What the election outcome tells us

[webfact]

What the election outcome tells us

By Tulsathit Taptim 
The Nation

 

 

Nobody is happy. That probably sums up the feeling after Sunday’s general election, which was predictably dictated by the prolonged political divide rather than tax, education and cannabis promises.
 

Abhisit Vejjajiva had the most obvious reason to be upset, but the Pheu Thai alliance will also be dismayed by the questionable legitimacy of their self-declared victory. The other side, meanwhile, may look at the popular vote with some satisfaction but will be staring at a rocky political scene from now on.

 

For the first time ever, a pro-Shinawatra party failed to top both the “seats” and the “votes” table. Pheu Thai won the greatest number of constituency seats but dropped to second in the competition for votes. Its main opponent, the Phalang Pracharat Party, won the second-highest number of seats but gathered the most votes nationwide.

 

Understandably, both camps have declared victory. Pheu Thai is adamant the election confirmed its right to take power, which has been maintained against all odds. “Your rules say it’s the number of seats that counts and here we are. We played by your rules and we won,” was the party’s unspoken message as it forged ahead in efforts to form a new government.

 

Not so fast, said Phalang Pracharat. We are new and have been attacked left and right. We are labelled pro-dictatorship. Much of the Thai media does not like us. We have also been up against influential Western naysayers. And yet here we are, supported by more Thais than you.

 

Pheu Thai can justifiably claim that the dissolution of its sister party, Thai Raksa Chart, snatched away millions of votes from the camp. Phalang Pracharat could respond that the remarkable support it got as a new party in Bangkok and other parts of Thailand, thrashing the Democrat Party in the process, must count for something.

 

Thais remain deeply divided. That’s the big picture emerging from the election figures and claims and counter-claims by Pheu Thai, Phalang Pracharat and their supporters. Spurred by fears that Thaksin Shinawatra could return, many life-long Democrat supporters played safe and turned against the party. Despite potentially explosive controversies deemed unhealthy for Thai norms, Pheu Thai still won the highest number of constituencies.

 

Phalang Pracharat represents one value and Pheu Thai another. They live under the same Constitution but, clearly, their treatment of certain important subjects is not the same. There are supporters of both parties who are sympathetic and understanding, but Pheu Thai, or its top echelon at least, has grown to represent one ideology, which Phalang Pracharat has vowed to oppose while promising to do a better job at it than the Democrats.

 

That’s why Abhisit was rejected by the voters and sent into early retirement. In a divided political climate where “extremes” sell, he tried to walk a tightrope of neutrality strung between them. His mistakes were to bet on a neutral “market” that was small, and be caught between two rival camps that were pushing him towards their enemies. This meant few voters considered his party a “safe” choice.

 

Election numbers sparked pride in the new star of Thai politics, Future Forward, but they will also force it rethink what Thais really want. 

 

Voters embraced Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit’s message in huge numbers, but the party he shows contempt for received an even bigger share of the vote. The Future Forward leader has vowed to dismantle “all legacies of the junta”, but how he acknowledges the will of almost 8 million citizens who voted for Phalang Pracharat could represent his biggest challenge.

 

It’s reasonable to assume that a big chunk of pro-Future Forward votes came from first-time voters, many of whom liked Thanathorn’s youthful image as an alternative to old-guard politics. As a fresh face, he deserves the benefit of the doubt when it comes to past activities and current ideologies, but he would be making a big mistake if he thinks all his voters were driven by ideology and principle.

 

Of the top three parties in the election standings, Future Forward lies in the most peculiar place. Pheu Thai sells and will continue to sell the Shinawatras, while Phalang Pracharat is projecting itself as their main opposition. These “markets” rarely overlap and have prevented any newcomer from shining, but somehow Future Forward has managed to become the third-biggest force in the industry and threaten both leaders.

 

Days, probably weeks, of nasty horse-trading are now guaranteed. The greatest irony in this supposed ideological showdown is that the people who will decide the outcome are almost entirely unencumbered by ideology.

 

In fact, it may not have been totally accurate to state that nobody is happy. A few politicians currently lying bottom of the election table could be sitting pretty at the moment. Offers will be pouring in from the “ideological” winner, who may stop at nothing to get what they want.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30366607

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2019-03-27

[Samui Bodoh]

I can't decide between calling this 'gibberish' or a 'nonsensical word salad'. 'Nonsensical gibberish', perhaps? Where does one begin with Kh Tulsahit?

 

A column about the election and not one mention of Prayut? Nor Prayut's... er... ahem... oh... "Mobile Cabinet meetings"? Or Prayut's promises of billions and billions and billions and billions in handouts (hmm... wasn't the Junta against "Populism?)? No mention of a Junta-rigged 'new' political system? No mention of an appointed Senate. No mention of the military's role in "urging" a proper vote? No mention of the threats from the military? No mention, just a "discussion" about ideology as if the Phalang Pracharat were a normal political party and not something ginned up by the military/Junta using public funds? 

 

The simple fact is that the Junta's party can only "win" by cheating. 

 

They are cheating cheaters who cheat.

 

"...Phalang Pracharat could respond that the remarkable support it got as a new party in Bangkok and other parts of Thailand, thrashing the Democrat Party in the process, must count for something..."

 

No, it does not count for anything. They cheated as their side always cheats.

 

I have asked the question before, and need to ask it again;

 

Why does this guy have a column?

 

 

[Lynn S]

That was a whole lot of words and lacked actual information.

[metisdead]

A troll post has been removed. 

[gunderhill]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

what Thais really want.

Free  money plain and  simple.

[YetAnother]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

the Phalang Pracharat Party, won the second-highest number of seats but gathered the most votes nationwide.

the big loser ? all of Us

[Thailand]

PPP coming out on top against all the odds, one has to wonder why, or even how it was possible. 

[ThaiBunny]

11 minutes ago, Thailand said:

PPP coming out on top against all the odds, one has to wonder why, or even how it was possible. 

Amazing Thailand

[bannork]

It's not amazing. They captured a lot of Pat's MPs and implemented a street of populist policies thus winning many grassroots votes  For the middle class they seemed to be a much stronger buffer against Thaksin than The Democrats.

[newatthis]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

Phalang Pracharat could respond that the remarkable support it got as a new party in Bangkok and other parts of Thailand, thrashing the Democrat Party in the process, must count for something.

And to put things in perspective: You got 7.9 million votes. That means that 27.1 million voters did not vote for you. That must count for something.

[madmen]

4 hours ago, YetAnother said:

the big loser ? all of Us

Just the TV political analysts. Thailand continues its daily life in peace and the accusations by our bar stool experts that 20+ million votes were "rigged" is truly laughable

[crobe]

So here we are going forward

 - Pheu Thai have enough support among smaller parties to muster a coalition of 251 - enough to have a governing majority in the lower house or to block anyone else

 - PPRP have enough support with the senate to muster enough votes to select the PM

 

Result - split parliament - PM without the backing of being the government will be powerless and will be constantly blocked in all legislation - months of argument and nothing gets done

 

Problems for all parties going forward

 - PPRP - This was their one chance at legitimacy, having many advantages in the run-up to the election - any subsequent election will see their popularity drop as no power = no popularity for them

 - Pheu Thai - Will need to allocate a lot of ministries to other parties - difficult to keep everyone in line as the trough opens - biggest issue for them - someone in the defence ministry - who can handle that?

 - FFP - They had to be in this camp given that they are anti military and anti the latest constitution - they want the Economics ministry but also need to have the Digital Economy and Science Ministries to play to their base - need to put some distance between themselves and PT when governing and not get caught in any scandals

 - Democrats - Just have to play a waiting game and hope the PPRP voters come back to them next time

[pornprong]

If Thailand’s institutions are dysfunctional, it’s both a cause and effect of the fractures in the broader Thai society. Because, although the election rules unfairly advantaged the pro-junta party, and even if some cheating took place, it’s clear that a significant portion of the population do support military rule. 

For some Thais — particularly in Bangkok, where much of the support for the junta can be found — a military strongman is preferable to a politician voted into power by provincial Thais. Class-anxieties, long-held ethnic prejudices and an outdated belief that rural Thais sell their votes contribute to this preference.

 

https://www.vice.com/en_asia/article/qvyq4x/election-results-thailand-broken-analysis-op-ed?fbclid=IwAR1xcbmzhCme2e5hvMe9wrJBWcQ4O3nOK2f84l0Ag_78YLbr8WoUt5TJSnY

[billd766]

5 hours ago, Thailand said:

PPP coming out on top against all the odds, one has to wonder why, or even how it was possible. 

Guess who counted the votes? 

 

The EC who were elected/selected by the military government.

[Baerboxer]

8 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I can't decide between calling this 'gibberish' or a 'nonsensical word salad'. 'Nonsensical gibberish', perhaps? Where does one begin with Kh Tulsahit?

 

A column about the election and not one mention of Prayut? Nor Prayut's... er... ahem... oh... "Mobile Cabinet meetings"? Or Prayut's promises of billions and billions and billions and billions in handouts (hmm... wasn't the Junta against "Populism?)? No mention of a Junta-rigged 'new' political system? No mention of an appointed Senate. No mention of the military's role in "urging" a proper vote? No mention of the threats from the military? No mention, just a "discussion" about ideology as if the Phalang Pracharat were a normal political party and not something ginned up by the military/Junta using public funds? 

 

The simple fact is that the Junta's party can only "win" by cheating. 

 

They are cheating cheaters who cheat.

 

"...Phalang Pracharat could respond that the remarkable support it got as a new party in Bangkok and other parts of Thailand, thrashing the Democrat Party in the process, must count for something..."

 

No, it does not count for anything. They cheated as their side always cheats.

 

I have asked the question before, and need to ask it again;

 

Why does this guy have a column?

 

 

 

Whereas good old honest Pheu Thai and Thaksin would never cheat, lie, cheat some more ................

 

No siree. Because they pretend to be social democrats. And as we all know the left, and pretend left, never ever lie or do wrong!

 

 

[Baerboxer]

3 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Guess who counted the votes? 

 

The EC who were elected/selected by the military government.

 

If they were going to fiddle the election and miscount they wouldn't have let PTP win so many seats, now would they!

[Baerboxer]

6 hours ago, YetAnother said:

the big loser ? all of Us

 

Yeah because a bunch of farangs clearly know what's best for Thailand regardless of what the majority of Thais who voted thought.

[Baerboxer]

5 hours ago, Thailand said:

PPP coming out on top against all the odds, one has to wonder why, or even how it was possible. 

 

Yeah and Thaksin getting less than half the votes he got in 2011. 

 

Can't be right because TVF Shin fans predicted another landslide victory for their hero. And they can't be wrong can they!

[madmen]

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Yeah because a bunch of farangs clearly know what's best for Thailand regardless of what the majority of Thais who voted thought.

Its called reverse democracy. The same bunch of TV posters crying for an election over several years finally got what they wanted and now they want to reverse the result. They should be ashamed

[wolf81]

1 hour ago, pornprong said:

If Thailand’s institutions are dysfunctional, it’s both a cause and effect of the fractures in the broader Thai society. Because, although the election rules unfairly advantaged the pro-junta party, and even if some cheating took place, it’s clear that a significant portion of the population do support military rule. 

For some Thais — particularly in Bangkok, where much of the support for the junta can be found — a military strongman is preferable to a politician voted into power by provincial Thais. Class-anxieties, long-held ethnic prejudices and an outdated belief that rural Thais sell their votes contribute to this preference.

 

https://www.vice.com/en_asia/article/qvyq4x/election-results-thailand-broken-analysis-op-ed?fbclid=IwAR1xcbmzhCme2e5hvMe9wrJBWcQ4O3nOK2f84l0Ag_78YLbr8WoUt5TJSnY

I feel some countries in general are just more suited for military dictatorships. E.g. most of the Middle-Eastern countries (where it's a better alternative to having hard-core Islamists in power). Perhaps for Thailand it's better as well. At least it means stability, but perhaps at the cost of (economic) progress.

[billd766]

58 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

If they were going to fiddle the election and miscount they wouldn't have let PTP win so many seats, now would they!

Why not?

 

The PPRP got more votes than PT, but the EC claim that there were nearly 2 million wrongly marked ballot papers. They refused to accept ballot papers from NZ.

 

Yet on Sunday night PT were streets ahead, but on Monday the odds for PPRP increased dramatically.

 

Who will be making the final decision on the ballot papers?

 

The EC.

 

Who picked them and pays them? The current government.

 

Will the ballot paper counting be done transparently with members of all parties and neutral observers be enabled to oversee the counting.

 

Not a chance.

 

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Yeah because a bunch of farangs clearly know what's best for Thailand regardless of what the majority of Thais who voted thought.

How do you know what the majority of Thais who voted thought?

 

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Yeah and Thaksin getting less than half the votes he got in 2011. 

 

Can't be right because TVF Shin fans predicted another landslide victory for their hero. And they can't be wrong can they!

 

Now that is a surprise.

 

Why did the PT get less seats and votes?

 

Could it be anything to do with the fact that the EC redrew the voting areas, perhaps because the EC was biased against a big party winner, perhaps because the PTP were allocated NO party list seats and the PPRP gained 26 party list seats.

 

Take your pick or come up with other reasons. 

[jonclark]

So let me get this straight on 20th May 2014 the Military with Prayut at the helm removed a very popular, elected PM from power. An act which in itself completely bypassed any notion of democracy or respect for democracy, but thought that okay and that democracy and the will of the people it represented was no big deal.

 

Now 5 years later they are hiding behind democracy to cling to power. 

 

I am sorry PRPP you burnt that democratic bridge many years ago you have no right to use democracy to prolong your power, when you trampled over it so spectacularly during your rise to power. Democracy is neither your shield nor your sword. 

[myshem]

What it tells us is that recreational weed is not for tomorrow...