Talk Elections

Thought we should have this.

Another election
Thaksin people vs. Military, aristocracy and elite.
Now, candidate is Thaksin's sister...

More of an electoral type event than an actual event, though.

I read that polling indicates a Thaksin victory. It is of course dubious whether polling reflects actual public mood and if election results will reflect actual public mood in a country like Thailand. And even then it is even more dubious whether official results will reflect actual results. And finally whether the government will reflect even the official results.

It's a long way to go if you don't have the military behind you in Thailand, it would seem.

Some of what should in a two-party system be the government's people are calling for a boycott.

I'm sorry, but is it possible that you missed a word there?

Nope. (Well, it would have been possible. But it is not true.)

They got cool posters, too:

()

I now understand your sentence, even if I'll maintain that it could have been phrased more clearly. :)

Yeah, basically. There's really not much to see there, it seems.

It's amusing how everyone here loves Thaksin just because opebo hates him. He's an extremely corrupt, not all that democratic either kleptocrat.

Who here loves Thaksin?

Gustaf has struck me as fond of him from his posts before.

Whatever the case I'm in favor of the liberal party known for being the opposition to previous right-wing military regimes over the party that put a former officer of one those regimes in the PM spot.

Exactly. Just like everybody else (excepting the Ope.)

And excepting me. I endorse the clown in my sig.

In latest Centre of Dhurakij Pundit University poll, of 33 constituencies in Bangkok, PTP is ahead in 22 and  Democrats up in 6.  As for a preferred choice of prime minister, 47% and 39% of the respondents want Pheu Thai candidate Yingluck Shinawatra and Democrat candidate Abhisit Vejjajiva respectively. Rak Santi’s Police General Purachai Piumsombun and Rak Thailand’s Chuvit Kamolvisit follow with 7% and 4% respectively.
In another poll for Bangkok,  37.9% of respondents said they would vote for constituency MP candidates of PTP, followed by the Democrats (22.2%), and Rak Santi (1.2%).
The Democrats came out with their own projection that they will win 185 out of the 500 seats where they will win 130 out of the 375 constituencies and 55 out of 125 party-list seats.  Democrats have 165 today.  This projection calls for the Democrats to win 22 out of the 33 Bangkok constituencies.  These polls indicate that these Democrat projections are not realistic.  And even if they were 185 seats will most likely be less than what PTP will win even under this Democrat rosy scenerio. 
Bangkok is where the Democrats should be strong.  If this is any indicator PTP will win and it could be with an absolute majority.

I'm not fond of him. I find it interesting that you or Opebo would support the champion of the poor (however corrupt he is) over the reactionary establishment. For instance, I thought you were opposed to monarchy, so why do you support the monarchist side?

And, quoting from Wikipedia: "Without meeting much resistance, a military junta overthrew the interim government of Thaksin Shinawatra on 19 September 2006. The junta abrogated the constitution, dissolved Parliament and the Constitutional Court, detained and later removed several members of the government, declared martial law, and appointed one of the king's Privy Counselors, General Surayud Chulanont, as the Prime Minister. The junta later wrote a highly abbreviated interim constitution and appointed a panel to draft a permanent constitution. The junta also appointed a 250-member legislature, called by some critics a "chamber of generals" while others claimed that it lacks representatives from the poor majority.[30][31]
In this interim constitution draft, the head of the junta was allowed to remove the prime minister at any time. The legislature was not allowed to hold a vote of confidence against the cabinet and the public was not allowed to file comments on bills.[32] This interim constitution was later surpassed by the permanent constitution on 24 August 2007.
Martial law was partially revoked in January 2007. The ban on political activities was lifted in July 2007,[33] following the 30 May dissolution of the Thai Rak Thai party. The new constitution was approved by referendum on 19 August, which led to a return to democratic elections on 23 December 2007."

Sounds very liberal and democratic to me. See, even though I'm not left-winged and not particularly fond of politicians like Thaksin I still don't like fascist military coups. Funny thing is, I thought you didn't either. But I guess that if Opebo likes them they must be good.

Oh, and here is the description of the anti-Thaksin PAD which led his overthrowal:

"The PAD consists of mainly of royalist upper and middle-class Bangkokians and Southerners, supported by the conservative factions of the Thai Army, some leaders of Democrat Party, and members of state-enterprise labor unions.[2][3]"

Sounds very liberal indeed. Further down:
"Citing the claimed failure of popular democracy in Thailand, the PAD has suggested constitutional amendments that would make Parliament a largely royally-appointed body.[26][27] It was strongly opposed to Thaksin's populist economic policies and attempts to decentralize political power. The Asian Human Rights Commission has noted of the PAD and their agenda that, "although they may not describe themselves as fascist, have fascist qualities."[28] The PAD is largely composed of royalists, has regularly invoked king Bhumibol Adulyadej in its protests, and has claimed that its enemies are disloyal to the monarchy.[29][30][31] It has openly called for the military and Thailand's traditional elite to take a greater role in politics.[32] The PAD is fiercely anti-Cambodian, with PAD leader and Foreign Minister Kasit Piromya calling Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen a "gangster", "crazy", a "tramp", a "slave", and saying that he would "use Hun Sen‘s blood to wash my feet."[33]"

It's good to see you know which side to take here, BRTD.

One interesting angle in this election is that both Abhisit Vejjajiva  and Thaksin Shinawatra are Thai Chinese.  Thai Chinese form 14% of the Thai popluation but dominate the Thai economy.  Abhisit Vejjajiva great-grandfather had a surname of Yuan and after serving as minster of health for the Thai Royal government, the Thai king granted his family the name Vejjajiva which means medical profession.  Thaksin Shinawatra family came to Thailand in the 1860s and had the surname Chiang.  They changed it in the 1930s during the anti-Chinese movenment at that time.  That anti-Chinese movenment was led by another Chinese Thai prime minster Plaek Pibulsongkram.  Plaek Pibulsongkram  was the real father of modern Thailand.  He renamed the country's name from Siam to Thailand and led Thailand into a alliance with Japan in WWII and then USA in the Cold War.  He mandated cultural and political Thai nationalism mostly along the lines of the Fascist movement in Europe at that time.  It would be the equivalent of having a person of Jewish background lead the Nazi party in Germany and then proceed with a radical German Nationalist agenda.  One of the reasons given by the Thai army for the overthrow of Thaksin Shinawatra  was that he disrespected the King with and undertone of disloyalty because he was not a real Thia being of Chinese background.  This election this line does not work as well since Abhisit Vejjajiva  is also of Chinese background.

Nobody really knows how many "Thai Chinese" there are... mostly because most of them are near totally assimilated and are in fact of only partly Chinese descent. It's like picking out Slavs in Germany... except that Chinese ancestry is a very vague indicator of higher social status, rather than lower as here.

By liberal party I was referring to the Democrat Party.

Thaksin's people on the other hand put this fascist and murderer in power: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samak_Sundaravej

That was after Thaksin was exiled and his party forbidden. Very liberal.

Anyway, here is your nice little party:

"The party upholds a constitutional monarchist and conservative position.[2] Numerous party members such as Somkiat Pongpaibul and Minister of Foreign Affairs Kasit Piromya were members of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD, commonly known as the "Yellow Shirts"), the royalist movement that helped overthrow Thaksin Shinawatra.[3] The party's electoral support bases are mainly richer constituencies in Bangkok and Southern Thailand. Since 2004, Democrat candidates won three elections for the governorship of Bangkok."

So, beyond the fact that it's basically the same as the PAD it doesn't sound very liberal. In any way.

Furthermore:

"A fact-finding panel at the Attorney-General's Office found that the Democrat Party bribed other parties to boycott the 2006 parliamentary election to force a constitutional crisis, and voted to dissolve the party. A junta tribunal acquitted Abhisit and the Democrats of the vote fraud charges, while banning Thaksin's Thai Rak Thai party for similar charges. Abhisit supported the junta's 2007 Constitution, calling it an improvement on the 1997 Constitution.[17]"

The most amusing thing is of course that the guy you brand as fascist was a member of the party which you branded as liberal and anti-fascist. Which just goes to show that you're being completely clueless and is just desperately trying to support your beloved idol in his support for the fascist side in Thai politics.

Yes, he was a member of the Democrats just as George Wallace and Strom Thurmond were members of the American Democrats. He split at about the same time as they did:


The Democrats as a party though were consistently opposed to fascist regimes:




I'm not too sure a movement ran by a rabid nationalist, racist and autocratic billionaire should be considered liberal.

Really the only logic in which one could call Thaksin a leftist is the through process of radical libertarians who like to say things like "Hitler and Mussolini were left wing."

You're seriously just BSing. Let me post what I did again, then:

"The party upholds a constitutional monarchist and conservative position.[2] Numerous party members such as Somkiat Pongpaibul and Minister of Foreign Affairs Kasit Piromya were members of the People's Alliance for Democracy (PAD, commonly known as the "Yellow Shirts"), the royalist movement that helped overthrow Thaksin Shinawatra.[3] The party's electoral support bases are mainly richer constituencies in Bangkok and Southern Thailand. "

I mean, do you have no reading comprehension? It's always been defined as being pro-king and anti-democracy.

"Although having no representatives in the cabinet, the Democrats had key representatives in the constitution drafting committee. Headed by Seni Pramoj and dominated by royalists under the direction of Prince Rangsit and Prince Dhani, the 1949 Constitution elevated the throne to its most powerful position since the 1932 overthrow of the absolute monarchy.[8] Among its features was a senate whose senators were to be appointed directly by the King. The constitution triggered protests among much of the public. It was attacked as contrary to the purpose of the 1932 revolution. Critics were branded republicans and communists.[9]"

You're basically just trolling here. There is no foundation for your position at all. It seems that during a period of time the military was actually for democracy which is why the Democrat party opposed them. Right now they are allied with the military and the king against democracy. They have lost a couple of elections but both times managed to outlaw the winning parties. How is that liberal?

---------------

Your Hitler and Mussolini analogy is amusing because that is precisely what you're doing. You're saying that a party that was once against the military must be the left - sort of like when people say that because Mussolini was originally a socialist or Hitler's party was called a worker's party they must be left-wingers.

If one looks at actual policy and voter bases there is no question that you're wrong.

Let me cite for you once again:

"The Thai Rak Thai party had a populist platform, appealing to indebted farmers - which had become indebted as a result of the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 - with promises of a strong economic recovery. The party also reached out to rural villages, and struggling businesses. Thai Rak Thai's policies have included a 30 Baht per hospital visit scheme, an extended debt moratorium for farmers, 1 million Baht microcredit development funds for all rural districts, and the One Tambon One Product project."

How is that not more left than the party of the rich guys who wants to give more power to the king and is supported by the army?

But, hey, I'll give you a deal: if you admit that you're willing to throw all your professed political ideals and principles over board and support a fascist political grouping just because some random guy on the internet that you've never met supports it (because he's a fascist) I will leave you be.

I don't care that you like fascists I just want to see you admit it.

The Hitler thing was in reference to libertarians saying things like "Well Hitler expanded the power of government so he was obviously left wing." It's blatantly idiotic to anyone who isn't a radical libertarian, but it's not too far off from calling Thaksin some type of left winger on those grounds. It should be blatantly obvious that all Thaksin cared about was pandering to his base of voters anyway. Robert Mugabe's base of support could also be described as "rural poor" and he started out with similar economic policies too.

Thaksin's party was called "Thai Rak Thai", which means "Thais Love Thais". That's basically a sentiment echoed when the BNP says things like "Britain for the British." He was an extreme nationalist and the rural poor often respond well to nationalistic sentiment. I've heard libertarians say things like that the BNP is left wing too. Was Jorg Haider left wing? His party proposed the nationalization of all agriculture, something that no other party did. In addition to his nationalism Thaksin had a horrible record of corruption, vote fraud, and a horrible human rights record of extrajudicial killings. Do you think the Muslims in southern Thailand are all fascists or aristocrats? That's what their voting patterns would imply if you accept "Thaksin = leftist/opposition = fascist" Did Samak become a leftist at some point before becoming PM too?

Furthermore the last election before Thaksin's ouster was boycotted by ALL opposition parties, not just the Democrats but also the conservative Chart Thai Party. Thaksin's party was later banned for pretty blatant vote fraud.

And Thanom Kittikachorn, a supporter of democracy? LOL.

Oh are you calling Xahar and Hashemite fascists too? They share opebo and I's views in regards to this.

I'm not saying that you're a fascist. I'm saying your only reason to oppose Thaksin is that Opebo does so. I never Thaksin was a great guy. But there can be no question that the party of the poor is more of the left than the party of the rich. Why do you want to support giving the unelected monarch so much power? Why do you oppose redistribution of wealth to the poor? Why do you oppose letting the party with more popular support actually running in the election?

All Thai politics seem pretty corrupt. Regardless, the rich elites always accuse the left parties and groups of being corrupt. It's what the Dixiecrats said of black office holders during the Reconstruction, for instance.

What is really amusing is that neither you nor your beloved Opebo would ever support the party that wants to give money to the poor against the party that wnats to protect the priveleges of the rich in any other country. Opebo does so because he actually lives there idn isn't a real left-winger and you do so because he does which is even more stupid.

So are Xahar and Hashemite fascists or people who based their political views only on what opebo supports? Are the Muslims of southern Thailand hardcore royalists?

Would you even care about Thai politics if opebo lived in Cambodia?

I've no idea what they said on the topic. You seem to think that one must either have your idiotic view or be a devout supporter of the King, since you always fall into some kind of either-or fallacy (I'm sure it has a cool name on wikipedia or tvtropes that you can look up), but that's not true.

For instance, I can recognize that Thaksin is likely a corrupt bastard while at the same time realize that he's the more left-winged of the political sides and that it's reasonable that whoever has the most popular support should be allowed to form the government in a democratic society. As well as thinking that breaking down the traditional elite is probably a good thing in such an unequal society.

Come on, Gustaf, Thaksin is a demagogue, who is adopting populist rhetoric purely to gain power.  'Leftism' doesn't really enter into this whole controversy above the level of the poor red-shirted extremists who got shot in the Silom Park.   I would certainly agree that the side I prefer has some fascist elements, though like most attempts at 'democracy' fascism is ascendant regardless of what party wins.  Democracy seems to me to be more the problem than 'fascism' - the majority of the people can always be counted on to prefer what I dislike.

Alas for me, it looks like the horrible Taksins are about to win and win big tomorrow.

Is there any reason for the Thaskins to think that contesting another election under another banner will prevent the military from being involved? They were deposed in a coup last time they won an election, and will most likely be thrown out if they win.

Posters are not permitted to call for military coups on this board. Thanks/diolch.

Why not?

see
http://203.150.244.91/web/en/page6.php
for latest
PTP set for majority.  PTP with 262 out of 500 for now will have an alliance with CP with 19 for a solid coalition government.  Rumors of talks between PTP and the military are ongoing into the night with a lot of details to be "worked out".

Looking at the results it seems polls were right about PTP taking a majority but wrong about PTP taking a majority of the constituency in Bangkok.  PTP took 10 out of 33 and DP took 23 out of 33.  Party list wise DP took 41% and PTP took 39% in Bangkok.

Any place with party list results by province? Me want make map.

Be careful, I don't think it is allowed on this board to mention the possibility of military remedies; your rumors of talks imply such a possibility.

Of course I am sure that there could be no such talks between the PTP and the Thai military, as a coup d'état is not only atrocious but impossible.

()

Yes here you go: http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/election/map-thailand

Here's the rough map I've made from that site, leaving a few provinces grey as they were too mixed to give a definite color (you could do something more complicated like lines or shading but I don't know how).  The big province in the northeast that's grey (Ubon Ratchathani) has a surprising amount of Democrat strength, the grey ones around Central Thailand, near Bangkok tend to be mixed Pueu Thai (Taksin), Democrat, Bumjai-Thai, and Chart Thai pattana. The Red areas - kind of close in suburbs of Bangkok are essentially slums, or low-rent areas inhabited mostly by people from Isaan.

Most of what you see that is red or yellow on the map is downright dominated by that party - Democrats dominate the south and Bangkok, the reds the heartland Isaan and North.  

Interesting note that the Bumjai-Thai and Chart Thai pattana have moved their support around quite a bit, still dominating their respective home provinces (Buriram and Supanburi), but catching very different ones outside that compared to previous elections.  Finally, the blue party on the map, Palun Chong, totally dominates Chonburi province (the home of the biggest sex tourist town) but has no strength elsewhere.

()

I'm not calling for one, I'm just stating that such a scenario is a real risk.

Oh, it's perfectly fine for people to mention the possibility of a military coup; there's no point in denying reality just because it's rather unpleasant. But cheering it on? No. In the same vein, I wouldn't allow someone to cheer on (say) the BNP here. If we are to have civilised discourse (and this is one board on this forum where we generally manage that) then there have to be a few limits here and there.

I do appreciate the irony of the whinging though.

The new PM is kinda hot.

If you are serious you're comically arrogant, but if not, ha ha, well done -  nice satire of an arrogant dictator.

Of course many people do support military coups, why wouldn't we?  You mention 'denying reality' and then make the assumption that the coup d'état is 'rather unpleasant'.  Of course the salient point about it is that in reality the coup d'état is very, extremely pleasant for a significant group, and most certainly for yours truly.  To deny this important fact about Thai politics is to completely fail to understand said nation, and of course to engage in the most egregious cultural imperialism (understandable, I know you're british).


Not a bit of irony involved, Al.  Apples and oranges - this forum is nothing like a nation-state.  You might as well charge someone for murder for dreaming about killing someone.  

Rather than solely waste my time dickering with the dictator of the board, I'll repost my laboriously fashioned map of the province-by-province constituency results, which, much to my chagrin, failed to garner any response the first time.  Gentlemen, it really isn't a bad map, if you want a moderately accurate sense of this election:

Just how mixed are the results in those central parts of the state?

You can check exactly at the site I provided as a source: http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/election/map-thailand

In most cases it was like one seat for Chart Patanna, one for BumJai-Thai, and one each for Democrats and Taksin.  Or other combinations which simply didn't give me a good reason for giving the province one color, and - apologies - I don't know how to make it checked or dashed or diagonaled, whatever you call that sort of thing.

OK checked it for you:

In the Central plains which you asked about, the grey provinces are like this:
Chachoengsao
Dem 2, Taksin 2
Utthai Thani
Dem 1, Chart Pattana 1
Lop Buri
Chart pattana 2, Taksin 2
Saraburi
Dem 1, Chart Pattana 1, Taksin 1
Nakon Sawan
Dem 1, Taksin 2

As for Ubon Ratchathani way over to the upper right, in the Northeast, I think I may have erred in not making it red, but I was just so amazed to see several Democrats winning in the Northeast (presumably they were from the large city of Ubon Ratchathani at the center of the province).  Even in the quite large cities of Khon Kaen and Udon Thani no Democrats managed to win.  Only in Ubon.:
Ubon Ratchathani
Chart Pattana 1, Democrats 3, Taksin 7

A lot of people here think that three factors could prevent this 1) people might be tired of coups and more 'fired up' against them, after the events of the last year or two with the Red Shirts and so forth, 2) the election is a specific and fairly overwhelming popular rejection of the coup of five years ago as well as government's handling of the Red riots since, and 3) there might be some kind of a compromise behind the scenes in the works, where the army and you-know-who (I don't mean him exactly, but that cabal) have come to some agreement with the Taksins.

Personally I feel that these are very reasonable speculations, however, I can only quote the historical list to show that a coup is possible:

Yes, I understand that. But I don't approve of it (I was raised to think of fascism as a bad thing and I'm too stuck in my ways to change now) and don't think that it is appropriate on a board dedicated to the democratic process and (in the end) to the idea of democracy.

Actually coups d'état are not connected to fascism exclusively - they can be related to numerous political ideologies and movements (in the country under discussion here they supported an 'Ancien Régime' much more than any 'fascism').  

And after all, this board is dedicated not to advocating or supporting the 'democratic process', but simply to examining it (and of course it was once dedicated discussing it, but that is in the past, apparently).

My world, my rules.

So please lay out for us which political ideas are allowed and which are to be censored.

A quick check of the list of Capital Offenses* should make that fairly clear. Number six, in case you've not spotted it. You will be executed at noon. By a bear, it seems.

In all seriousness, it's a matter of common sense (so a collection of prejudices, namely mine). If you insist on complaining in a manner that would get you shot in one of your beloved dictatorships, then an updated set of rules and regulations may be written and posted up here and some point in the reasonably near future.

*The more American spelling option makes more sense in that context, naturally.

I'm proud to say that my map more or less matches Wikipedia's, which as far as I can tell was made a few days after mine:

Wiki:
()

Mine:
()

Finally, gentlemen, I found an actual constituency map of this election:

()

Very interesting stuff, in some cases it serves to confirm my guesses  - for example 23 central, richer bangkok constituencies voted Dem, while 10 poorer  more peripheral but still urban constituencies voted Taksin, and in other cases throw me for a loop  - for example look at Ubon Ratchathani in the northeast - the one place in the Northeast you see a knot of several Democrat constituencies.  While some of them do look like they're in the urban heart of the eponymous capital of the province, a few look like they're quite rural.. very interesting.

What's so different north from south that they vote so differently?

So it's an ethic thing?

Ok, that's quite clear, thanks!

Wow, you can even see where the ethnic malay majority constituency is in that map!

Yeah, sorry guys, the ethnic and linguistic differences between Isaan and to a slightly lesser extent the North are somewhat common knowledge, and I didn't think to mention them.  They are extremely important to Thai politics.

Isaan people do in fact not only speak a different dialect they look quite different from Central Thais.  I can identify whether someone comes from Isaan, the North, South, or is a 'real Thai' about 80% of the time.