Prayuth may act as interim PM

[Thanet]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

The guy who vowed that when he took over the country he would never be P.M. Why not let the people choose a P.M instead of making yourself the supreme leader.

It seems he IS the people's choice to be the next PM.

With a nationwide turnout of almost 99% Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un was not only elected to the highest legislative body in North Korea, he won with the unanimous approval of his district, which had 100 per cent turnout. Voters had only one candidate's name on the ballot for each district and they had the choice of voting yes or no. Will Thailand follow the path of TRUE democracy as did North Korea? Yes or no.

The DPRK has 3 parties.

Really? Are all of them still functioning as parties?

Three parties would be the ruling party, the gulag party and the executed party?

[Ricardo]

There's nothing wrong with critically examining past events, as is meant by the word 'revisionism'. Indeed, such practice is an integral part of debate.

'Negationism', or distortion of past events, describes your assertion that Abhisit's appointment was legitimate as far as the opinion of the general public was concerned. If it were, then why on earth did his party get so decisively defenestrated when he eventually had to call a general election? Why wasn't he re-elected?

"why on earth did his party get so decisively defenestrated"

Interesting way to describe winning 11.4-million votes ?

and "when he eventually had to call a general election"

The July-2011 election was called five or six months earlier, than it had to be called, wasn't it.

Facts are just such inconvenient things, or perhaps not, on 'Planet Thanet' ? (I'm a fellow 'Thanet thickie', as it happens)

Meanwhile having finally taken back control from the eternally-vascillating politicians, and set government & the reforms on track, it makes perfect sense (to me at least) that the General should retire from his current job as-scheduled, but continue to take a leading role until the elections in October-2015.

More interesting will be to see, does he then stand (on his record by then) for some new-form right-wing/establishment party, and will the UDD similarly form a new non-Shin left-wing party, or will the same old faces continue to dominate ?

But that's perhaps for future threads, over the next fifteen months, or so.

[rametindallas]

You must have failed history in High School as everyone knows the People's Power Party, a Thaksin puppet government, won the first election (held a year after the coup) after the military appointed government of retired general Surayud stepped aside in 2007.

Revisionist, much?

Perfectly true. They won the election, as they always do, only to be swept aside by the courts in favour of more 'preferred' people, i.e., the Dems.

Still at the revisionist level, I see. A bit of cooking and some election fraud swept aside by courts must be wrong as it effected the party of the big boss in Dubai. MP's elect Abhisit as PM, but that's wrong, MPs election Samak/Somchai is right.

There's nothing wrong with critically examining past events, as is meant by the word 'revisionism'. Indeed, such practice is an integral part of debate.

'Negationism', or distortion of past events, describes your assertion that Abhisit's appointment was legitimate as far as the opinion of the general public was concerned. If it were, then why on earth did his party get so decisively defenestrated when he eventually had to call a general election? Why wasn't he re-elected?

There's nothing wrong with critically examining past events, as is meant by the word 'revisionism'.

You must have failed learning to read a dictionary in High School.

Revisionism: support of ideas and beliefs that differ from and try to change accepted ideas and beliefs especially in a way that is seen as wrong or dishonest

Describes you to a tee.

distortion of past events, describes your assertion that Abhisit's appointment was legitimate as far as the opinion of the general public was concerned.

Since when has the 'court of public opinion' had any legal bearing? NEVER

Were there any legal challenges to Abhisit's election to PM? NO

Could you have any way to prove what public opinion was at the time of Abhisit's election to PM? NO

Is twisting any truth and turning it on its head your stock in trade? YES

You use the methods of a propagandist and you are not skilled at it. Only a fellow sycophant or dim-wit would agree with your reasoning.

As for why Abhisit's party was not returned to power in the 2011 election, there will be books written on the subject of control of villagers' votes by pu yai ban and kamnans with threats of losing handouts if the votes were not right as well as outright vote buying (check out youtube for endless video or red shirt vote buying in the villages). Only a very low-information reader on this forum would not know how the elections were 'fixed'.

Edited June 30, 2014 by rametindallas