From the blog world.....
Will Yingluck debate Abhisit? | Asian Correspondent
By Bangkok Pundit
May 25, 2011
If BP was a gambler, BP would put money down on there being a debate given the odds of there being a debate don’t seem that high. Despite some statements by members of Puea Thai, Yingluck has actually not ruled out a debate. The Democrats are likely to continually raise the issue of Yingluck needing to debate Abhisit. The expectation seems to be that if there was a debate to quote Tulsie “the truth is that Abhisit could beat her 10 times at the podium”. Hence, there is a view that Yingluck won’t debate Abhisit as she knows she will lose.
However, BP thinks Yingluck will not directly debate Abhisit in a one-on-one debate, but if there is a debate featuring multiple party leaders Yingluck will then. In fact, multiple party leaders may actually be required for legal reasons. The Nation:Former Election Commission member Gothom Arya said an election debate would benefit the people as it would give more information about each party’s policies as well as the personality of party leaders who propose to be prime-ministerial candidates.
However, such a debate in Thailand might face legal constraints , he said.
“How can we give equal time to the leaders of all the political parties as stipulated by the law? Is it acceptable to hold debates for only some party leaders people see as having a better chance of becoming the prime minister? What [about] the supporters of small parties?” he asked.
“Party leaders with administrative experience would have an advantage over the new faces. In the current case, Abhisit would have an advantage over Yingluck – but a debate between Abhisit and Thaksin would be very interesting,” Gothom said.
Quick side note: Actually, a debate between Thaksin and Abhisit would be entertaining, but it will be disastrous for Yingluck as it would focus attention on Thaksin….
The Bangkok Post also notes that the only form of a debate currently being organized is with multiple party leaders:Asked about the invitation for an election debate on June 24 by the People’s Network for Election in Thailand (PNET), Ms Yingluck said she will have to check whether there is any appointment for election campaign or other important thing on that day.
“I will also have to see and consider details of the debate first,” she said.
PNET has invited leaders of leading political parties for the debate, including Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva of the Democrat.
BP: Now, what does “leading” mean? A chance of winning seats? Now, the debate format is where Abhisit excels and where Yingluck will be at a disadvantage, but if the debate format is Abhisit, Yingluck, Chaowarat (of BJT), Chumpol (Chat Thai Pattana), Chuwit etc all on show then this changes the dynamic. Yingluck then just has to perform better than most/all of the others aside from Abhisit and sound reasonable in her answers. The others are also at a disadvantage and will not want to be seen as bullying a woman either.
If there is a debate, the argument that she has not been tested then becomes significantly weaker. Yingluck is always going to face the nominee issue, but if she wants to appear as her own women then a debate is the best way to do this. In fact, it will be the best way to show to independent voters/silent majority she is a credible alternative to Abhisit. Now, for Yingluck to appear enough third and smaller political party leaders will also have to turn up so we will need to see what happens regarding there attendance first….
Finally, BP agrees with what Pichai says in the Bangkok Post:Even though Khun Yingluck is at a disadvantage in a debate against Khun Abhisit as far as experience is concerned, I am not sure it will be that easy for the prime minister as well. He cannot be too aggressive or arrogant. And certainly as far as experience in business is concerned, I dare say that she has a distinct advantage as she probably has a better understanding of how businessmen think and work.It may be wishful thinking on my part and Khun Yingluck’s political advisers may have many reasons why she should not agree to take up such a challenge. But I say why not?
Why not break the mould or political taboo and have a debate, and let the people decide?
BP: Indeed…
btw, mention of “moral” is mostly related to momentum and psychological factors, but can also relate to mandate and legitimacy.