Constitution Referendum

This usually works perfectly well since Thai people are pretty honest and keep there promises. The now banned TRT was notorious for this kind of practice.

It's nice to know there is some transparency in the actual voting process, but you have to appreciate the contrast between honesty and ethics. Honest enough to carry out the promises with somewhat unethical (is vote buying illegal in Thailand?) vote-buying.

There is some transparency for sure. Just look at the long faces of some junta members. They didn't expect about a 70 - 80 percent "yes" but anything like this recent result.

In Thailand buying votes is absolutely illegal and a criminal offence which will lead to severe punishment to the buyer.

Like gambling, which is also illegal but still popular …

... minus the knee-jerk reactions so beloved of many members, turn to this week's Economist magazine's coverage of the referendum. Warning: the article contains some long words - http://www.economist.com/world/asia/dis ... id=9687312

For those who have difficulty accessing the site, here's a summary. 58% of the eligible population voted and of those 57% voted in favour of the Constitution. Some of those claiming to vote in favour said they voted "yes" merely to hasten the next phase - the general election - rather than having any belief in the virtues of the Constitution itself. That is, they were voting to end the military dictatorship. Many ex-TRT members have joined a new party, the PPP, whose leader has (surprise, surprise) now been charged over corruption allegations from the distant past. Finally, even in the notoriously unreliable world of Asian economic statistics, which are usually an arm of government propaganda, the Thai economy slowed to 4% growth when the generals took over and hasn't improved. Oh, and the Economist doesn't mince any words about who was behind the coup, describing it as the "royalist-military elite"

... minus the knee-jerk reactions so beloved of many members, turn to this week's Economist magazine's coverage of the referendum. Warning: the article contains some long words - http://www.economist.com/world/asia/dis ... id=9687312

For those who have difficulty accessing the site, here's a summary. 58% of the eligible population voted and of those 57% voted in favour of the Constitution. Some of those claiming to vote in favour said they voted "yes" merely to hasten the next phase - the general election - rather than having any belief in the virtues of the Constitution itself. That is, they were voting to end the military dictatorship. Many ex-TRT members have joined a new party, the PPP, whose leader has (surprise, surprise) now been charged over corruption allegations from the distant past. Finally, even in the notoriously unreliable world of Asian economic statistics, which are usually an arm of government propaganda, the Thai economy slowed to 4% growth when the generals took over and hasn't improved. Oh, and the Economist doesn't mince any words about who was behind the coup, describing it as the "royalist-military elite"

Well, looks like political parties are usually not established for democracy but for excuses, and blaming the voters for there own faults.

blaming the voters for there own faults.

Or possibly even their own faults

... minus the knee-jerk reactions so beloved of many members, turn to this week's Economist magazine's coverage of the referendum. Warning: the article contains some long words - http://www.economist.com/world/asia/dis ... id=9687312

For those who have difficulty accessing the site, here's a summary. 58% of the eligible population voted and of those 57% voted in favour of the Constitution. Some of those claiming to vote in favour said they voted "yes" merely to hasten the next phase - the general election - rather than having any belief in the virtues of the Constitution itself. That is, they were voting to end the military dictatorship. Many ex-TRT members have joined a new party, the PPP, whose leader has (surprise, surprise) now been charged over corruption allegations from the distant past. Finally, even in the notoriously unreliable world of Asian economic statistics, which are usually an arm of government propaganda, the Thai economy slowed to 4% growth when the generals took over and hasn't improved. Oh, and the Economist doesn't mince any words about who was behind the coup, describing it as the "royalist-military elite"

Bwa ha ha ha Bwaaa ha ha ha, or how ever it goes, The Economist! You mean that sad rag that has supported Bush Blair and Thaksin through out? It used to be a reasonable read, oh, lets say in the late eighties, when I was using it to swot fellow boys buttocks, now it is drivel, the correspondents rude, up their own arse-holes, their silly opinionated biased crap even watered down especially to break into the American market. They mistakenly think (might have something to do with the fact they are a British bog wipe) they are being read by the leaders dealers shakers and makers of the day so are particularly sycophantic........Dear Economist are you still wondering what happened to all those weapons of mass destruction? Bwa ha ha ha ha.

Bwa ha ha ha ha.

I see someone has let the children out to play