Majority of Thais don’t understand primary voting system, poll finds

[baboon]

4 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

Yes, how about some voter education.

Indeed, how about that?

Where is the voter education?

Have you seen any?

I haven't.

What are they waiting for?

Waiting to get approval to roll it out?

 

How about first educating the people by telling them honestly and openly the pros and cons of the new system.
How about have debates and discussions where supporters and academics talk about it.

When thats done, how about asking the people how they think about it.

And then following the will of the poeple.

 

Isn't that a nice idea. Seems a lot like how they do it elsewhere around the world....

But, but, what if they were still to vote for the wrong candidates? We couldn't be having that, could we?

[halloween]

5 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

The opinion of PTP supporters on this forum doesn't count as they also cheer about kids being killed in Trat and think voting makes a democracy.

 

But in all seriousness, I don't think anybody here really cares how MPs are picked as nobody will be able to name more than 5 MPs of any party. Nobody likes Charlerm or knows him personally, so why you think his nomination would be an integral part of problems people have with this change?

 

What most do care about is that the junta is working extremely hard to stack the deck of cards to get an outcome they like. 

But we all know that if they don't like the outcome they will simply do another coup and changes the rules of the game again, till they finally win.

 

Name me a country that prospered under military rule.

And please do not mention China without understanding why China is showing such growth in the past decades.

Baboon and you are taking the same attitude, the junta proposed it so it must be bad, which is completely illogical and ignores any argument in its favour.

It works in other democratic countries, and if nothing else, prevents the picking of MP candidates by the party leader(ship) and returns that right to the individual party members. Is that not more democratic?

[robblok]

5 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

The opinion of PTP supporters on this forum doesn't count as they also cheer about kids being killed in Trat and think voting makes a democracy.

 

But in all seriousness, I don't think anybody here really cares how MPs are picked as nobody will be able to name more than 5 MPs of any party. Nobody likes Charlerm or knows him personally, so why you think his nomination would be an integral part of problems people have with this change?

 

What most do care about is that the junta is working extremely hard to stack the deck of cards to get an outcome they like. 

But we all know that if they don't like the outcome they will simply do another coup and changes the rules of the game again, till they finally win.

 

Name me a country that prospered under military rule.

And please do not mention China without understanding why China is showing such growth in the past decades.

You really don't get it do you.. (or dont want to get it) if MP's are directly voted in they need to preform well or lose support next time. Now people can only vote democrat or PTP and some others. Most people vote because of how they always voted. They would not leave democrats or PTP because of a MP.. but if they could chose they certainly would not have chosen those in power. So this will give the people more power.. and hero Thaksin a lot less. I guess that is what you worry about because without his financial backing the PTP will preform less.

 

The junta is just trying to break Thaksin his power (and i support those efforts) but this system is far more democratic.. and you are always saying you love democracy.. but now that it poses problems for your PTP your against it.. bit hypocrite.

 

Countries that prospered under military rule 

Germany (it did prosper got out of the deepest crisis ever.. only problem that they started a war but don't see that happening here)

[robblok]

1 minute ago, halloween said:

Baboon and you are taking the same attitude, the junta proposed it so it must be bad, which is completely illogical and ignores any argument in its favour.

It works in other democratic countries, and if nothing else, prevents the picking of MP candidates by the party leader(ship) and returns that right to the individual party members. Is that not more democratic?

You hit the nail on its head.. junta suggests it.. must be bad. They don't even seem to look at it logically.

 

 

[pumpjack]

i smiled when i read the headline " Majority of Thais don’t understand primary voting system "

 

my wife still thinks santa clause is real  and 99% of bar girls i talk to thaink mickey mouse is a cat 

[baboon]

1 minute ago, robblok said:

You hit the nail on its head.. junta suggests it.. must be bad. They don't even seem to look at it logically.

 

 

They don't suggest anything. If they want it, they do it.

[baboon]

7 hours ago, pumpjack said:

i smiled when i read the headline " Majority of Thais don’t understand primary voting system "

 

my wife still thinks santa clause is real  and 99% of bar girls i talk to thaink mickey mouse is a cat 

Get yourself a more interesting circle of aquaintances, then...

[robblok]

5 minutes ago, baboon said:

They don't suggest anything. If they want it, they do it.

Does not make your response to it any different.. kinda like pavlov and his dogs... you read junta and condemn it. 

 

Tell me what you think is really wrong with this system and debate it on its merits and faults. 

Edited June 25, 2017 by robblok

[halloween]

5 minutes ago, robblok said:

Does not make your response to it any different.. kinda like pavlov and his dogs... you read junta and condemn it. 

 

Tell me what you think is really wrong with this system and debate it on its merits and faults. 

they don't have it in DPRK?

[mogo51]

2 hours ago, Ceruhe said:

I think if we just 1:1 swap out "don't understand" for "don't matter" it would be spot on as well. Different connotation, same result.

What is voting? That would be closer to the true answer.

[LannaGuy]

Majority of Thais don’t understand primary voting system much, poll finds

 

fixed

[Bob12345]

25 minutes ago, robblok said:

You hit the nail on its head.. junta suggests it.. must be bad. They don't even seem to look at it logically.

 

 

Did he hit the nail on the head?

Did i state somewhere this new voting system is bad?

I can't remember i did, nor can I find it in my posts. Maybe you can enlighten me and quote me where i said this system is bad or worse than the current system.

 

What i did say is that the military is trying to stack the deck and what i did say is that they should have an open debate about the merits of the system and let the people decide.

But i guess you guys (you and halloween) will oppose that because.... uhm, yeah, why you guys don't want the people to decide?

Edited June 25, 2017 by Bob12345
spelling

[Bob12345]

7 hours ago, robblok said:

Does not make your response to it any different.. kinda like pavlov and his dogs... you read junta and condemn it. 

 

Tell me what you think is really wrong with this system and debate it on its merits and faults. 

Thats a great idea. 

If we discuss the merits and its faults we can agree on certain points and decide if it will be good or bad for the country. We will need some academics in political science to discuss this, politicians can give their opinion, and representatives of other groups. That is seriously a fabulous idea!

 

Maybe you should share that idea with the authoritarian regime you support.

Maybe they could organize debates and broadcast it.

And then organize polls all around the country to see how the people like it.

 

almost like a democracy, don't you think?

Edited June 25, 2017 by metisdead
Please do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes.

[halloween]

2 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

Did he hit the nail on the head?

Did i state somewhere this new voting system is bad?

I can't remember i did, nor can I find it in my posts. Maybe you can enlighten me and quote me where i said this system is bad or worse than the current system.

 

What i did say is that the military is trying to stack the deck and what i did say is that they should have an open debate about the merits of the system and let the people decide.

But i guess you guys (you and halloween) will oppose that because.... uhm, yeah, why you guys don't want the people to decide?

Perhaps you could explain how it is 'stacking the deck' by introducing a more democratic way to select MP candidates?

 

If they were to announce an education program, an open debate, and then a vote on whether primary voting should be used, would you applaud or claim it was a trick to delay elections? Come on, admit it, whatever they do will be wrong in your, and others, eyes.

[robblok]

8 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

Did he hit the nail on the head?

Did i state somewhere this new voting system is bad?

I can't remember i did, nor can I find it in my posts. Maybe you can enlighten me and quote me where i said this system is bad or worse than the current system.

 

What i did say is that the military is trying to stack the deck and what i did say is that they should have an open debate about the merits of the system and let the people decide.

But i guess you guys (you and halloween) will oppose that because.... uhm, yeah, why you guys don't want the people to decide?

If the system is good why would the people have to decide ? Do you really think the people would decide based on merit or based on what their political leaders tell them to vote.  I am all for a nice open discussion of this system would be good to hear what the objections are against more democracy. 

 

 

But in all seriousness, I don't think anybody here really cares how MPs are picked as nobody will be able to name more than 5 MPs of any party. Nobody likes Charlerm or knows him personally, so why you think his nomination would be an integral part of problems people have with this change?

 

seems here you are against it as you say it will solve nothing or has no influence.

 

 

Edited June 25, 2017 by robblok

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

Thats a great idea. 

If we discuss the merits and its faults we can agree on certain points and decide if it will be good or bad for the country. We will need some academics in political science to discuss this, politicians can give their opinion, and representatives of other groups. That is seriously a fabulous idea!

 

Maybe you should share that idea with the authoritarian regime you support.

Maybe they could organize debates and broadcast it.

And then organize polls all around the country to see how the people like it.

 

almost like a democracy, don't you think?

I have no problems with what you say.. just as you have no connection to kid killers and hospital bombers correct ?. I don't support all that the side i prefer does neither do you. 

 

I am all for an open discussion of the merits.. but because I can't work magic.. lets discuss the pro's and cons here on the forum. 

[JAG]

would anybody care to explain how voting will be done now?

Sent from my SM-G950F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

By the right sort of people.
There are plenty of ways to ensure that the people you don't wish to have an ( effective) vote can be disenfranchised.
Multiple round voting has the advantages of:
1) Giving greater opportunities to confuse the less well informed ( particularly when you have ensured that you have a handle on the media, and can limit the freedom to campaign.
2) Increasing the opportunities to ensure that the "good" candidates are selected and stand.
3) Possibly leading to many becoming bored with a long drawn out process and therefore losing interest.

[williamgeorgeallen]

2 hours ago, halloween said:

Amazing isn't it, that quite insular people don't understand a new concept. Must be a trick to delay elections.

 

That decided, could we get back to the pros and cons of primary voting?

ha, with the education system it may be decades before thais can be taught how the system works. another good delaying tactic  general.

[Bob12345]

5 minutes ago, halloween said:

If they were to announce an education program, an open debate, and then a vote on whether primary voting should be used, would you applaud or claim it was a trick to delay elections? Come on, admit it, whatever they do will be wrong in your, and others, eyes.

I would applaud it.

If the people got a fair picture of the pros and cons and this system would yield the best results i would applaud it.

 

And how can it be a trick to delay elections? What elections? The ones that were supposed to happen a year ago? 5555

 

Ooooooh, ouch. I am sorry, your whole world view is based on that whoever is against a unelected military leader deciding for others what to do and think while filling its own pockets and putting his friends in power must be supporting Taksin, hospital bombers, kid killers, and men in black.

Well, seems that your simplistic view of the world is not totally correct after all...

[wanderluster]

majority of thais dont understand garbage cans either

[Bob12345]

10 minutes ago, robblok said:

1.

If the system is good why would the people have to decide ? Do you really think the people would decide based on merit or based on what their political leaders tell them to vote.  I am all for a nice open discussion of this system would be good to hear what the objections are against more democracy. 

 

 

 

2.

seems here you are against it as you say it will solve nothing or has no influence.

 

 

1. And there you have it: the reason why you support the junta. You think the people are too easily influenced or too dumb to decide for themselves so you want someone else to do it for them. You keep saying you are pro-democracy but here you clearly show that you do not support democracy for the Thai people and probably never will.

 

2. No, and I have serious trouble how you get that conclusion from what I said.

I said I think nobody really cares. So therefore I am against? How does that work? 

Please give me a peak into how your brain works, i am intrigued.

[Bob12345]

50 minutes ago, robblok said:

Countries that prospered under military rule 

Germany (it did prosper got out of the deepest crisis ever.. only problem that they started a war but don't see that happening here)

You have got to be kidding right?

This is about the worst example you could have picked, I have never seen anybody ask so openly for Godwin's law to be used against them.

You seriously crack me up.

[baboon]

5 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

 

And how can it be a trick to delay elections? What elections? The ones that were supposed to happen a year ago? 5555

 

No, clearly the election that was supposed to be held the year before that. Or perhaps the election that was supposed to be held the year before that...

[robblok]

2 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

1. And there you have it: the reason why you support the junta. You think the people are too easily influenced or too dumb to decide for themselves so you want someone else to do it for them. You keep saying you are pro-democracy but here you clearly show that you do not support democracy for the Thai people and probably never will.

 

2. No, and I have serious trouble how you get that conclusion from what I said.

I said I think nobody really cares. So therefore I am against? How does that work? 

Please give me a peak into how your brain works, i am intrigued.

1) You are right I am thinking that people are easily influenced here in this country. Whole villages declared red.. people toeing the party line.. sounds a lot like China. So yea.. I do think that people here are not great independent thinkers. I think democracy is nice but has major drawbacks if a population is not educated.. or like here often votes how they are told. Democracy works better in better educated countries. 

 

2) was not an endorsement of the program at all.. sounded like a negative picture of it. So I keep looking at it that way. 

 

 

[robblok]

1 minute ago, Bob12345 said:

You have got to be kidding right?

This is about the worst example you could have picked, I have never seen anybody ask so openly for Godwin's law to be used against them.

You seriously crack me up.

You asked about countries that prospered.. Germany did prosper before it started the war.. You only asked about prospering. I replied your question.You yourself already excluded China.. (fun telling people how they have to answer) You only asked about prospering. you did not set a time frame for the prospering.. I just replied and I was right.. now your making stuff up again. So typical of you. 

[Bob12345]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

1) You are right I am thinking that people are easily influenced here in this country. Whole villages declared red.. people toeing the party line.. sounds a lot like China. So yea.. I do think that people here are not great independent thinkers. I think democracy is nice but has major drawbacks if a population is not educated.. or like here often votes how they are told. Democracy works better in better educated countries. 

So why do you want to discuss the pros and cons of a political system if you are against democracy in Thailand anyways?

No matter the pros and cons, you want an unelected person and his entourage ruling the country (at least until the people are "educated" enough which will not happen the coming decades).

[robblok]

4 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

So why do you want to discuss the pros and cons of a political system if you are against democracy in Thailand anyways?

No matter the pros and cons, you want an unelected person and his entourage ruling the country (at least until the people are "educated" enough which will not happen the coming decades).

Why i want to discuss it hear.. maybe because its a discussion board and that is what we do here. I am not sure what else to do here.. all agree and sing kumbayaa ?

 

I am not against democracy in Thailand.. i say it works not as well here and that people are easily influenced and listen to the ones they own allegiance too. That is the whole basis of the system here (patronage system). I thought you would have known by now. 

[baboon]

11 minutes ago, robblok said:

You asked about countries that prospered.. Germany did prosper before it started the war.. You only asked about prospering. I replied your question.You yourself already excluded China.. (fun telling people how they have to answer) You only asked about prospering. you did not set a time frame for the prospering.. I just replied and I was right.. now your making stuff up again. So typical of you. 

So, Nazi Germany prospered under dictatorship until the said dictatorship left the country as a pile of rubble and its population foraging among the ruins for something, anything, to eat. What a ringing endorsement for that system of government. 

Edited June 25, 2017 by baboon

[Bob12345]

4 minutes ago, robblok said:

You asked about countries that prospered.. Germany did prosper before it started the war.. You only asked about prospering. I replied your question.You yourself already excluded China.. (fun telling people how they have to answer) You only asked about prospering. you did not set a time frame for the prospering.. I just replied and I was right.. now your making stuff up again. So typical of you. 

Germany did prosper before it started the war, partly because it was preparing for the war. And see how that prosperity ended, the country did not look that great after the defeat.

 

I already wanted China to be excluded not because China is the great success story of prosperity under an undemocratic rule, but because it is too long of a story to make the point why China's prosperity was not that much of an accomplishment and won't last that long.

 

You could also have answered North Korea by the way, by you logic they are doing tremendous now compared to the decades of famine.

 

And strange you only could chose from 2 countries. There must have been hundreds of military governments all around the government in the past 100 years.

How did 99% of them end?

[robblok]

Just now, baboon said:

So, Nazi Germany prospered under dictatorship until the said dictatorship left the country as a pile of rubble and it's people foraging among the ruins for something, anything, to eat. What a ringing endorsement for that system of government. 

Yes it prospered for quite some time years before it started that war. You know how bad the economy was there. Its not a ringing endorsement. China is but Bob was telling me what i could and could not answer kinda like a little dictator.