Jump to content
BANGKOK
webfact

Future Forward scores landslide win in Chiang Mai’s election re-run

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, scorecard said:

How sweet you are, like anywhere there are folks who respect the law and there are those who do things very carefully so they don't get caught, and in this country (and othrs) there are without doubt some 'groups' who have absolutely no ethics, in fact they believe they are above the law. And yes the same comment applies to every aspect of the curent election and the NCPO, and the judge who recently scolded the young policeman for having the gall to asl for his license,etc etc etc. 

What about giving a tip in a Restaurant would that be illegal as well? Just wondering like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Artisi said:

Have they both left the building, didn't notice....... 

Yes big sister hasn't been seen for a few months, disappeared when there was talk of further charges for the folks involved in the fake C2C rice deals, the case where the minister and his assistant got 42 years and 36 years in jail respectively. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, monkfish said:

What about giving a tip in a Restaurant would that be illegal as well? Just wondering like.

That's up to you and has nothing to do with the case in point.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, arithai12 said:

You are absolutely right, to donate 2000B to a temple is indeed an immoral and unethical act. Everybody else understood it and that's why no other candidate made any donations to temples.

Sure.

Thais donate to temples all the time. Temples even have donation boxes. People donating money here in temples is about as normal as it gets. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, scorecard said:

That's up to you and has nothing to do with the case in point.

Actually, it does. Temples here are supposed to offer some form of sanctuary. Donating money to them so they can continue to do so would be seen as a form of making merit. Would you begrudge a politician giving monks food in the morning? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Ozman52 said:

Is that relevant? TIT.

 

what I find amazing is that in all the moaning and whining about this system, not one person has even commented that FFP were allotted 50 party list seats, 1/3 of the available total. Why? Because they had wide community support, but not strong enough most localities, winning only 30 constituencies. But they received ~17.7% of the total votes, this was multiplied by 500 to give 88, and their 30 seats were topped up to 80 to show their actual level of electorate support. 

That calculation is a simplification and approximation but close enough.

 

Some may argue that if the vote goes 51/49, 51 wins and the 49 can go cry. Which is the more democratic?

 

I think having 2 votes is better, as Thailand used to, one for the constituency, it's very important to have your own MP who will work or not for you as the case may be, and then the Party List MPs where voters can select the party whose policy they like.

Who will want to go on a party list for Pheua Thai next time, not one MP! 

Regarding FF, yes they benefitted enormously from the new system, it must rile the junta a lot, yet the EC, appointed by the junta, changed the calculation criteria to strip FF of many seats.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, bannork said:

I think having 2 votes is better, as Thailand used to, one for the constituency, it's very important to have your own MP who will work or not for you as the case may be, and then the Party List MPs where voters can select the party whose policy they like.

Who will want to go on a party list for Pheua Thai next time, not one MP! 

Regarding FF, yes they benefitted enormously from the new system, it must rile the junta a lot, yet the EC, appointed by the junta, changed the calculation criteria to strip FF of many seats.

 

2 votes defeats the purpose, as obviously the MP you vote for will come from the party you like. The aim is to give representation to the parties that get a lot of votes but don't win many seats. FFP were huge beneficiaries, I can't see that they could have benefited much more.

 

Edited by Ozman52
spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Wilsonandson said:

You bet, with marijuana legal people can begin to have deep thoughts, spawn great ideas, start new food cravings, re-kindle their sex lives, cope with suffering, enjoy the simple life, focus on that hobby, learn the art of conversation, make new friends and appreciate good music.

 

Wow, all upside, no downside?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Death from caffeine...? mmm...studies have shown coffee to be quit benign.

 

I'm not sure how benign Thai-cannabis really is though. Wasn't there a Uni-study done recently on 500kgs of ganja supplied by the police. The study revealed the stuff to be so polluted by pesticides and other toxic elements to render it unfit for human consumption!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, scorecard said:

Wow, world shattering.

Thanx for your input.

One line to$$er.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...