Thread: Sakhon Nakhon : By-election result at midnight

Oooooo. I'm gonna stay up late tonight then with a mug of hot coco. Even though he's not in it, my moneys on Aphisit .... all 2 bahts worth.

Originally Posted by Bangyai

Oooooo. I'm gonna stay up late tonight then with a mug of hot coco. Even though he's not in it, my moneys on Aphisit .... all 2 bahts worth.

It's actually a very important result if you know anything about Thai politics.

Has Thaksin in his direct phone calls influenced the village headmen to influence their people to vote the right way

Can Newin enforce obedience?

Will Abhisit see that nobody gives a fuck without 500 baht attached?

Originally Posted by teddy

Originally Posted by Bangyai

Oooooo. I'm gonna stay up late tonight then with a mug of hot coco. Even though he's not in it, my moneys on Aphisit .... all 2 bahts worth.

It's actually a very important result if you know anything about Thai politics.

Well thanks for that Teddy but if you can bear with me I think you'll see I was merely being flippant.

Actually, I'm not surprised at the result. I have read and heard many people trashing the political nuance of the rural electorate , especially north easterners, and accusing them of being as fickle as a five hundred baht note. IMO this result demonstrates that most of them have stuck with the party that they believe will best serve their interests and that the intensive campaign to turn Thaksin into the all pervading bogie man has largely fallen on deaf ears. Its all very well for Aphisit to croon smoothing platitudes about ' everything being back to normal ' and that ' things are getting better ' but its pretty clear that out in the boonies a lot of people still support the ousted premier.

Having said that....... I'd call this a real hobsons choice. Pheu Thai or Newin....yuk.

that's because rural Thai are extremely stupid and loyal,

they believe in Ghosts and all kind of funny shit, like Thaksin being a nice billionaire and giving away his money to the poor

That's why a Democratic election system doesn't really work in a country with poor and uneducated voters, they are easily manipulated.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

That's why a Democratic election system doesn't really work in a country with poor and uneducated voters, they are easily manipulated.

Unlike wealthy and well educated France for example, where in the 2002 Presidential election, the slogan "Vote for the crook, not for the fascist" secured for that pillar of integrity, Jacques Chirac, a landslide victory.

^ because LePen was a good choice maybe ?

^ Don't be absurd BF. I am simply rebutting your statement, that by inference states that only in more developed countries can Democracy work.

A casual look at the realities of various Western elections will show that depsite all their advantages in education and or wealth, the electorate are often forced to make a choice between the lesser of two evils. That the electorate is wise to their being conned time and time again is illustrated by amongst other places, Britain, where for the last few general, local and Euro elections barely half the eligible voters, if that, even bothered to vote.

Education and wealth may be one factor in deciding sensible voting practices, but to keep harping on it as if it is the key factor in all cases, as you seem to do, is easily disproved.

Originally Posted by Warwick

I am simply rebutting your statement, that by inference states that only in more developed countries can Democracy work.

it's a question of degree, the probability for Democracy to work in a poor and uneducated country is very unlikely.

not to say that western democracies with a more educated population are perfect, but they are more likely to succeed. The USA being an exception though, or is it ? the majority of its population is quite uneducated, same a third world country. The US, like China, has two system within.

Originally Posted by Warwick

A casual look at the realities of various Western elections will show that depsite all their advantages in education and or wealth, the electorate are often forced to make a choice between the lesser of two evils. That the electorate is wise to their being conned time and time again is illustrated by amongst other places, Britain, where for the last few general, local and Euro elections barely half the eligible voters, if that, even bothered to vote.

again, I don't disagree, but Democracy is more likely to succeed in a country with a population that is properly educated or at least politically involved. When Democracy is being tested, that population is more likely to do the right thing.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

again, I don't disagree, but Democracy is more likely to succeed in a country with a population that is properly educated or at least politically involved. When Democracy is being tested, that population is more likely to do the right thing.

but it seems to work in the USA so why not in Thailand