem that's happened, the Government abused its position in a huge way. So reforms are needed before an election can come about again. And who's to say they won't try to sneak in the thing that caused all of this (the Amnesty Bill) again. That's what most folks fear, even the ones who hate the protests.

The problem is, who heads the Reforms, PT are obviously not going to agree to something that will put them in a bad light or stop with their agenda. And this is the situation we find ourselves in.

Suthep doesn't help matters with his stupid People's Council idea, demanding that all Shinawatras go (yes they should go so we could be rid of them once and for all, but it's for the people who decide, not you) and avoiding all talks.

The only solution I see which will be best is for a Military led government for a while, while both sides sort out the reforms, then call an election, but even then I cannot see the sides agreeing and will be months and months, or even years of arguing. Just do us all a favour, Thaksin, Yingluck and Suthep, give it up and bugger off all of you.

Am I following you correctly?

PT - NO

People's Council - NO

Military - NO (due to mos./years of arguing)

One further question: Franks and beans?

[MunterHunter]

So reforms are needed before an election can come about again.

I hate to break it to you, but Thailand is a democracy, and the Thai people do not want your reforms. If you don't like it, maybe you can go and live in China or North Korea.

Every Thai person i know, from many different circles, all want reforms before the election.

So sorry to call you out, diceq, but your 'the thai people do not want your reforms' is a complete and utter lie.

[rubl]

"Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra told foreign media ..."

Well, did she also explain why the protests started? Did she mention the 'blanket amnesty bill' which was good for Thaksin and therefore good for the country? Did she mention how her poor brother had to call a relative who just happens to be MoFA to get a new passport issued from flooded offices while the nation was somewhat occupied by water flowing through their living room. Did she mention the 400 billion Baht lost in rice pledging, her brother's pet scheme gone 'right'? Etc., etc.. Now did she?

Edited January 17, 2014 by rubl

[moonao]

Don't be a lying idiot. How is the Feb 2 election going to solve the political conflict? So what if you win it? People will still hate you and your brother. The only way to solve this conflict is for your government to distance itself from your idiot brother and actually try to govern this country without any interference from him. You may not be able to govern wisely because most of you are idiots but at very least, try not to come up with hare brained schemes like the rice pledging or tablets for children! alt=bah.gif pagespeed_url_hash=4274630315 width=19 height=19>

Screaming and shouting and having little hissy fits like this won't help.

Neutral observers, countries around the world, international diplomats, and more importantly, millions of Thais have all come out in support of Feb 2 elections as proposed by Yingluck.There is only a small, increasingly hysterical, and increasingly isolated minority of spoilted brat yellow shirts that disagree.

If you don't understand democracy or don't like it, perhaps you should move to a country with a more compatible political system, like Burma or North Korea.

[Hawkman]

If PT win (which of course they will) then they should be the ones running the country, no question. The problem that's happened, the Government abused its position in a huge way. So reforms are needed before an election can come about again. And who's to say they won't try to sneak in the thing that caused all of this (the Amnesty Bill) again. That's what most folks fear, even the ones who hate the protests.

The problem is, who heads the Reforms, PT are obviously not going to agree to something that will put them in a bad light or stop with their agenda. And this is the situation we find ourselves in.

Suthep doesn't help matters with his stupid People's Council idea, demanding that all Shinawatras go (yes they should go so we could be rid of them once and for all, but it's for the people who decide, not you) and avoiding all talks.

The only solution I see which will be best is for a Military led government for a while, while both sides sort out the reforms, then call an election, but even then I cannot see the sides agreeing and will be months and months, or even years of arguing. Just do us all a favour, Thaksin, Yingluck and Suthep, give it up and bugger off all of you.

Am I following you correctly?

PT - NO

People's Council - NO

Military - NO (due to mos./years of arguing)

One further question: Franks and beans?

More or less yeah. I can't see any solution that will make both sides happy. Can you? It's too deep now.

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

[MunterHunter]

If you don't understand democracy or don't like it, perhaps you should move to a country with a more compatible political system, like Burma or North Korea.

Why, is Thaksin setting up total domination of those countries too?

[mamypoko]

If PT win (which of course they will) then they should be the ones running the country, no question. The problem that's happened, the Government abused its position in a huge way. So reforms are needed before an election can come about again. And who's to say they won't try to sneak in the thing that caused all of this (the Amnesty Bill) again. That's what most folks fear, even the ones who hate the protests.

The problem is, who heads the Reforms, PT are obviously not going to agree to something that will put them in a bad light or stop with their agenda. And this is the situation we find ourselves in.

Suthep doesn't help matters with his stupid People's Council idea, demanding that all Shinawatras go (yes they should go so we could be rid of them once and for all, but it's for the people who decide, not you) and avoiding all talks.

The only solution I see which will be best is for a Military led government for a while, while both sides sort out the reforms, then call an election, but even then I cannot see the sides agreeing and will be months and months, or even years of arguing. Just do us all a favour, Thaksin, Yingluck and Suthep, give it up and bugger off all of you.

Am I following you correctly?

PT - NO

People's Council - NO

Military - NO (due to mos./years of arguing)

One further question: Franks and beans?

More or less yeah. I can't see any solution that will make both sides happy. Can you? It's too deep now.

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

100% agree with you here

[FangFerang]

I find it sadly amusing that neither side addresses the root of the other side's problems and contentions. The Dems are upset because the percentage of voters they win is not the percentage of seats they are awarded after election. In the US we call it Gerrymandering, and it is a legitimate complaint. The other side wants the poor to have a voice in governance, without a "people's council" of select individuals who eat rice from their fields and profit from the sweat of their hands without just cause.

Simple deadlock, but it is turning into game of Thai-Russian roulette.

Fools, charlatans, uncaring overseers of a plantation nation....

Thais deserve better than this.

[Timwin]

Mr. Suthep is just a sneaky old politicians, going all in to save his own sorry **s. He knows he might lose in the courts against the murder charges and what else.

If he were to succeed, guess what this so called "people's" council would do? He would get a blanket amnesty because he is such a "good" guy and those charges were to magically to disappear!

[Toby Jugg]

She is right. You know.

[JRSoul]

Democracy is not only about numbers - it is ALSO about the LAW - that is what makes Thaksin unacceptable - otherwise its 2 wolves and a sheep arguing about what to eat for dinner!!

de·moc·ra·cy

diˈmäkrəsē/

noun

1. 1.

   a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.

Dictionaries are good. You should learn how to use them.

So is Politics for Simplistic Idiots. Did you write it?

[JRSoul]

Now you can tell me that Thailand's democracy is perfect, that there is nothing wrong with a criminal being given access to cabinet meetings, and that lies from ministers are normal policy.

You mean like this?

"Wikileaks diplomatic cables from the US embassy revealed that many members of his own party have long complained of his corrupt and unethical behavior...After several Criminal court ruling that deaths and injuries sustained by red-shirt protesters during the political unrest in April and May 2010 are the direct result of order to soldier given by Suthep Thaugsuban, the director of the Resolution of the Emergency Situation (CRES), the Department of Special Investigation, public prosecutors and police agreed to file murder charges against him" - wiki

OK Timmy, other people lie as well. Like to have a go at criminals being given access to cabinet meetings (and at the same time making outstanding wealth gains)?

BTW I told my g/f of 8+ years that you in your opinion I regard her as sub-human. She said I treat her better than the dog, so she'll stay anyway. My teenage step-daughters thought it was very funny.

[Crushdepth]

This whole farce is predicated upon a legitimate government asking for their being voted for in an 'election'. Those posters crying for a Western style democracy should ask themselves how they would respond to their home countries being run by proxy from a criminal fugitive, such proxy now being investigated for the sequestration of billions of dollars from state coffers, and no wait, , asking for a further feed at the trough!

++++1

Also worth noting that Thai law does not permit anyone with a criminal conviction to stand for political office. Many people find it unacceptable that the government is run by a criminal fugitive, via his family members.

If the Shin clan had played with a straight bat there never would have been a protest.

[diceq]

Every Thai person i know, from many different circles, all want reforms before the election.

So sorry to call you out, diceq, but your 'the thai people do not want your reforms' is a complete and utter lie.

I was referring to the majority of the people when I said that "the Thai people" do not want your reforms. If the majority of the people do not want it, the minority have to respect it. That's how a democracy works. But maybe you missed that class in elementary school.

[rubl]

Did Ms. Yingluck also mention her famous 'Mongolia' speech? The one about democracy having come to Thailand and how awfull her brother was treated?

[FangFerang]

More non-news from both sides. What rubbish.

[steveromagnino]

If PT win (which of course they will) then they should be the ones running the country, no question. The problem that's happened, the Government abused its position in a huge way. So reforms are needed before an election can come about again.

What exactly are those reforms needed?

At a minimum, off the top of my head, there are a wide number of measures in which Thailand is failing, and the only way they will be addressed is with reform, whether before or after an election, first there must be agreement that, for instance, reform is needed on the following:

- freedom of the press and freedom to communicate ideas without political interference (impossible currently and really difficult since 2007)

- proper oversight of budget and spending - it is Thai people who pay the costs of the government budget, it is not politicians' money to spend as they wish without oversight as is being proposed and has occurred with multiple examples (flood management, rail system, rice scheme)

- separation and respect for separation of powers especially judiciary and legislative branches

- ability of candidates to canvas for support or present their ideas in a fair and neutral environment (impossible with red shirt villages for instance) during an election (note some candidates were not even able to register, and different parties were treated differently)

- severe and genuine punishment for lies and misrepresentation by parties or individuals with no exceptions

- severe punishment for vote buying or electoral fraud

- respect for the constitution - it is INSANITY to allow a convicted fugitive who refuses to return to Thailand to be allowed by the foreign minister to wander around the world freely while the government campaigns foreign governments for him to be able to do so, when the letter of the law states their job is return him to face justice. It is INSANITY to allow said individual to be allowed to effectively run the government - I don't care if you were elected, that's not a blank cheque to do what you want

- reduction in corruption with increase in oversight by the public and watch dogs

- increase in penalties for corruption and inciting unrest outside of what is allowed in the constitution, with genuine attempts to punish leaders who encourage others to break the law (this is one reason why the entire amnesty idea was frigging dumb from the beginning)

- a more evolved political system which reduces the power of the regional godfathers who control the rural vote for the most part (admittedly slowly decreasing) and are in turn controlled by the fugitive from Dubai on one side of the house, and by some very unsavoury individuals in the opposition on the other - this one is very tough but vital to handling some of the corruption related issues - some of the items above are required to ensure that the political system evolves

- a meritocracy in the civil service with major rewards to stamp out corruption and major punishments for condoning it - the fear of the fugitive in Dubai and his methods is why so many civil servants will not admit publically to the corruption they will privately tell some very shocking stories about that we all know (we can read Thaksin former ally turned enemy turned ally Sanoh for a typical example)

- a bigger picture issue: equality. It is indeed true that rich people are treated differently than poor in Thailand, especially people of influence. That the Deputy PM's son could get away with murder, or a rich kid can drive into a cop, or a bunch of rich politicians can defraud the country of billions...and yet a poor person can go to jail on trumped up charges. Or that certain rich people get the government to work for them to lie, create FTAs or policy to tilt the playing field in their favour - this is a longterm issue that can only be resolved with respect for the law starting from the top and working down - do we see politicians respecting the law? that's as funny as anything Steve Colbert can come out with.

Now one might say......none of the above matter. Some would say if I am PM, if I have a majority in parliament then I can do what I want, and if I want to in fact tilt the business environment, reward my supporters however undeserved, reduce media freedom and increased control, increase corruption that enriches me, interfere with every other branch of power, reduce any oversight, ignore the constitution, eliminate any vestige of meritocracy and only reward my allies.....I can BECAUSE I WON THE ELECTION outright. So people chose me to do what I said I would, and therefore the law doesn't apply.

Ok, let's push it further. We've seen laws made for personal profit by Thaksin, 'because he was elected he could do it'. We've seen both sides select and remove people for political, not country benefit. We've seen ongoing attempts especially by TRT/PPP/PT to remove oversight even when it was set out in the consitution. We see vast amounts of government budget used for pork, personal advertising, personal travel, popularist schemes that will make the country broke....justified "because I won the election".

We've gone through this exact scenario in 2005/6. It does not end well. For anyone.

The purpose of a functioning democracy is not a popularity contest where the majority elect their party to look after their interests (or to do whatever they want). Rather it is to select the best possible people, chosen by their peers, to look after EVERYONE'S interests including the minorities who cannot vote, or cannot secure election wins.

The answer is pretty simple. There must be genuine compromise on both sides. Both sides agree on reform, a neutral viewpoint is currently a successful next election is an impossibility, it is a pointless waste of our cash with an almost guaranteed null outcome. To say that it cannot be moved is simply not true, and for Yingluck to blindly keep repeating her right as she was elected with a majority is not a compromise.

We know PT are buying up smaller parties to make up the shortfall of voter losses they think they are going to see. This buying up of factions is something that overseas media simply do not understand, and their inability to understand it is why they do not see the issues facing Thailand are not quite the same as some other countries.

The protesters rejecting every offer, however opportunistic and insincere many have been, is also not a compromise.

The real compromise starts with genuine talks, similar to what we saw with the red shirts with the PM, except of course the red shirt leader who should be on trial for treason, was not in the room and was supposedly sending SMSs to cease talks since amnesty was not on the cards.

The problem must be resolved between the leaders to create a path that all agree on, then the election becomes less important, less of a hot potato. Both sides claim a commitment to reform. Maybe both sides are insincere. But let us all hear what those reforms should be, because the current scenario similar to 2006 is not going to end well for any of us.

Reform IMHO means there must be acceptance of consequences, with action comes consequence, and the start is chronological, each and every corruption/civil unrest case should be reviewed and completed even if the defendant refuses to attend. No amnesty, no people let off the hook, no <deleted> about 'I was elected so I don't have to participate' and certainly no more rubbish about personal wars against 1 family; let them have their day in court, we all know Yingluck has little to do with government policy anyhow, she should be considered merely a secretary, not a PM. After all, that is her work history with AIS/SC Asset anyhow.

Edited January 17, 2014 by steveromagnino

[MunterHunter]

Every Thai person i know, from many different circles, all want reforms before the election.

So sorry to call you out, diceq, but your 'the thai people do not want your reforms' is a complete and utter lie.

I was referring to the majority of the people when I said that "the Thai people" do not want your reforms. If the majority of the people do not want it, the minority have to respect it. That's how a democracy works. But maybe you missed that class in elementary school.

Please provide evidence to support your claim that 'the majority of thai people do not want reforms'

As for the school comment, well learn to write properly and then people wont have to second guess you... I learnt that in school too.

Edited January 17, 2014 by MunterHunter

[Spartakos]

If PT win (which of course they will) then they should be the ones running the country, no question. The problem that's happened, the Government abused its position in a huge way. So reforms are needed before an election can come about again.

What exactly are those reforms needed? Compared to decades old nepotism under the yellow rule for the Bangkok elite, the reds have not abused their position anywhere near of their level! The same group of Bangkok elite families are still running the show more or less.

They only bitch about not being the top dog anymore and about the rural Thais having actually power to oppose them! It is so outrageous...!

Try listening less to your wife.

[oldthaihand99]

"Oust me by voting, Yingluck urges opponents"

That would be the gentlemanly way.

Rather than the more painful "seizing her assets" or "probing" her.

[Jeremy50]

Don't be a lying idiot. How is the Feb 2 election going to solve the political conflict? So what if you win it? People will still hate you and your brother. The only way to solve this conflict is for your government to distance itself from your idiot brother and actually try to govern this country without any interference from him. You may not be able to govern wisely because most of you are idiots but at very least, try not to come up with hare brained schemes like the rice pledging or tablets for children!

BUT, the Thai people voted for them with a big majority........Yes or No.............

Doesn't matter who governs, none of them have a clue. So where does the country go..........?

No ..........and even if they had - Thailand cannot be run for the SOLE PURPOSE of bringing back HER BROTHER!!! That is NOT Democracy - with Democracy comes the law and her last three years have BROKEN IT!!!

You are telling me the present gov didn't win by votes ?

They won by buying votes on a massive scale. Why do you guys keep forgetting that.

[pipkins]

In a nutshell - you have only but CONTEMPT for the established democratic process.

If they win with a 'big majority', so what? Will it solve the conflict and the divide in this country? Will it stop the violence? She's lying through her teeth because you're going to have all sorts of bombs going off before, during and also AFTER the elections. Saying the political conflict will be over after elections is as usual a big fat lie from her.

Democracy is not only about numbers - it is ALSO about the LAW - that is what makes Thaksin unacceptable - otherwise its 2 wolves and a sheep arguing about what to eat for dinner!!

Where this tired, jaded old argument falls well short is it is a statement that you seem to accept but only in isolation from other facts.

There is no doubt in any resonable mind, media outlet of Government agency outside of thailand that the Law in Thailand is written by, tailored to suit, policed and enfoced basically by the PDRC.Democrat backers.

Were the laws fair and seen to be judged even handedly, perhaps your small point would come into play.

Wiki and google more and see how many cases were ever brought against Dem, PAD for crimes, insurrection, land missapropriation, extra judicial killings and beating in the south.

The Law can also be an ass, corrupted and enfoced in a partisan way. Simply put, if the Law is fair and seen to be fair it should be obeyed... If not it should be repealed and fought against. Think Poll tax in England

How Sutheps educated supporters cannot entertain more than one notion at a time is beyond me... considering how intellegent they keep telling us they are.

Try expanding on your arguments... perhaps people will start to see you as a serious poster and not another un-thinking regurgitator of old cliches.

Start now by teling us that the Constitution was not written by the Army Controlled Junta... Tell us it was not illegal to campain against it. Tell us that all the opposition radio and tv stations were closed down by the army... Tell us that abhisit, even under these circumstance got more than 30.5% of the vote that year. Tell us the Army didn't strongarm the coalitinon together... State outright "I think the constitution is right and fair... because" Really, I wold be interested to know.

Then provide the facts to back up what you say. I've read most judicial reports on it, and there is nobody serious arguing against this position. So why do you expect that after all this, anybody should have knuckeled down and obeyed such an outragous assault on democracy?

Edited January 17, 2014 by pipkins

[oldthaihand99]

They won by buying votes on a massive scale. Why do you guys keep forgetting that.

Robin Hood bought votes by taking from the rich to give to the poor.

What's wrong with that. The tax money has to go somewhere, doesn't it. Free medical care is something you oppose?

Vote buying. Everyone does it. You know you want to too.

Edited January 17, 2014 by oldthaihand99

[Jasun]

Fair enough, but an olive branch or two wouldn't hurt.