Suthep predicts violence if Yingluck is ruled guilty and removed

[djjamie]

Suthep is right, however i believe Red Shirts have lost a lot of its supporters.

Just the other day, the Red camp has set up a camp on Sukhumvit road, near Theaparsit road.

There is a stage and a truck playing very loud music with 3 flags

1. Thai

2. Thaksin

3. Red shirt movement

Funny thing is, it is now the second day i drive past morning and late afternoon and no one is there, but 1 fool dancing around waiving the flag.

On many previous occasions when they set up the same thing, there were always people around, but no one now, not even a single taxi driver.

Perhaps all the broken promises and no payment to parents of the supporters are now starting to show, and the only violence expected is from the hardcore's

That correct. There are facts that back that up too. Voter turnout at polling stations unaffected by the protests especially in the northern regions of Thailand where the regime draws the majority of its support and where polling went uninterrupted, I repeat UNINTERRUPTED recorded the highest turnout of 56.14% in the North East, followed by the North with 54.03%. Yet in 2011 the turn out was 75%? Rats jumping ship don't even get results that low!

That is why they stubbornly always refer to the 2011 elections results. Give it 10 years and when they still don't have the popular mandate they will still refer to the 2011 election results because that election suits their agenda.

You are either not very smart or just blind.

One of the major parties (Democrat Party) did not participate in the elections. If you are a supporter of that party, you will then be unlikely to turnout to vote either, don't you think? And if this is the case, voter turnout would obviously be lower than previously, don't you think?

Or don't you think at all?

The condescension does not go unnoticed. Well done on you and your peers all having one thing in common... A shared trait.

I was referring to the North and North East exactly because of this reason. They are PT strong holds. I didn't mention Bangkok or the south for that reason either./ They are DEM strongholds and our reason does explain why the voter turnout was as low as 8%.

I will give you one thing. Your excuse is better than another forum members that said the turn out in North was so low because the PT laborers working in Bangkok could not be bothered to travel back to the north to vote because they knew it was a one horse race. That is still be favorite excuse (no offense)

If you reply then please try to keep the "shared trait" to a minimum. It says more about you than it does me.

[HonestQuietBob]

Suthep is right, however i believe Red Shirts have lost a lot of its supporters.

Just the other day, the Red camp has set up a camp on Sukhumvit road, near Theaparsit road.

There is a stage and a truck playing very loud music with 3 flags

1. Thai

2. Thaksin

3. Red shirt movement

Funny thing is, it is now the second day i drive past morning and late afternoon and no one is there, but 1 fool dancing around waiving the flag.

On many previous occasions when they set up the same thing, there were always people around, but no one now, not even a single taxi driver.

Perhaps all the broken promises and no payment to parents of the supporters are now starting to show, and the only violence expected is from the hardcore's

That correct. There are facts that back that up too. Voter turnout at polling stations unaffected by the protests especially in the northern regions of Thailand where the regime draws the majority of its support and where polling went uninterrupted, I repeat UNINTERRUPTED recorded the highest turnout of 56.14% in the North East, followed by the North with 54.03%. Yet in 2011 the turn out was 75%? Rats jumping ship don't even get results that low!

That is why they stubbornly always refer to the 2011 elections results. Give it 10 years and when they still don't have the popular mandate they will still refer to the 2011 election results because that election suits their agenda.

You are either not very smart or just blind.

One of the major parties (Democrat Party) did not participate in the elections. If you are a supporter of that party, you will then be unlikely to turnout to vote either, don't you think? And if this is the case, voter turnout would obviously be lower than previously, don't you think?

Or don't you think at all?

The condescension does not go unnoticed. Well done on you and your peers all having one thing in common... A shared trait.

I was referring to the North and North East exactly because of this reason. They are PT strong holds. I didn't mention Bangkok or the south for that reason either./ They are DEM strongholds and our reason does explain why the voter turnout was as low as 8%.

I will give you one thing. Your excuse is better than another forum members that said the turn out in North was so low because the PT laborers working in Bangkok could not be bothered to travel back to the north to vote because they knew it was a one horse race. That is still be favorite excuse (no offense)

If you reply then please try to keep the "shared trait" to a minimum. It says more about you than it does me.

When Essendon play bottom teams such as Melbourne or The Giants at the MCG, why are the crowds so small?

Could it be that only the diehard few are interested in one sided competitions?

What sort of crowd would Essendon get, at their home ground on a friday night if the other team didn't show up?

Would it be smaller or large than the Anzac Day crowd in a contested match against the Collingwood d***heads?

Same logic applies to the 2014 Thai general election.

DJ, you're on the losing side of Thai politics but on the upside, for you personally, even though it's early days, Essendon look top 4 this year.

Edited March 23, 2014 by HonestQuietBob

[Moruya]

Are there really any reds left now?

I'm sure most of them have seen through all this secessionist and violent objectives and have returned to the fields to grow rice for free

[djjamie]

You are either not very smart or just blind.

One of the major parties (Democrat Party) did not participate in the elections. If you are a supporter of that party, you will then be unlikely to turnout to vote either, don't you think? And if this is the case, voter turnout would obviously be lower than previously, don't you think?

Or don't you think at all?

The condescension does not go unnoticed. Well done on you and your peers all having one thing in common... A shared trait.

I was referring to the North and North East exactly because of this reason. They are PT strong holds. I didn't mention Bangkok or the south for that reason either./ They are DEM strongholds and our reason does explain why the voter turnout was as low as 8%.

I will give you one thing. Your excuse is better than another forum members that said the turn out in North was so low because the PT laborers working in Bangkok could not be bothered to travel back to the north to vote because they knew it was a one horse race. That is still be favorite excuse (no offense)

If you reply then please try to keep the "shared trait" to a minimum. It says more about you than it does me.

When Essendon play bottom teams such as Melbourne or The Giants at the MCG, why are the crowds so small?

Could it be that only the diehard few are interested in one sided competitions?

What sort of crowd would Essendon get, at their home ground on a friday night if the other team didn't show up?

Would it be smaller or large than the Anzac Day crowd in a contested match against the Collingwood d***heads?

Same logic applies to the 2014 Thai general election.

DJ, you're on the losing side of Thai politics but on the upside, for you personally, even though it's early days, Essendon look top 4 this year.

You believe that 61% that voted for the referendum was a minority or use other whimsical arguments because the majority in this case did not suit your agenda. The 59% majority that didn't want the amnesty is another example of playing the majority down because it does not suit an agenda, a party that supporters one principle of democracy is more democratic a party that supports all principles of democracy, but the 43% that voted for the PTP 3 years ago was an overwhelming majority whose results can be drawn from to state the PTP majority 3 years later. Now being the same person that blatantly manipulates and makes excuses for why 61%, 59% and 15/15 principles is not a majority, but 43% and 1/15 is is now using the AFL to argue Thai politics in stating that the majority in fact still support the PTP. Good luck with that.

That is PTP logic right there and on that note I will leave it at that.

Edited March 23, 2014 by djjamie

[djjamie]

You are either not very smart or just blind.

One of the major parties (Democrat Party) did not participate in the elections. If you are a supporter of that party, you will then be unlikely to turnout to vote either, don't you think? And if this is the case, voter turnout would obviously be lower than previously, don't you think?

Or don't you think at all?

The condescension does not go unnoticed. Well done on you and your peers all having one thing in common... A shared trait.

I was referring to the North and North East exactly because of this reason. They are PT strong holds. I didn't mention Bangkok or the south for that reason either./ They are DEM strongholds and our reason does explain why the voter turnout was as low as 8%.

I will give you one thing. Your excuse is better than another forum members that said the turn out in North was so low because the PT laborers working in Bangkok could not be bothered to travel back to the north to vote because they knew it was a one horse race. That is still be favorite excuse (no offense)

If you reply then please try to keep the "shared trait" to a minimum. It says more about you than it does me.

When Essendon play bottom teams such as Melbourne or The Giants at the MCG, why are the crowds so small?

Could it be that only the diehard few are interested in one sided competitions?

What sort of crowd would Essendon get, at their home ground on a friday night if the other team didn't show up?

Would it be smaller or large than the Anzac Day crowd in a contested match against the Collingwood d***heads?

Same logic applies to the 2014 Thai general election.

DJ, you're on the losing side of Thai politics but on the upside, for you personally, even though it's early days, Essendon look top 4 this year.

Point of interest is that the 2006 elections that the DEM's also boycotted still had a voter turn out of 65% (20% higher than the 2014 elections)

So kinda debunks your argument as well…...not that the comparison between Australian football and Thai politics didn't!

Edited March 23, 2014 by djjamie

[HonestQuietBob]

You are either not very smart or just blind.

One of the major parties (Democrat Party) did not participate in the elections. If you are a supporter of that party, you will then be unlikely to turnout to vote either, don't you think? And if this is the case, voter turnout would obviously be lower than previously, don't you think?

Or don't you think at all?

The condescension does not go unnoticed. Well done on you and your peers all having one thing in common... A shared trait.

I was referring to the North and North East exactly because of this reason. They are PT strong holds. I didn't mention Bangkok or the south for that reason either./ They are DEM strongholds and our reason does explain why the voter turnout was as low as 8%.

I will give you one thing. Your excuse is better than another forum members that said the turn out in North was so low because the PT laborers working in Bangkok could not be bothered to travel back to the north to vote because they knew it was a one horse race. That is still be favorite excuse (no offense)

If you reply then please try to keep the "shared trait" to a minimum. It says more about you than it does me.

When Essendon play bottom teams such as Melbourne or The Giants at the MCG, why are the crowds so small?

Could it be that only the diehard few are interested in one sided competitions?

What sort of crowd would Essendon get, at their home ground on a friday night if the other team didn't show up?

Would it be smaller or large than the Anzac Day crowd in a contested match against the Collingwood d***heads?

Same logic applies to the 2014 Thai general election.

DJ, you're on the losing side of Thai politics but on the upside, for you personally, even though it's early days, Essendon look top 4 this year.

Point of interest is that the 2006 elections that the DEM's also boycotted still had a voter turn out of 65% (20% higher than the 2014 elections)

So kinda debunks your argument as well…...not that the comparison between Australian football and Thai politics didn't!

I was just trying to dumb the argument down a bit, guess I didn't go far enough.

As for the difference in turnout between the 2006 and 2014 elections,

Ever heard of once bitten, twice shy.

Most of those that voted in 2006 only to have the election annulled and their votes tossed out have learnt that voting in a Democrat boycotted election is a waste of a day.

Your last post furthers my argument and destroy yours.

Better check your feet for a bullet hole.

Edited March 23, 2014 by HonestQuietBob

[bulekee]

Does anyone have the same point of view as myself that Thailand is so predictable.I.E. elections,demontrations and the same,same attitude.It is like watching a repeat of a very bad soap opera.I remember when I first came to live here 12 years ago and bought the Bangkok Post,I could not understand why the first 3 pages were full of political news.Now 9 years down the line I think I am getting to grips with it.In my opinion they cannot get away from politics.Looking further back in Thai history there is no hope for this country.I think also foreigners should do what Thida suggested a couple of years ago,get out of Thailand.Good idea then they will have the whole of Thailand back to rice paddies.

[JAG]

Suthep is right, however i believe Red Shirts have lost a lot of its supporters.

Just the other day, the Red camp has set up a camp on Sukhumvit road, near Theaparsit road.

There is a stage and a truck playing very loud music with 3 flags

1. Thai

2. Thaksin

3. Red shirt movement

Funny thing is, it is now the second day i drive past morning and late afternoon and no one is there, but 1 fool dancing around waiving the flag.

On many previous occasions when they set up the same thing, there were always people around, but no one now, not even a single taxi driver.

Perhaps all the broken promises and no payment to parents of the supporters are now starting to show, and the only violence expected is from the hardcore's

That correct. There are facts that back that up too. Voter turnout at polling stations unaffected by the protests especially in the northern regions of Thailand where the regime draws the majority of its support and where polling went uninterrupted, I repeat UNINTERRUPTED recorded the highest turnout of 56.14% in the North East, followed by the North with 54.03%. Yet in 2011 the turn out was 75%? Rats jumping ship don't even get results that low!

That is why they stubbornly always refer to the 2011 elections results. Give it 10 years and when they still don't have the popular mandate they will still refer to the 2011 election results because that election suits their agenda.

They will probably continue to refer to the 2011 results as a benchmark because the way things are going, and under the regime which you espouse the 2011 election will probably be the last election for a very considerable period.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[djjamie]

Point of interest is that the 2006 elections that the DEM's also boycotted still had a voter turn out of 65% (20% higher than the 2014 elections)

So kinda debunks your argument as well…...not that the comparison between Australian football and Thai politics didn't!

I was just trying to dumb the argument down a bit, guess I didn't go far enough.

As for the difference in turnout between the 2006 and 2014 elections,

Ever heard of once bitten, twice shy.

Most of those that voted in 2006 only to have the election annulled and their votes tossed out have learnt that voting in a Democrat boycotted election is a waste of a day.

Your last post furthers my argument and destroy yours.

Better check your feet for a bullet hole.

Your football "belief" went against your new argument. You said when one side is not in the election the supporters don't come out. That was your argument and that is what you said. Facts showed above that is what you said. Look above. Just look. I debunked that fact belief of yours. I proved that in exactly the same circumstances in 2006, exactly the same, the voter turn out was 20% more. In other words I proved you wrong with "facts". Should I reiterate? You said a football team with only one side playing will not garner supporters. I said look at voter outcome in 2006. So now I proved you wrong yet again, by showing you facts in Thailand compared to your football analogy from Australia and you then after loosing that argument project the argument to rebut my "facts" with further fallacies. No proof or evidence. Just comparisons with AFL and your beliefs. You give me one link, just one link of voters saying once bitten twice shy. I supply facts, you supply beliefs. And you are condescending towards me! If I was immature it would be the other way around, but alas I don't degrade my comments to condescend anyone. It does not prove a point except to say more about the person making the comments that it does about the person they are directed at.

So you degrade me, call me dumb and belittle me yet your the one saying 59%, 61% and 15/15 is a minority while 42% and 1/15 is an overwhelming majority. I compare facts from the North and North East of voter turn outs that have minimal impact on DEM's boycotting the election and reiterate that comparison that between the 2006 and 2014 boycotting elections there was a major difference in voter turn out and you offer an Essendon V Melbourne game "belief" as your defense which in itself is not even fact only hoping to throw unsubstantiated arguments in to he political mist hoping some will stick. You give me a fact of the supporters that turned up to an Essendon game when Melbourne did not attend and I will give you a fact from the sinking of the titanic to further my argument...

I am sure if the PTP argued the sky was green you would argue that point till the cows came home as well comparing it to when Essendon won there first premiership.

Again, if you reply, state facts, not beliefs and don't condescend me.

Edited March 23, 2014 by Scott

[Blackmirage2013]

I give up.

Maybe we should just split Thailand in two and call it North and South Thailand, just like North and South Korea.

Let the red shirts and their version of Kim Jong Un, Thaksin Shinawatra, find out what happens when you have a DESPOT as a leader and your economy depends on synergy with the South.....

It is so obvious that North Thailand is backward and depends on the economic engine of South Thailand and that without the support of the South, North Thailand will become as backwards as North Korea.

[djjamie]

Suthep is right, however i believe Red Shirts have lost a lot of its supporters.

Just the other day, the Red camp has set up a camp on Sukhumvit road, near Theaparsit road.

There is a stage and a truck playing very loud music with 3 flags

1. Thai

2. Thaksin

3. Red shirt movement

Funny thing is, it is now the second day i drive past morning and late afternoon and no one is there, but 1 fool dancing around waiving the flag.

On many previous occasions when they set up the same thing, there were always people around, but no one now, not even a single taxi driver.

Perhaps all the broken promises and no payment to parents of the supporters are now starting to show, and the only violence expected is from the hardcore's

That correct. There are facts that back that up too. Voter turnout at polling stations unaffected by the protests especially in the northern regions of Thailand where the regime draws the majority of its support and where polling went uninterrupted, I repeat UNINTERRUPTED recorded the highest turnout of 56.14% in the North East, followed by the North with 54.03%. Yet in 2011 the turn out was 75%? Rats jumping ship don't even get results that low!

That is why they stubbornly always refer to the 2011 elections results. Give it 10 years and when they still don't have the popular mandate they will still refer to the 2011 election results because that election suits their agenda.

They will probably continue to refer to the 2011 results as a benchmark because the way things are going, and under the regime which you espouse the 2011 election will probably be the last election for a very considerable period.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Well until the 14 other principles of democracy are adhered too anyway.

Thanks for the back up.

[JAG]

I wouldn't regard it as back up, just a comment!

And you know my views on the fabled x principles of democracy, so let's not go there again

Cheers now.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[BigMountain]

I think red shirt support can be legitamately questioned at this point. I dont believe statistics from the recent nullified election is a valid measurement of support, however. That was set out to fail and everyone knew it. A better measurement will be the numbers redshirt rallies draw. (Same goes for suthep who has seen his support drop). I have a feeling the courts ruling on the election may have the result of electrifying the redshirt base

[HonestQuietBob]

Point of interest is that the 2006 elections that the DEM's also boycotted still had a voter turn out of 65% (20% higher than the 2014 elections)

So kinda debunks your argument as well…...not that the comparison between Australian football and Thai politics didn't!

I was just trying to dumb the argument down a bit, guess I didn't go far enough.

As for the difference in turnout between the 2006 and 2014 elections,

Ever heard of once bitten, twice shy.

Most of those that voted in 2006 only to have the election annulled and their votes tossed out have learnt that voting in a Democrat boycotted election is a waste of a day.

Your last post furthers my argument and destroy yours.

Better check your feet for a bullet hole.

Your football "belief" went against your new argument. You said when one side is not in the election the supporters don't come out. That was your argument and that is what you said. Facts showed above that is what you said. Look above. Just look. I debunked that fact belief of yours. I proved that in exactly the same circumstances in 2006, exactly the same, the voter turn out was 20% more. In other words I proved you wrong with "facts". Should I reiterate? You said a football team with only one side playing will not garner supporters. I said look at voter outcome in 2006. So now I proved you wrong yet again, by showing you facts in Thailand compared to your football analogy from Australia and you then after loosing that argument project the argument to rebut my "facts" with further fallacies. No proof or evidence. Just comparisons with AFL and your beliefs. You give me one link, just one link of voters saying once bitten twice shy. I supply facts, you supply beliefs. And you are condescending towards me! If I was immature it would be the other way around, but alas I don't degrade my comments to condescend anyone. It does not prove a point except to say more about the person making the comments that it does about the person they are directed at.

So you degrade me, call me dumb and belittle me yet your the one saying 59%, 61% and 15/15 is a minority while 42% and 1/15 is an overwhelming majority. I compare facts from the North and North East of voter turn outs that have minimal impact on DEM's boycotting the election and reiterate that comparison that between the 2006 and 2014 boycotting elections there was a major difference in voter turn out and you offer an Essendon V Melbourne game "belief" as your defense which in itself is not even fact only hoping to throw unsubstantiated arguments in to he political mist hoping some will stick. You give me a fact of the supporters that turned up to an Essendon game when Melbourne did not attend and I will give you a fact from the sinking of the titanic to further my argument...

I am sure if the PTP argued the sky was green you would argue that point till the cows came home as well comparing it to when Essendon won there first premiership.

Again, if you reply, state facts, not beliefs and don't condescend me.

I'm fast running out of ways to simplify this.

1. In a 2 horse race, if 1 horse boycotts, turnout will be lower than in a contested ballot, this doesn't mean the non-boycotting horse is less popular.

(i.e. you can't claim that PTP support has dropped based on a lower turnout in a boycotted election)

2.Election turnout is responsive to the perceived closeness of the contest. The closer the expected outcome, the higher the turnout. In these situations political parties focus on "get out the vote" campaigns. With 1 horse running against itself, the result is a foregone conclusion therefore lower turnout is to be expected.

(i.e. turnout was low because there was no contest).

3. People learn from their experiences.If one were to put some money in a vending machine and nothing was dispensed, the clever ones would not continue to empty their wallet into the machine, they would jut walk away.

(i.e. people who wasted a day voting in the last boycotted election aren't going to waste another day voting in another boycotted election)

4.The sky is not green.

Why would you say such a silly thing?

[HonestQuietBob]

I give up.

Maybe we should just split Thailand in two and call it North and South Thailand, just like North and South Korea.

Let the red shirts and their version of Kim Jong Un, Thaksin Shinawatra, find out what happens when you have a DESPOT as a leader and your economy depends on synergy with the South.....

It is so obvious that North Thailand is backward and depends on the economic engine of South Thailand and that without the support of the South, North Thailand will become as backwards as North Korea.

The economic engine of the south is built on the back of the cheap labour supplied by the north.

[Scott]

Please keep your comments civil. Continued inflammatory remarks directed at other posters can result in a warning.

[jayboy]

I give up.

Maybe we should just split Thailand in two and call it North and South Thailand, just like North and South Korea.

Let the red shirts and their version of Kim Jong Un, Thaksin Shinawatra, find out what happens when you have a DESPOT as a leader and your economy depends on synergy with the South.....

It is so obvious that North Thailand is backward and depends on the economic engine of South Thailand and that without the support of the South, North Thailand will become as backwards as North Korea.

The economic engine of the south is built on the back of the cheap labour supplied by the north.

Both wrong I'm afraid.The South (at least the Upper South) is prosperous because of tourism and primary commodities like rubber and oil palm.If there is an economic engine however (of course excepting the Bangkok powerhouse) it is the North East where the development in the last decade has been remarkable.And don't forget social and political upheaval happens when things are getting better not when they are stagnant or worse.

[philw]

I give up.

Maybe we should just split Thailand in two and call it North and South Thailand, just like North and South Korea.

Let the red shirts and their version of Kim Jong Un, Thaksin Shinawatra, find out what happens when you have a DESPOT as a leader and your economy depends on synergy with the South.....

It is so obvious that North Thailand is backward and depends on the economic engine of South Thailand and that without the support of the South, North Thailand will become as backwards as North Korea.

Thank you for giving up.

I won't dignify your other three sentences with a response.

[djjamie]

Point of interest is that the 2006 elections that the DEM's also boycotted still had a voter turn out of 65% (20% higher than the 2014 elections)

So kinda debunks your argument as well…...not that the comparison between Australian football and Thai politics didn't!

I was just trying to dumb the argument down a bit, guess I didn't go far enough.

As for the difference in turnout between the 2006 and 2014 elections,

Ever heard of once bitten, twice shy.

Most of those that voted in 2006 only to have the election annulled and their votes tossed out have learnt that voting in a Democrat boycotted election is a waste of a day.

Your last post furthers my argument and destroy yours.

Better check your feet for a bullet hole.

Your football "belief" went against your new argument. You said when one side is not in the election the supporters don't come out. That was your argument and that is what you said. Facts showed above that is what you said. Look above. Just look. I debunked that fact belief of yours. I proved that in exactly the same circumstances in 2006, exactly the same, the voter turn out was 20% more. In other words I proved you wrong with "facts". Should I reiterate? You said a football team with only one side playing will not garner supporters. I said look at voter outcome in 2006. So now I proved you wrong yet again, by showing you facts in Thailand compared to your football analogy from Australia and you then after loosing that argument project the argument to rebut my "facts" with further fallacies. No proof or evidence. Just comparisons with AFL and your beliefs. You give me one link, just one link of voters saying once bitten twice shy. I supply facts, you supply beliefs. And you are condescending towards me! If I was immature it would be the other way around, but alas I don't degrade my comments to condescend anyone. It does not prove a point except to say more about the person making the comments that it does about the person they are directed at.

So you degrade me, call me dumb and belittle me yet your the one saying 59%, 61% and 15/15 is a minority while 42% and 1/15 is an overwhelming majority. I compare facts from the North and North East of voter turn outs that have minimal impact on DEM's boycotting the election and reiterate that comparison that between the 2006 and 2014 boycotting elections there was a major difference in voter turn out and you offer an Essendon V Melbourne game "belief" as your defense which in itself is not even fact only hoping to throw unsubstantiated arguments in to he political mist hoping some will stick. You give me a fact of the supporters that turned up to an Essendon game when Melbourne did not attend and I will give you a fact from the sinking of the titanic to further my argument...

I am sure if the PTP argued the sky was green you would argue that point till the cows came home as well comparing it to when Essendon won there first premiership.

Again, if you reply, state facts, not beliefs and don't condescend me.

I'm fast running out of ways to simplify this.

1. In a 2 horse race, if 1 horse boycotts, turnout will be lower than in a contested ballot, this doesn't mean the non-boycotting horse is less popular.

(i.e. you can't claim that PTP support has dropped based on a lower turnout in a boycotted election)

2.Election turnout is responsive to the perceived closeness of the contest. The closer the expected outcome, the higher the turnout. In these situations political parties focus on "get out the vote" campaigns. With 1 horse running against itself, the result is a foregone conclusion therefore lower turnout is to be expected.

(i.e. turnout was low because there was no contest).

3. People learn from their experiences.If one were to put some money in a vending machine and nothing was dispensed, the clever ones would not continue to empty their wallet into the machine, they would jut walk away.

(i.e. people who wasted a day voting in the last boycotted election aren't going to waste another day voting in another boycotted election)

4.The sky is not green.

Why would you say such a silly thing?

1. The 2006 voter turn out "fact" comparison disputes your "belief" Show me with facts mate. The North (PTP strong hold received up to 30% less of a turn out than in the last election yet 30% of the populations are not DEM's in the North) Without referring to football or horse races, explain that fact. Don't explain it with horse races or football or gridiron or soccer or even the 1995 world dart championships. Just use Thai political facts.

2. The 2006 voter turn out "fact" comparison disputes your "belief". Show me with facts. Simple. I will understand if you show me facts. Don't use your belief as facts.

3. You have yet again used an illogical fallacy to try to prove a point. Show me with facts that the voters had this mind set. Facts! Come on. I can use me beliefs all night, but I use facts. I see you really don't hold them in high regard.

4. I know the sky is not green. No one said it was green. "Why would I say such a thing"? You're seriously asking me this? My point was if the PTP stated it was green some would ague that it was as well. Can you seriously not comprehend what I said when I stated "I am sure if the PTP argued the sky was green you would argue that point till the cows came home as well" Do you really interpret that differently to how I said it? With that unbelievable misunderstanding of a simple obvious sentence as such how can I believe your above points.

Point #4 typifies my "green sky" argument in case that the PTP supporters will argue the sky is green when it isn't. They simply ignore facts or completely misunderstand or as I suspect refuse to accept the sentence when it does not suit an agenda and then quote it out of context to try to further their belief.

Now if you reply again…State facts. Like I did to further your argument. Not beliefs. Facts.

Notice no belittling, condescension or demonizing. Lets keep that up heay.

[djjamie]

I give up.

Maybe we should just split Thailand in two and call it North and South Thailand, just like North and South Korea.

Let the red shirts and their version of Kim Jong Un, Thaksin Shinawatra, find out what happens when you have a DESPOT as a leader and your economy depends on synergy with the South.....

It is so obvious that North Thailand is backward and depends on the economic engine of South Thailand and that without the support of the South, North Thailand will become as backwards as North Korea.

The economic engine of the south is built on the back of the cheap labour supplied by the north.

Interesting. I don't dispute this and in fact find it interesting so thanks for highlighting it, but have you got a link to this? In other words…..Facts to back up your argument?

Edited March 23, 2014 by djjamie

[Publicus]

You are either not very smart or just blind.

One of the major parties (Democrat Party) did not participate in the elections. If you are a supporter of that party, you will then be unlikely to turnout to vote either, don't you think? And if this is the case, voter turnout would obviously be lower than previously, don't you think?

Or don't you think at all?

The condescension does not go unnoticed. Well done on you and your peers all having one thing in common... A shared trait.

I was referring to the North and North East exactly because of this reason. They are PT strong holds. I didn't mention Bangkok or the south for that reason either./ They are DEM strongholds and our reason does explain why the voter turnout was as low as 8%.

I will give you one thing. Your excuse is better than another forum members that said the turn out in North was so low because the PT laborers working in Bangkok could not be bothered to travel back to the north to vote because they knew it was a one horse race. That is still be favorite excuse (no offense)

If you reply then please try to keep the "shared trait" to a minimum. It says more about you than it does me.

When Essendon play bottom teams such as Melbourne or The Giants at the MCG, why are the crowds so small?

Could it be that only the diehard few are interested in one sided competitions?

What sort of crowd would Essendon get, at their home ground on a friday night if the other team didn't show up?

Would it be smaller or large than the Anzac Day crowd in a contested match against the Collingwood d***heads?

Same logic applies to the 2014 Thai general election.

DJ, you're on the losing side of Thai politics but on the upside, for you personally, even though it's early days, Essendon look top 4 this year.

Point of interest is that the 2006 elections that the DEM's also boycotted still had a voter turn out of 65% (20% higher than the 2014 elections)

So kinda debunks your argument as well…...not that the comparison between Australian football and Thai politics didn't!

Drivel.

The 2014 election was held under physical assault by the fascist Suthep and his Black Shirt thugs attacking innocent voters, both in the early balloting the Sunday prior to the Feb 2nd general election and on Sunday the 2nd. Everyone - everyone - knew from the long Suthep windup long before the election that Suthep and his fascists were going to prevent the election by all means, at all costs to the voters to include life itself.

The nationwide scientific public opinion research survey before the election occurred indicated clearly that 80% of voters wanted to vote, but that a half of that percentage were fearful that Suthep's fascist violence would shut down the election and present to voters great physical harm. Voters in the North and the Northeast had no opposition to vote against, given the DP boycott joined the PDRC attempt to shut down the voters at the polls.

Presently, with a new election necessary, and the fascist Suthep and his fascist thugs again making loud menacing noises towards the voters of the country, expect another low turnout - if we ever get to a new election.

The circumstances of the 2006 election were completely unlike and dissimilar to the aborted election of 2014, as there was no mass movement of fascist thugs physically assaulting voters for the specific purpose of stopping the election. Anyone who says democracy needs to be forcibly nullified in order to preserve it, protect it, improve it, extend it, is a cynical liar or a blistering idiot..

[djjamie]

When Essendon play bottom teams such as Melbourne or The Giants at the MCG, why are the crowds so small?

The condescension does not go unnoticed. Well done on you and your peers all having one thing in common... A shared trait.

I was referring to the North and North East exactly because of this reason. They are PT strong holds. I didn't mention Bangkok or the south for that reason either./ They are DEM strongholds and our reason does explain why the voter turnout was as low as 8%.

I will give you one thing. Your excuse is better than another forum members that said the turn out in North was so low because the PT laborers working in Bangkok could not be bothered to travel back to the north to vote because they knew it was a one horse race. That is still be favorite excuse (no offense)

If you reply then please try to keep the "shared trait" to a minimum. It says more about you than it does me.

Could it be that only the diehard few are interested in one sided competitions?

What sort of crowd would Essendon get, at their home ground on a friday night if the other team didn't show up?

Would it be smaller or large than the Anzac Day crowd in a contested match against the Collingwood d***heads?

Same logic applies to the 2014 Thai general election.

DJ, you're on the losing side of Thai politics but on the upside, for you personally, even though it's early days, Essendon look top 4 this year.

Point of interest is that the 2006 elections that the DEM's also boycotted still had a voter turn out of 65% (20% higher than the 2014 elections)

So kinda debunks your argument as well…...not that the comparison between Australian football and Thai politics didn't!

Drivel.

The 2014 election was held under physical assault by the fascist Suthep and his Black Shirt thugs attacking innocent voters, both in the early balloting the Sunday prior to the Feb 2nd general election and on Sunday the 2nd. Everyone - everyone - knew from the long Suthep windup long before the election that Suthep and his fascists were going to prevent the election by all means, at all costs to the voters to include life itself.

The nationwide scientific public opinion research survey before the election occurred indicated clearly that 80% of voters wanted to vote, but that a half of that percentage were fearful that Suthep's fascist violence would shut down the election and present to voters great physical harm. Voters in the North and the Northeast had no opposition to vote against, given the DP boycott joined the PDRC attempt to shut down the voters at the polls.

Presently, with a new election necessary, and the fascist Suthep and his fascist thugs again making loud menacing noises towards the voters of the country, expect another low turnout - if we ever get to a new election.

The circumstances of the 2006 election were completely unlike and dissimilar to the aborted election of 2014, as there was no mass movement of fascist thugs physically assaulting voters for the specific purpose of stopping the election. Anyone who says democracy needs to be forcibly nullified in order to preserve it, protect it, improve it, extend it, is a cynical liar or a blistering idiot..

The 2014 election was held under physical assault by the fascist Suthep and his Black Shirt thugs attacking innocent voters.

​I compared the results from the North and North East where there was no disruption. I repeat…None.

Suthep and the "fascist thugs and brainless dictator, terrorist maniac, compulsive bad ass's" and add preferred demonizing word here that suits your agenda "……………………" do not equate to the North where voter turn out was 20% less than in 2006 when the DEM's boycotted the election as well. The 2014 and the 2006 elections in the North went un interrupted.

You have stated an illogical fallacy that does not hold water, but DOES suit an agenda.

Edited March 23, 2014 by djjamie

[philw]

Just for info and quoted this evening from another BKK based paper.

"The Election Commission (EC) said only 4.18% of 2.12 million voters nationwide who had registered for the advance vote turned out to cast their ballots."

For todays Senate elections.

Could there be something wrong with the way things are headed and voter enthusiasm ??

95% did not vote ??

Why ???

[philw]

When Essendon play bottom teams such as Melbourne or The Giants at the MCG, why are the crowds so small?

The condescension does not go unnoticed. Well done on you and your peers all having one thing in common... A shared trait.

I was referring to the North and North East exactly because of this reason. They are PT strong holds. I didn't mention Bangkok or the south for that reason either./ They are DEM strongholds and our reason does explain why the voter turnout was as low as 8%.

I will give you one thing. Your excuse is better than another forum members that said the turn out in North was so low because the PT laborers working in Bangkok could not be bothered to travel back to the north to vote because they knew it was a one horse race. That is still be favorite excuse (no offense)

If you reply then please try to keep the "shared trait" to a minimum. It says more about you than it does me.

Could it be that only the diehard few are interested in one sided competitions?

What sort of crowd would Essendon get, at their home ground on a friday night if the other team didn't show up?

Would it be smaller or large than the Anzac Day crowd in a contested match against the Collingwood d***heads?

Same logic applies to the 2014 Thai general election.

DJ, you're on the losing side of Thai politics but on the upside, for you personally, even though it's early days, Essendon look top 4 this year.

Point of interest is that the 2006 elections that the DEM's also boycotted still had a voter turn out of 65% (20% higher than the 2014 elections)

So kinda debunks your argument as well…...not that the comparison between Australian football and Thai politics didn't!

Drivel.

The 2014 election was held under physical assault by the fascist Suthep and his Black Shirt thugs attacking innocent voters, both in the early balloting the Sunday prior to the Feb 2nd general election and on Sunday the 2nd. Everyone - everyone - knew from the long Suthep windup long before the election that Suthep and his fascists were going to prevent the election by all means, at all costs to the voters to include life itself.

The nationwide scientific public opinion research survey before the election occurred indicated clearly that 80% of voters wanted to vote, but that a half of that percentage were fearful that Suthep's fascist violence would shut down the election and present to voters great physical harm. Voters in the North and the Northeast had no opposition to vote against, given the DP boycott joined the PDRC attempt to shut down the voters at the polls.

Presently, with a new election necessary, and the fascist Suthep and his fascist thugs again making loud menacing noises towards the voters of the country, expect another low turnout - if we ever get to a new election.

The circumstances of the 2006 election were completely unlike and dissimilar to the aborted election of 2014, as there was no mass movement of fascist thugs physically assaulting voters for the specific purpose of stopping the election. Anyone who says democracy needs to be forcibly nullified in order to preserve it, protect it, improve it, extend it, is a cynical liar or a blistering idiot..

The 2014 election was held under physical assault by the fascist Suthep and his Black Shirt thugs attacking innocent voters.

​I compared the results from the North and North East where there was no disruption. I repeat…None.

Suthep and the "fascist thugs and brainless dictator, terrorist maniac, compulsive bad ass's" and add preferred demonizing word here that suits your agenda "……………………" do not equate to the North where voter turn out was 20% less than in 2006 when the DEM's boycotted the election as well. The 2014 and the 2006 elections in the North went un interrupted.

You have stated an illogical fallacy that does not hold water, but DOES suit an agenda.

Perhaps the electorate are getting bored with the manipulations of the Courts and the general disrespect of their voting entitlements.

Why bother, when your vote will be artificially nullifed by a vested interest. ??

[Fat Haggis]

HQB and DJJ need to get a room !!

[Publicus]

When Essendon play bottom teams such as Melbourne or The Giants at the MCG, why are the crowds so small?

The condescension does not go unnoticed. Well done on you and your peers all having one thing in common... A shared trait.

I was referring to the North and North East exactly because of this reason. They are PT strong holds. I didn't mention Bangkok or the south for that reason either./ They are DEM strongholds and our reason does explain why the voter turnout was as low as 8%.

I will give you one thing. Your excuse is better than another forum members that said the turn out in North was so low because the PT laborers working in Bangkok could not be bothered to travel back to the north to vote because they knew it was a one horse race. That is still be favorite excuse (no offense)

If you reply then please try to keep the "shared trait" to a minimum. It says more about you than it does me.

Could it be that only the diehard few are interested in one sided competitions?

What sort of crowd would Essendon get, at their home ground on a friday night if the other team didn't show up?

Would it be smaller or large than the Anzac Day crowd in a contested match against the Collingwood d***heads?

Same logic applies to the 2014 Thai general election.

DJ, you're on the losing side of Thai politics but on the upside, for you personally, even though it's early days, Essendon look top 4 this year.

Point of interest is that the 2006 elections that the DEM's also boycotted still had a voter turn out of 65% (20% higher than the 2014 elections)

So kinda debunks your argument as well…...not that the comparison between Australian football and Thai politics didn't!

Drivel.

The 2014 election was held under physical assault by the fascist Suthep and his Black Shirt thugs attacking innocent voters, both in the early balloting the Sunday prior to the Feb 2nd general election and on Sunday the 2nd. Everyone - everyone - knew from the long Suthep windup long before the election that Suthep and his fascists were going to prevent the election by all means, at all costs to the voters to include life itself.

The nationwide scientific public opinion research survey before the election occurred indicated clearly that 80% of voters wanted to vote, but that a half of that percentage were fearful that Suthep's fascist violence would shut down the election and present to voters great physical harm. Voters in the North and the Northeast had no opposition to vote against, given the DP boycott joined the PDRC attempt to shut down the voters at the polls.

Presently, with a new election necessary, and the fascist Suthep and his fascist thugs again making loud menacing noises towards the voters of the country, expect another low turnout - if we ever get to a new election.

The circumstances of the 2006 election were completely unlike and dissimilar to the aborted election of 2014, as there was no mass movement of fascist thugs physically assaulting voters for the specific purpose of stopping the election. Anyone who says democracy needs to be forcibly nullified in order to preserve it, protect it, improve it, extend it, is a cynical liar or a blistering idiot..

The 2014 election was held under physical assault by the fascist Suthep and his Black Shirt thugs attacking innocent voters.

​I compared the results from the North and North East where there was no disruption. I repeat…None.

Suthep and the "fascist thugs and brainless dictator, terrorist maniac, compulsive bad ass's" and add preferred demonizing word here that suits your agenda "……………………" do not equate to the North where voter turn out was 20% less than in 2006 when the DEM's boycotted the election as well. The 2014 and the 2006 elections in the North went un interrupted.

You have stated an illogical fallacy that does not hold water, but DOES suit an agenda.

I wrote in my post that which you choose to ignore so I will repost it now:

Voters in the North and the Northeast had no opposition to vote against, given the DP boycott joined the PDRC attempt to shut down the voters at the polls.

Anyone in politics, with experience in politics, or any political scientist can advise us that, when one's own political party has its major opponent opt out of an election, the absence of the major opponent will depress the turnout of both your own base of voters and also of other targeted voters. The matter is self evident in politics and elections and, combined with a nationwide state of apprehension or outright fear of Suthep's fascist thugs by the general electorate, it will account for a depressed voter turnout. ..

You who purport to have no agenda need to recognize your agenda, which includes baselessly accusing others of "an illogical fallacy" but which first and foremost seeks the absurd and cynical militant goal to forcibly nullify democracy in the pretense of preserving it, protecting it, improving it, extending it. I reiterate that no such undertaking is in any way or by any means democratic, nor can it possibly be democratic. You are determined to kill the patient to stop the disease.

Yes, the underlying precept is that 1 person 1 vote democracy is good. Minus 15 confounding provisos - or is it 21 caveats or whatever number - democracy is further unencumbered.

[Thai at Heart]

I believe its possible, that if an open free election happened tomorrow, turn out would be at an all time high.

[SICHONSTEVE]

I believe its possible, that if an open free election happened tomorrow, turn out would be at an all time high.

It is not possible to hold a free and fair election tomorrow so we will never know!!!!

[Publicus]

I believe its possible, that if an open free election happened tomorrow, turn out would be at an all time high.

It is not possible to hold a free and fair election tomorrow so we will never know!!!!

Don't you love it.