Democrat Party to seek Thai court annulment of snap polls

[diehard60]

"He said the Democrat Party, though boycotting the polls, will carry on its political activity on national reform and encourage public participation."

Why would anyone follow them now as they dont want it to end untill they are in power with a dictatorship.

[Thait Spot]

In the 2011 elections where the EC declared a 'landslide' result for PTP when you actually looked at the figures, their vote count was actually only 35% of the entire nationwide electorate. They may have won on paper, but 35% hardly represents a 'mandate from the people'.

Kikoman:

The figures I have differ greatly from the one you posted (35%) is wrong, but giving you the benefit of the doubt that you may have been confused by the election percentages.

en.Wikipedia.org states the Official turnout as (75.03%) B. P. newspaper Unofficial turnout was (65.99%) printed in the newspaper as results of that election!

PTP received (48.41%) and the Democrats received (35.15%) of the total votes cast!

Cheers

My dear boy.

75% of voters turned out

48% of those voted PTP

Ergo 35% of all voters

Maths 101

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Publicus]

The emergency decree turned out to be a complete misnomer, as events on the ground have shown that the administration never used the full resources under it. There was no push from the army, because they would never have complied. The police presence, far from increasing, all but disappeared. The protesters continued to be under grenade attacks. There was no difference in police deterrence from before or after the emergency decree was imposed. The only area the administration went through with zeal was the intimidation of the media and going after businesses that supported the protest movement. Period. The emergency decree was a flop in the very areas of the country that apparently justified its presence. There were no scenes of violence concerning the polls themselves, outside of the continued armed attacks against the protesters. And in the areas where the administration was not pleased with what was happening, the emergency decree remained absolutely inert. So the emergency decree was an absolute fizzle except as an excuse to clamp down on the media - which even there had only moderate success. Article 108 will lead to the nullification of the vote. But as no one expects another poll to take place this this weekend, and as there is no reasonable expectation that the effort to open up the Southern constituencies will be any more successful than they were before, the election push has turned out to be falling of its own weight, without any other monitoring intervention. Pheu Thai needs to adopt a new strategy. And yet, they've decided to do exactly the same thing - simply order more polls. The same strategy - but expecting a different result.

Hogwash.

The SOE prevented large scale polling violence that otherwise was intended by the PCAD as had occurred as a rehearsal during early voting two Sundays ago. PCAD, which had been collapsing of its own fascist dead weight, failed miserably in trying to stop the election so it now sits isolated and busted.

The government significantly precluded such violence by implementing the SOE with superb timing, ie, the SOE was a puff of breath onto the PCAD as it teetered on the precipice of collapse and which did push PCAD over the edge of collapse as seen by its shutdown of two ghost protest sites in Bangkok and its abject failure to stop the election.

Because of the sage and effective timing in implementing the SOE, the government created the conditions for the police to strategically move further into the background, like the Cheshire Cat. The SOE has had no substantial impact on Thai media and never was intended to control media - its successful focus was instead a strategically timed shutdown of the fast fading PCAD.

The government knew it wouldn't have to use the full resources of the SOE, never intended to use them, nor did the government in fact use the full resources of the SOE. The limited SOE was intelligently initiated and successfully applied to further cool the failing insurrection thus enabling the police to reduce their already consciously restrained role and further to marginalize the Army in anything it might consider doing.

The government can now pursue further by-elections in Bangkok in an atmosphere more subdued than was the case the past Sunday. It can now work to limit further the already fizzling resistance in the South which can be expected to further dissipate by the Feb 23rd voting date.

The whole of the fascist predicate is fast falling apart and becoming ever more dissembled, and your desperate post is direct testimony of this new and obvious reality, so thank you for it.

[Piichai]

Dems forgot to add that the acting PM vote incorrectly, and it should be null, and set the election again.

Good point.

Yingluck must vote again!

[Piichai]

It would be nice to know why the Democrats think that the election should be annulled.

There may be a few reasons...

IIRC, a certain percentage of the electorate must vote for the election to be considered valid.

And then there's that bugaboo about an election being held throughout the country on the same day.

Not to mention the SOE problems...

[Piichai]

Those individuals, groups, parties who boycotted the 2 Feb 2014 election has no legal right to petition for the invalidation of election results.

Really? That's an actual law in Thailand? Or are you just making things up again?

The election was called, planned nationwide according to the 2007 constitution election law that was amended by DEM led government.

Had anyone petitioned to the court that the election was unconstitutional before the election?

Yingluck was told by so many people that holding elections now was a bad idea.

Not only did the election show exactly what people thought of her and the PTP by the poor turnout, it was a considerable waste of money when the farmers have gone without since before October!

[Publicus]

Those individuals, groups, parties who boycotted the 2 Feb 2014 election has no legal right to petition for the invalidation of election results.

Really? That's an actual law in Thailand? Or are you just making things up again?

The election was called, planned nationwide according to the 2007 constitution election law that was amended by DEM led government.

Had anyone petitioned to the court that the election was unconstitutional before the election?

Yingluck was told by so many people that holding elections now was a bad idea.

Not only did the election show exactly what people thought of her and the PTP by the poor turnout, it was a considerable waste of money when the farmers have gone without since before October!

Thai fascists failed miserably in trying to stop the election. As the fascist insurrection continues to dissemble the by elections can occur in an atmosphere of decreasing anarchy. The dynamics are that the whole of the fascist predicate is collapsing as proved by the buffoon Suthep's latest rantings and ragings that he will continue.......and continue....and continue. His fascist insurrection is collapsing and I suspect Suthep himself is verging on physical and mental collapse.

[Piichai]

1. The constitutionality of the election is not in question. CC even said the election can be postponed if EC and the Government agreed to postpone it.

2. EC can red card or yellow card a candidate based on the evidence given by involved voter/s and after investigation.

3. The DEM has no right because they boycotted the GE and should be seen as an attempt to sabotage it.

4. More than 50 political parties participated in the GE.

5. 89.2 of the constituencies participated.

Of course, the DEM who boycotted the GE can try petitioning to invalidate election results. However, it should be highlighted and question why

1. Only the DEM dominated constituencies were afected?

2. Had the DEM voiced their disapproval when registration centres and polling stations were blocked by thugs?

These are at least, circumstantial evidence that the DEM is trying to sabotage the election. If found guilty is liable of party being dissolved and its executive could also face a maximum 10 years jail sentence.

Of course, the DEM is always depending on its grandfather/father court/independence agencies for goodies. Their parents had spoiled them and they never grow up.

1. Of course it's in question. It's up to the CC to decide if they'll hear it or not. IIRC, the vote was unanimous that the vote could be delayed, and only a majority vote that the EC should discuss it with Yingluck. A little research would do you good.

2. Your problem is thinking that *only* involved voters have a say.

3. Without regard to how it might be seen (by people having a hard time seeing the truth anyway), it does indeed seem to be their right to question it.

4. So what?

5. In some of the constituencies that participated, only 20% voted. Maybe not enough for it to be considered a valid election.

1 (again?). Voter turnout in the north and northeast was very poor; IIRC 50% or so. Since when are the north and northeast considered Democrat dominated?

2 (again?) People have a right to speak or not speak as they see fit. IIRC some Democrats voted, and some did not.

[Piichai]

Those individuals, groups, parties who boycotted the 2 Feb 2014 election has no legal right to petition for the invalidation of election results.

The election was called, planned nationwide according to the 2007 constitution election law that was amended by DEM led government.

Had anyone petitioned to the court that the election was unconstitutional before the election?

Since voting is complusory, a person who fails to vote without explanation will lose his or her right to file any objection to the MP election and senatorial selection. He or she will also lose the right to apply for candidacy for national and local elections and to be nominated for the senatorial selection. At the same time, that person will not be allowed to apply for a position as a subdistrict headman and village headman. These rights will be given back to a voter when he or she votes in the next election, at whatever level. In order to exercise their voting rights, voters must bring along their citizen identification cards or other official cards with a photo and the ID number of the card holder. A person intentionally destroying a ballot paper will be subject to a jail term of up to one year or a fine of up 20,000 baht, or both. These penalties may also include a revocation of voting rights for five years, by a court’s order.

And what about if they put their votes in the wrong box?

[Piichai]

Not when the reason for not voting has been explained to the EC already

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Had they? EC accepted? AV although on personal basis, said he won't explain to EC since his reason is not listed. Arrogant behavious!

It's hard to tell if you're a troll or you really don't get it.

The EC understood already why there shouldn't be a vote. They tried to explain that to Yingluck, but (insert joke about putting ballots in wrong box here).

Some may have valid reasons, as listed by the EC, for missing the election, but AV's reason isn't on the list so he has nothing to say to the EC about it.

The election will be deemed invalid soon enough. Thus he won't have to worry.

[Publicus]

Those individuals, groups, parties who boycotted the 2 Feb 2014 election has no legal right to petition for the invalidation of election results.

The election was called, planned nationwide according to the 2007 constitution election law that was amended by DEM led government.

Had anyone petitioned to the court that the election was unconstitutional before the election?

Since voting is complusory, a person who fails to vote without explanation will lose his or her right to file any objection to the MP election and senatorial selection. He or she will also lose the right to apply for candidacy for national and local elections and to be nominated for the senatorial selection. At the same time, that person will not be allowed to apply for a position as a subdistrict headman and village headman. These rights will be given back to a voter when he or she votes in the next election, at whatever level. In order to exercise their voting rights, voters must bring along their citizen identification cards or other official cards with a photo and the ID number of the card holder. A person intentionally destroying a ballot paper will be subject to a jail term of up to one year or a fine of up 20,000 baht, or both. These penalties may also include a revocation of voting rights for five years, by a court’s order.

And what about if they put their votes in the wrong box?

They get to be prime minister again.

[Gweiloman]

Those individuals, groups, parties who boycotted the 2 Feb 2014 election has no legal right to petition for the invalidation of election results.

The election was called, planned nationwide according to the 2007 constitution election law that was amended by DEM led government.

Had anyone petitioned to the court that the election was unconstitutional before the election?

Since voting is complusory, a person who fails to vote without explanation will lose his or her right to file any objection to the MP election and senatorial selection. He or she will also lose the right to apply for candidacy for national and local elections and to be nominated for the senatorial selection. At the same time, that person will not be allowed to apply for a position as a subdistrict headman and village headman. These rights will be given back to a voter when he or she votes in the next election, at whatever level. In order to exercise their voting rights, voters must bring along their citizen identification cards or other official cards with a photo and the ID number of the card holder. A person intentionally destroying a ballot paper will be subject to a jail term of up to one year or a fine of up 20,000 baht, or both. These penalties may also include a revocation of voting rights for five years, by a court’s order.

And what about if they put their votes in the wrong box?

No problem there. It's still valid. Try to keep up.

[Piichai]

Those individuals, groups, parties who boycotted the 2 Feb 2014 election has no legal right to petition for the invalidation of election results.

Really? That's an actual law in Thailand? Or are you just making things up again?

The election was called, planned nationwide according to the 2007 constitution election law that was amended by DEM led government.

Had anyone petitioned to the court that the election was unconstitutional before the election?

Yingluck was told by so many people that holding elections now was a bad idea.

Not only did the election show exactly what people thought of her and the PTP by the poor turnout, it was a considerable waste of money when the farmers have gone without since before October!

Thai fascists failed miserably in trying to stop the election. As the fascist insurrection continues to dissemble the by elections can occur in an atmosphere of decreasing anarchy. The dynamics are that the whole of the fascist predicate is collapsing as proved by the buffoon Suthep's latest rantings and ragings that he will continue.......and continue....and continue. His fascist insurrection is collapsing and I suspect Suthep himself is verging on physical and mental collapse.

Name calling aside... I'm not so sure they failed as the election turnout in the north and northeast was pretty low.

Sounds like the farmers up their made their point. Even *they* want reforms!

[Just1Voice]

No, they want their Rice Money!

[icommunity]

Not when the reason for not voting has been explained to the EC already

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Had they? EC accepted? AV although on personal basis, said he won't explain to EC since his reason is not listed. Arrogant behavious!

It's hard to tell if you're a troll or you really don't get it.

The EC understood already why there shouldn't be a vote. They tried to explain that to Yingluck, but (insert joke about putting ballots in wrong box here).

Some may have valid reasons, as listed by the EC, for missing the election, but AV's reason isn't on the list so he has nothing to say to the EC about it.

The election will be deemed invalid soon enough. Thus he won't have to worry.

So it means AV did not have a valid reason.

[focus27]

This news snippet hasn't yet been turned into a full post:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/701591-thailand-live-monday-3-feb-2014/page-3#entry7388629

Ignore the back-slapping, face-saving camaraderie, but hasn't EC Commissioner Somchai just admitted that he screwed up?! Isn't that just the sort of admission to add fuel to those seeking to annul this election?

cynical, me?

[citizen33]

90% of the country turned up to vote. There cannot be a clearer indication that the PEOPLE disagrees with Mr. Suthep's call to boycott the election. Only think is the Mr. Suthep and the Democrats are blind to this obvious FACT.

No they didn't. PROVE IT if you think it is true, but most evidence suggests this is wildly incorrect.

This is what we know for now:

- "Thai voters cast ballots across almost 90 percent of the country yesterday" ref Business Week

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-01-31/thai-election-commission-says-blocking-of-ballots-to-hamper-vote

- this is by area (NOT total number of voters)

- " 49 million eligible voters for 375 constituencies" ref. Rueters

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/02/us-thailand-protest-factbox-idUSBREA1100X20140202

(therefore your claim of 90% would mean approximately 44m people voted - which they didn't)

- "Voting was disrupted in 18 percent or 69 of 375 constituencies nationwide, the Election Commission said, affecting 18 of 77 provinces, Reuters reported"

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2014/02/thailand-protesters-disrupt-general-election-20142263752606651.html

(disrupted means just that)

- "In southern provinces, voter turnout was estimated at 20 to 30 per cent, much lower than previous elections.Voter turnout was a little over 40 per cent in Chai Nat, less than 50 per cent in Phichit, about 50 per cent in Ayutthaya, according to local election officials."

-- The Nation 2014-02-03

Furthermore....

- EC chairman Supachai Somcharoen said about 13 million voters who could not exercise their right to vote made up about 25% of the entire electorate of almost 49 million eligible voters. (note this excludes the number who also chose NOT to vote which was at least a similar number IMHO)

- Bangkok Metropolitan Administration reported unofficial voter turnouts yesterday in Bangkok at 1.14 million people, or 26.18% of a total of 4.36 million eligible voters, compared to voter turnouts of 71.62% in the July 3, 2011 election.

- Voter turnouts nationwide even in the strongholds of Peua Thai were consistently lower than 2011, with a significant number of people electing not to vote - I heard percentages by changwat this morning being between 45 - 60% in the north and north east

- turnout in 2011 was 75% - to achieve 90% would require a major and massive publicity exercise virtually forcing people to vote....which has not happened

So rather than your claim of 90% turnout I would imagine something like 50% possibly lower is the more likely result. I think you might mean 90% of the country were able to vote in some way (already a bit optimistic), but of course, many people chose NOT to vote or participate as occurs in EVERY election.

If you add NO VOTE cast + selecting NO VOTE as a choice in the election, it would seem highly likely that PT have lost their popular mandate even running effectively unopposed (almost all the parties except Chuwit and BJT are already PT allies or so small as to be irrelevant (I do not agree with this approach to counting votes, but some will likely propose this)).

Every party 'claims' to be pro reform - the only question is the HOW and the WHO. As some Thais think that Thai politicians by and large are the most unethical scumbags in Thailand (and that's including the jetski guys in Pattaya, the touts in Patpong and the worst of the BiB and many would put Suthep Chalerm and the Shinawatras close to the top of the skim lists) some are really am unsure whether they should be the ones to lead the reform - however - that's not PT's view - their view is as the majority they should do as they wish without oversight, because the majority support them. Well, it would seem that this may no longer true.

Any view on whether the Dems should have run in the election is now irrelevant. but it would seem impossible for this result to stand - the parties didn't even have manifestos or campaign prior to the election - many MPs even felt the result would be annulled before the election went ahead - is it any wonder that despite the rhetoric, that in a time when participation should be at an all time high (even in provinces with no effect from the protesters) that this is not the case and participation is actually pretty poor?

It is a bit rich to cite low turnout as a reason to discount the election when the yellow side has done everything it can to make voting dangerous, ranging from mild intimidation to opening up on pro-voters with pistols and assault weapons in Lak Si. Indeed the BBC made much the same point this morning. It is true that the claim of 90 per cent turnout is too high a figure, but the intentional neglect of context undermines Mr Magnino's credibility.

Edited February 3, 2014 by citizen33

[Publicus]

@Piichai

Name calling aside... I'm not so sure they failed as the election turnout in the north and northeast was pretty low.

Sounds like the farmers up their made their point. Even *they* want reforms!

I see you've taken on a new presumptuous air which is to speak imposed things on the people you presume to speak for that they never said or would say. Bad form.

[NCFC]

The emergency decree turned out to be a complete misnomer, as events on the ground have shown that the administration never used the full resources under it. There was no push from the army, because they would never have complied. The police presence, far from increasing, all but disappeared. The protesters continued to be under grenade attacks. There was no difference in police deterrence from before or after the emergency decree was imposed. The only area the administration went through with zeal was the intimidation of the media and going after businesses that supported the protest movement. Period. The emergency decree was a flop in the very areas of the country that apparently justified its presence. There were no scenes of violence concerning the polls themselves, outside of the continued armed attacks against the protesters. And in the areas where the administration was not pleased with what was happening, the emergency decree remained absolutely inert. So the emergency decree was an absolute fizzle except as an excuse to clamp down on the media - which even there had only moderate success. Article 108 will lead to the nullification of the vote. But as no one expects another poll to take place this this weekend, and as there is no reasonable expectation that the effort to open up the Southern constituencies will be any more successful than they were before, the election push has turned out to be falling of its own weight, without any other monitoring intervention. Pheu Thai needs to adopt a new strategy. And yet, they've decided to do exactly the same thing - simply order more polls. The same strategy - but expecting a different result.

In every other post you claim the election will be annulled because of Article 108. Let's have a look at that:

Article 108

The King has the prerogative to dissolve the House of Representatives for new election of members of the House. Dissolution of the House of Representatives is made through a Royal Decree in which the day for new general election must be fixed within 60 days and the election date must be the same throughout the Kingdom. Dissolution of the House of Representatives may be made only once under the same circumstances.

Taken from International Constitutional Law website based on the unofficial translation of the draft constitution provided to the public by the Constitutional Court of Thailand 2012.

The point you argue is that the election must be held on the same day throughout Thailand. But that is not what the constitution says. It says the date must be the same throughout the kingdom. Which is exactly what happened when the Royal Decree announced that the date for the election was Feb 2nd.

You'll notice Article 108 makes no mention of advanced voting or absentee voting. According to your definition advanced voting would cause the election to be annulled because it did not take place on the same day.

You will also notice Article 108 makes no mention of bye-elections where a constituency does not having a candidate in place on Feb 2nd. According to your defnition because elections under these conditions did not take place at the same time as other elections then the result would be an anulled election.

Clearly, that is not the case. In fact it would be impossible to have advanced voting, general elections and bye-elections all on the same day throughout the country.

The election date was correctly set as Feb 2 throughout the whole of the country as demanded by the constitution. What follows now is a series of bye-elections and there is no breach of Article 108 as bye-elections are very common practice in Thailand after a general election.

So sorry to disappoint you, but elections will not be anulled under Article 108 in the way you suggest.

Edited February 3, 2014 by NCFC

[icommunity]

Those individuals, groups, parties who boycotted the 2 Feb 2014 election has no legal right to petition for the invalidation of election results.

Really? That's an actual law in Thailand? Or are you just making things up again?

The election was called, planned nationwide according to the 2007 constitution election law that was amended by DEM led government.

Had anyone petitioned to the court that the election was unconstitutional before the election?

Yingluck was told by so many people that holding elections now was a bad idea.

Not only did the election show exactly what people thought of her and the PTP by the poor turnout, it was a considerable waste of money when the farmers have gone without since before October!

House dissolve was demanded by AV and the DEM but when it happened, they boycotted it.

[noni99]

90% of the country turned up to vote. There cannot be a clearer indication that the PEOPLE disagrees with Mr. Suthep's call to boycott the election. Only think is the Mr. Suthep and the Democrats are blind to this obvious FACT.

I think that you are quite blind - maybe it's only red what you can see ?

90% of the country turned up to vote - what a crazy statement !

Even in the north it was just about 50% - somewhere else about 20%-30% - maybe you added them up to come to 90% ???

But nothing else is to expect from someone who supports this government - 90% hahaha

[Thaiready]

If you know you can't win by legal, democratic means, you can always try the illegal, undemocratic ways. That seems to work for the Dems pretty well at times. http://static.thaivisa.com/forum//public

style_emoticons/default/coffee1.gif

Even in the US.....I have come to the conclusion All Democrates are Socialist

[steveromagnino]

What part of that, do you not understand, "(89%) of Thai registered voters chose to vote"yesterday!

The Yellows and their backers were trying to stop the election and told all of it supporters not to vote, in contrast the Yingluck government stated that people should support the Thai Democracy and vote.

"89% of eligible voters voted in the February 2 national election, 10.9% of voters chose not to vote or were blocked from voting"

RESULTS: The Suthep, Democrat party, lost the election as (1 out of 10) voters backed the demonstrators call to boycott the election!

In sharp contrast (9 out of 10) Thai voters backed PTP position to vote.

All I have read today is the pathetic post from posters trying to "save face" as the real Thai majority, burst their bubble and voted in over whelming numbers!

I would laugh to, but I chose not to add insult to injury!

It is poor form to belittle and insult others.

I think what you mean (based on what happened, not your own opinion).....

RESULTS: The anti government protesters affected the election as (5 out of every 10) voters either were not affected by or ignored the demonstrators call to boycott the election, this represents a drop from around 7.5 out of every 10 voters in the past who turned out to vote.

Of the (5 out of 10) Thai voters who backed PTP position to vote, we do not yet know what proportion out of those 5 out of 10 voted NO or did not vote for PTP, which was the other option offered by the protesters as a form of protest vote.

As I have previously posted (not that most things are referenced):

This is what we know for now:

- "Thai voters cast ballots across almost 90 percent of the country yesterday" ref Business Week

http://www.businessw...-to-hamper-vote

- this is by area representing potential to cast a vote NOT total number of voters

- " 49 million eligible voters for 375 constituencies" ref. Rueters

http://www.reuters.c...EA1100X20140202

(therefore your claim of 90% would mean approximately 44m people voted - which they didn't - closer estimate is )

- "Voting was disrupted in 18 percent or 69 of 375 constituencies nationwide, the Election Commission said, affecting 18 of 77 provinces, Reuters reported"

http://www.aljazeera...3752606651.html

(disrupted means just that)

- "In southern provinces, voter turnout was estimated at 20 to 30 per cent, much lower than previous elections.Voter turnout was a little over 40 per cent in Chai Nat, less than 50 per cent in Phichit, about 50 per cent in Ayutthaya, according to local election officials."

-- The Nation 2014-02-03

- turnout in Chiang Rai (stronghold of PT) voter turnout around 60% less than the last election turnout of 76% (ignoring the voters who chose to vote NO VOTE)

http://www.thairath.co.th/content/region/400797

- turnout in Buriram (stronghold of BJT) voter turnout around 50%

http://www.thairath.co.th/content/pol/400775

Furthermore....

- EC chairman Supachai Somcharoen said about 13 million voters who could not exercise their right to vote made up about 25% of the entire electorate of almost 49 million eligible voters. (note this excludes the number who also chose NOT to vote which was at least a similar number IMHO)

- Bangkok Metropolitan Administration reported unofficial voter turnouts yesterday in Bangkok at 1.14 million people, or 26.18% of a total of 4.36 million eligible voters, compared to voter turnouts of 71.62% in the July 3, 2011 election.

- Voter turnouts nationwide even in the strongholds of Peua Thai were consistently lower than 2011, with a significant number of people electing not to vote - I heard percentages by changwat this morning being between 45 - 60% in the north and north east

- updated: EC Commissioner estimates turnout at around 45% I think somewhere in this thread (I have not seen this reference, but would seem to be about right)

You say 90%. Reality is around half that at 45-50%, and again, that's not counting the people who used their vote to NO VOTE.

Edited February 3, 2014 by steveromagnino

[Gweiloman]

90% of the country turned up to vote. There cannot be a clearer indication that the PEOPLE disagrees with Mr. Suthep's call to boycott the election. Only think is the Mr. Suthep and the Democrats are blind to this obvious FACT.

I think that you are quite blind - maybe it's only red what you can see ?

90% of the country turned up to vote - what a crazy statement !

Even in the north it was just about 50% - somewhere else about 20%-30% - maybe you added them up to come to 90% ???

But nothing else is to expect from someone who supports this government - 90% hahaha

Yes, I agree that toybits must have been quite blind but I don't think it was due to red. Maybe he got carried away by the other side - claiming millions upon millions have taken to the streets.

[whybother]

Those individuals, groups, parties who boycotted the 2 Feb 2014 election has no legal right to petition for the invalidation of election results.

Really? That's an actual law in Thailand? Or are you just making things up again?

The election was called, planned nationwide according to the 2007 constitution election law that was amended by DEM led government.

Had anyone petitioned to the court that the election was unconstitutional before the election?

Yingluck was told by so many people that holding elections now was a bad idea.

Not only did the election show exactly what people thought of her and the PTP by the poor turnout, it was a considerable waste of money when the farmers have gone without since before October!

House dissolve was demanded by AV and the DEM but when it happened, they boycotted it.

The protesters demanded that Yingluck resign. They didn't demand immediate elections.

[Publicus]

90% of the country turned up to vote. There cannot be a clearer indication that the PEOPLE disagrees with Mr. Suthep's call to boycott the election. Only think is the Mr. Suthep and the Democrats are blind to this obvious FACT.

I think that you are quite blind - maybe it's only red what you can see ?

90% of the country turned up to vote - what a crazy statement !

Even in the north it was just about 50% - somewhere else about 20%-30% - maybe you added them up to come to 90% ???

But nothing else is to expect from someone who supports this government - 90% hahaha

You and Suthep see red and you blindly charge it.

[Gweiloman]

This news snippet hasn't yet been turned into a full post:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/701591-thailand-live-monday-3-feb-2014/page-3#entry7388629

Ignore the back-slapping, face-saving camaraderie, but hasn't EC Commissioner Somchai just admitted that he screwed up?! Isn't that just the sort of admission to add fuel to those seeking to annul this election?

cynical, me?

It is already on a ongoing thread.

What is also interesting is that the SET finished higher. Seems like the markets are satisfied that the elections have been conducted correctly and satisfactorily and that things will return to normal soon.

[icommunity]

Can the Democrat Party at least have the decency to change their name to something more appropriate like the National Socialist Party or the Falange. I mean, this is what you do when you can't win elections...boycott them or seek to have them annulled.

Ya, after AV took over, the DEM boycott GE and lose elections. The previous two:1. Under the protection of the junta 2007, they lose. 2. Under the military and after amended the election law , they still lose. 3. Now, they boycott after demanding that the house should be dissolved. Some said they wanted to reform the election law they changed yet again.

The DEM seeking Thai Court to annul snap polls. They are not paying the game, they disqualified themselves. They chicken out.

[Cricketnut]

"Ong-art Klampaiboon, deputy Democrat leader, said the party will lodge a petition to the court soon through various channels.

He called on the caretaker government to revoke the Emergency Decree which, he claimed, has negatively impacted on tourism, foreigners' confidence in the country and the country's economy.

"The general election is held and it has been proven that people's rallies have not created any violent incidents, or state of emergency. The Emergency Decree is no longer necessary," he said."

Is this man serious, has he slept through the last month or so? So it's all down to the Emergency Decree, nothing whatsoever to do with suthep and his increasingly wild proclamations and actions?

No violent incidents, hate to hear and see what the Dems call violent if they ever come to power. What a sick bunch of idiots, and I can say that cause I live in a Democratic country. Well done Thailand and the people who participated on all sides....

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE 8.2 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[whybother]

Can the Democrat Party at least have the decency to change their name to something more appropriate like the National Socialist Party or the Falange. I mean, this is what you do when you can't win elections...boycott them or seek to have them annulled.

Ya, after AV took over, the DEM boycott GE and lose elections. The previous two:1. Under the protection of the junta 2007, they lose. 2. Under the military and after amended the election law , they still lose. 3. Now, they boycott after demanding that the house should be dissolved. Some said they wanted to reform the election law they changed yet again.

The DEM seeking Thai Court to annul snap polls. They are not paying the game, they disqualified themselves. They chicken out.

"2. Under the military and after amended the election law , they still lose."

Which election was that?