Thai Democrat Party threatens to boycott second election

[rubl]

How can elections be fair when a criminal fugitive abroad is allowed to own and control one of the participating political parties?

As for "winning elections", all parties which participate AND get seats win. That's how it works in a democracy with a follow up in "respect my vote even AFTER it has been counted".

As long as the Pheu Thai with it's failed and utter corrupt government (where's my 700++ billion) is allowed to continue as if nothing happened, no elections can be fair.

My dear rubl,

IF a criminal fugitive abroad is allowed to own and control one of the political parties, this might make it illegal but it does not make any set of elections unfair. Even the CC does not refer to this allegation in their considerations.

Your other points are irrelevant.

You may be elderly, but you have not learnt to know when to give up arguing a lost point.

How can elections be fair if a political party which is run by a criminal fugitive abroad is allowed to participate? The CC ruled on the legality of the elections, not on the very interesting situation of a criminal fugitive running the country. They were not asked to rule on that.

As for no one trying to bite this hot potato and certainly not swallow it, well, just shows you that the situation in Thailand cannot be compared with what lots of posters here know from their home countries. Makes it also clear why the continued pushing for 'democracy means voting' is very suspect.

You may be younger and therefor not learned yet that just pronouncing someone lost an argument makes it a fact.

Edited March 21, 2014 by rubl

[rubl]

Gweiloman, maybe you can explain what you meant by own and control. It's like Suterp finance 1/3 of the Dem Party and he is on many arrest warrants and that he control all the policies of the Dem Party. It's the same?

I was merely quoting our dear rubl who alleges that Thaksin owns and controls PTP. That is why I started my post with the capitals, IF....

Well, you may want to doubt my word on this, but would you accept Thaksin's owns statements?

[rubl]

lots of quotes removed

I already commented on that in another thread

[GarryP]

I don't know where to begin.

They didn't want to participate because elections at this moment in time are implicitly UNFAIR for the reasons that I have given. The PTP have no qualms about obtaining power in an unfair and unethical manner, however, the Democrats are a responsible party and do not wish to cheat like the PTP - so they lose!!

Populist policies are fine if they are sensible and do not place a burden on society - I'm afraid that these policies that they used to gain power are in another dimension in this respect and should never have seen the light of day!! It is rather ironic how much they have alienated their core voters though as they fell apart at the seams and destroyed their livelihoods!! If you could implement a policy whereby everybody felt a small benefit and it wasn't too costly then that would be an example of an affordable populist policy that will endear you to the people (and in doing so make you popular).

Your third point avails to those elections (Feb 2nd) being based on the self same principles of unfairness that would potentially lead to the same outcome as we have just suffered (sorry, I mean that the farmers are enduring). The elections must be made free and fair before the Dem's will consider re entering the fray as the PTP cheating their way to another 4 years of mismanagement is not something Thailand can afford!!! The Dem's didn't contest these elections to render the process irrelevant and outcome unrepresentative of the people's wishes, which is precisely what they achieved, now that these elections have been voided.

Not wanting to get in the fray, but claiming PTP using a populist platform renders elections unfair is somewhat misguided. What is stopping the Democrats espousing wonderful get rich quick populist schemes. Certainly unethical, but not against the rules of the game. You cannot blame the parties for the lack of discrimination or gullibility of the electorate. In any case, I doubt very much that the reason the Democrats refused to participate was because they do not wish to cheat. They try to put themselves over as whiter than the driven snow, which could not be further from the truth. They are just less blatant about it.

I will agree, however, that this PTP lot is probably one of the most corrupt ever. Even Chatchai Choonhavan and his buffet cabinet would be envious of the excesses.

[Cricketnut]

Khun Chavanond, very sensible statement.

Fight to the end, oust the Shinawatra clan, and then have real DEMOCRATIC elections.

I think the Dems have had plenty of time to think of reforms. So let's put them on the table start acting like adults and let the people decide. At the moment it looks as if the democrats have come up with nothing for the Thai people as a whole and want to grab back power by default. What a shame and a shame for the Thai people in not being able to function in a Democratic country. After all democracy has its pitfalls in all society's.

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

[Cricketnut]

Who wants to play against a team that wins by cheating every time.

At last a clear statement justifying the Democrat boycott (though I think a misguided one).

To make sense of it at least two questions need to be answered:

1.How was the last election not valid and fairly conducted especially since all independent observers were satisfied?

2.What precise reforms need to be put in place to make the next one fair?

I'm not unsympathetic to a national effort across parties to reform the system and tackle corruption, but for clarity's sake there needs to be an understanding on an improved electoral process.

If the response is just the usual claptrap (Thaksin buying farmers votes etc) we can only conclude the Democrat boycott is for the reason they are unelectable.

And in that case the advice should be ditch the incompetent leadership, cut ties with the gangster Suthep, tell the Bangkok middle class that they cannot have the casting vote, develop some policies attractive to the Thai people as a whole.. and then win an election.

Exactly, but the dems are to scared of losing face by losing an election which should be un loseable

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

[monkeycountry]

"However, the Prime Minister and her government should not be the ones hosting the general election because they are part of the conflict, said Chavanond."

Democrat Party? What are they on - is he telling them they can't participate in the election because they happen to be the caretaker government?

Incredibly stupid statements and action.

Once again you display your lack of understanding of even the very basics. Try to google the words "hosting" and partcipating", you will find they are quite different.

As an example, many countries participate in the olympics, it however does not mean they are all suitable hosts of the olympics, in fact most of them are probably not for many reasons.

To make it completely clear. In the quote you mention it is suggested that the PTP does not host the election. Nowhere is it mentioned that the PTP should not participate.

See the difference? (I expect no reply of course :-)

[monkeycountry]

Since they won't be taking part in any more elections, a more accurate description would be 'former political party'. In any case, since they didn't vote in the last election, they're all barred from standing for election for the next five years.

As usual facts and what you want to be true easily get mixed up for you.

A political party is barred if they do not participate in 2 general elections in a row, not just 1.

Hope that helps :-)

[Spalpeen]

Since they won't be taking part in any more elections, a more accurate description would be 'former political party'. In any case, since they didn't vote in the last election, they're all barred from standing for election for the next five years.

As usual facts and what you want to be true easily get mixed up for you.

A political party is barred if they do not participate in 2 general elections in a row, not just 1.

Hope that helps :-)

.

MP's are banned from standing for election for five years if they do not cast their vote in one election......duh!

[Thaddeus]

Since they won't be taking part in any more elections, a more accurate description would be 'former political party'. In any case, since they didn't vote in the last election, they're all barred from standing for election for the next five years.

As usual facts and what you want to be true easily get mixed up for you.

A political party is barred if they do not participate in 2 general elections in a row, not just 1.

Hope that helps :-)

.

MP's are banned from standing for election for five years if they do not cast their vote in one election......duh!

And as I said the last time you brought it up.

They didn't stand does not mean they did not cast a vote.

[Spalpeen]

Since they won't be taking part in any more elections, a more accurate description would be 'former political party'. In any case, since they didn't vote in the last election, they're all barred from standing for election for the next five years.

As usual facts and what you want to be true easily get mixed up for you.

A political party is barred if they do not participate in 2 general elections in a row, not just 1.

Hope that helps :-)

.

MP's are banned from standing for election for five years if they do not cast their vote in one election......duh!

And as I said the last time you brought it up.

They didn't stand does not mean they did not cast a vote.

.

Which would make them cynical hypocrites, like Abhisit, since they were telling everyone else not to vote in the election

[Joeb]

I had been a supporter of the Dems. Have always been anti-Thaksin, but then I witnessed first hand the Dems idea of an election campaign in the Northeast. It was embarrassing. Three candidates came into a temple and couldn't wait for the monks to finish praying. Walked through the temple and stuck business card in the hands of the people praying and walked out without saying word to anyone. They had their Bangkok salon hairdos, shiny shoes and beautiful matching blue jackets. They lost 200 votes right there. They have no clue.

They could have swung many of those people to their side as times were not good for them under the government of the day. No, they alienated the whole lot. Until they show some respect for those whose vote they seek they will never get elected.

[binjalin]

They didn't stand does not mean they did not cast a vote.

.

Which would make them cynical hypocrites, like Abhisit, since they were telling everyone else not to vote in the election

exactly

[SICHONSTEVE]

So who won the Feb 2nd elections then??

.

PTP by a landslide........obviously. I'm surprised you didn't know that. If that wasn't the case then you would not now be seeing treasonous judges tying themselves in knots to block the will of the people.

What!! So the elections that were voided were won by PTP were they.

If a team is 2 - 0 up and the floodlights fail and they have to abandon play then that team won two - nil did they??

I bet that you will see match abandoned in the papers the following day and no points awarded to either team.

Another thing, if the results of the election to that point were not allowed to be announced until the election was complete (as per the constitution) did you have insider information from the EC as to what the situation was up to that point!!!

I think that you DID lose 2 - 0 on this one!!!!

[dutchisaan]

To all our dear red fan members.

In every political thread on tv all of you are going to the extreme to back up the ptp. Claming that what is hapening in Thailand is everybodys fould and your dear leader is innocent, including the rest of her party.

But I will have to give you all some credit! You keep following the ptp party line by claming that somebody else done it and don't answer questions like, where did the money from the rice sceme go, or why this goverment issued a new pasport for a wanted fugetive, or, etc etc.

One thing all of you stand out in is that most of you spend day and night to respond to these threads, while we didn't hear anything from your dear leader asof now.

And before any one wants to tell me that I am a yellow suporter, I will tell you I am not. They doN't deserve to be in the goverment either.

I can just not understand that so many people will back up a corrupt goverment.

However by reading your reactions I learned that if you look trough red tinted glasses everything is black and white. If you are not for me than you are against me.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[HerIndoors]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't the Constitution Court set up by the coup makers?? Hmmm ... just a thought, but why would anybody want to take seriously anything that happens in Thai politics? As for the Democrat Party .. what a bunch of losers. As for the Shinawatra lot.... what a bunch of losers.

[HonestQuietBob]

Any yellow die-hards remember this?

(Note the date)

Abhisit to fund managers: Democrats will participate in postponed election

By Bangkok Pundit Jan 16, 2014 10:00AM UTC

[maxme]

A larger part of the Isaan population still lives under the age old patronage system, their own homegrown elite as it were. They vote as they are told to. Furthermore the participation of a political party led by a criminal fugitive abroad makes a mockery out of these elections.

A reform is needed before proper elections can be held.

So, please tell us all what specific reforms you would consider need to be in place before proper elections can take place, and how would these reforms be implemented? Your mate Suthep can't elaborate on this question, but perhaps you can.

Such agressiveness, chill-out man.

The PDRC is having forums to setup frameworks for possible reforms. A broader participation is needed to further give body to that framework. Even more participation will be needed to get some consensus on the reforms. Discussions on how to implement should come when the reforms are seen as getting into a workable shape.

In the mean time, you might want to give us your view on things?

Sorry but are you really saying that the standard M.O of any legit political party is to have reforms made postmortem of an election?

Or is your statement just a bunch of empty words for "I have no clue about that"?

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Edited March 22, 2014 by maxme

[rubl]

So, please tell us all what specific reforms you would consider need to be in place before proper elections can take place, and how would these reforms be implemented? Your mate Suthep can't elaborate on this question, but perhaps you can.

Such agressiveness, chill-out man.

The PDRC is having forums to setup frameworks for possible reforms. A broader participation is needed to further give body to that framework. Even more participation will be needed to get some consensus on the reforms. Discussions on how to implement should come when the reforms are seen as getting into a workable shape.

In the mean time, you might want to give us your view on things?

Sorry but are you really saying that the standard M.O of any legit political party is to have reforms made postmortem of an election?

Or is your statement just a bunch of empty words for "I have no clue about that"?

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Since when is the PDRC a political party?

BTW I was replying to our HK man who seemed to misunderstand that the PDRC didn't come with info on reforms yet. I just wrote what I read before.

Like I invited him, I'd like to invite you to give your view on things. That's assuming you have one?

[maxme]

So, please tell us all what specific reforms you would consider need to be in place before proper elections can take place, and how would these reforms be implemented? Your mate Suthep can't elaborate on this question, but perhaps you can.

Such agressiveness, chill-out man.

The PDRC is having forums to setup frameworks for possible reforms. A broader participation is needed to further give body to that framework. Even more participation will be needed to get some consensus on the reforms. Discussions on how to implement should come when the reforms are seen as getting into a workable shape.

In the mean time, you might want to give us your view on things?

Sorry but are you really saying that the standard M.O of any legit political party is to have reforms made postmortem of an election?

Or is your statement just a bunch of empty words for "I have no clue about that"?

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

Since when is the PDRC a political party?

BTW I was replying to our HK man who seemed to misunderstand that the PDRC didn't come with info on reforms yet. I just wrote what I read before.

Like I invited him, I'd like to invite you to give your view on things. That's assuming you have one?

Oh sure but first things first give us the answer on reforms. That's assuming you don't want to deflect the question yet again.

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand