Thaskin and Democracy

If anyone has been aware there were riots in Thailand over alleged political corruption involving the Prime Minister, Thaskin Shinawatra. The protests were led by opponents of Thaskin and his leadership of the country, and were largely initiated when he decided to sell off his family's interests in some of his businesses. The details are not as important as the fact that a minority of the country was able to bring down the government still enjoying the support of the majority of the population. The fact is that Thaskin won the elections in 2001, then again in 2005 and then he won the snap election in 2006 he called to try and strengthen his political position.

His opponents cannot and should not have been allowed to force him from office through protesting against his govenrment even though a majority supported him. Is there something about democracy and majority rule that they don't seem to understand? They cannot exercise a veto over the right of the majority party to form a government, no matter how painful. If every opposition decided to take things to the streets in democracies when they don't like something the duly elected government does the precedent would be disastrous for democracy and for the future.

There has to be a point where you recognize you lost the elections and then try and fight again next time.