[From a question-a-day trivia calendar – It is a stretch to say the nation elected Samak. Samak was appointed coalition head by Thaksin after a futile attempt to have Chavalit Yongchaiyudh take the position.]
Popular Posts
- Election posters: Looking at you
- The last time a coup leader became PM after a return to democracy
- We really care about Thaksin
- Several parties, same owner
- Election posters: End the economic crisis
- Election poster pollution
- Election posters: Pheu Thai’s heart is people
- Why do Thai people always smile?
- Election posters: Take action, be clear
- More jokes about Yingluck
- Election posters: Stopping, Cleansing, Destroying
You say: “It is a stretch to say the nation elected Samak. Samak was appointed coalition head by Thaksin after a futile attempt to have Chavolit Yongjiyut take the position.”
Perhaps next time Abhisit comes up on your site you will will say: “It is a stretch to say the nation elected Abhisit. Abhisit’s party lost the 2007 election and was appointed head of a coalition that was cobbled together by the military and other higher ups after a hasty judicial decision to dissolve several coalition parties.”
At least Samak was the leader of a party that won a plurality in an election, which is far more than can be said for Abhisit. Samak was leader of the PPP in 2007 and 2008, led it to the election and was, I believe, a party list candidate. As leader of the largest party in the 2007 election, he arranged a coalition and became PM. Samak never made it a secret that he was Thaksin’s “proxy,” while Abhisit could never admit that he was the military’s proxy.
Don’t look now 2B.C, but your prejudice is showing … again.
Totally agree with Albert’s comment. Brilliant!
Albert will however find it difficult to prove that ANY Thai politician is capable of winning a fair fight. I find it best to figure out politicians on this basis. Would I really want to live next to a murderous xenophobe blowhard like Samak, or a slippery public schoolboy elitist like Abhiset. The answer will always be NO when there are much more reasonable ordinary human beings available. In which case, why should I feel inclined to make excuses for any of Thailand’s festering politicians. Dear Albert. They are ALL scumbags!
Of course Albert is ignoring that reason Thaksin appointed him PPP party leader was due to Samak’s impeccable royalist credentials and being well known among the rural poor from his days as a radio commentator on Army radio stations in the 1970’s.
His broadcasts in the days just before the Thammasat Massacre in 1976 are credited with whipping up the hatred and violence among the rural poor that made up the membership of the village scouts that participated in the attack. Thaksin was well aware that Samak’s audience in 1976 is the same group that make up his core following today.
John: I wasn’t ignoring anything.It was a comment on something specific. BTW, my understanding is that Samak was popular in Bangkok with the working class, not those in rural areas.
Perhaps you would be well-advised not to conflate populism with genuine popularity. I’ve never met anyone who actually opined that they liked Samak – although I’m pretty certain that they liked the color of his election cash and his other backhanders. We shouldn’t forget his role in inciting the very worst kind of vicious barbarity, while sitting comfortably in an army radio studio. The man was an absolute coward. Furthermore, it is pretty much a given that he became Thaksin’s proxy because he needed the cash through the mismanagement of his own and other folk’s financial resources. Let the f***** rot in hell!