In case you haven’t decided which party to vote for in this Sunday’s Thailand election

2026-02-06 - 08:46

For Thai voters who have yet to decide which party to vote for this Sunday, allow me to assist you in making that decision easier — or perhaps more complex. Below is a structured look at why one might or might not vote for each of the three main prime ministerial candidates and their parties. The list is not in any particular order. Anutin Charnvirakul and the Bhumjaithai Party (BJT) Reasons you might vote for Anutin and BJT Anutin is a pragmatist who appears able to enlist professionals to support his administration. What voters have seen over the past three to four months is likely what they will get from the incumbent and his party. He presents himself as a royalist, with a non-negotiable stance on the lese majeste law — a position that reassures conservative voters. He oversaw the decriminalisation of marijuana for medical purposes and has taken a clear stance against casinos. A Cambodian Cabinet minister publicly urged Thais not to vote for Anutin and BJT if they want peace — a comment that some Thai voters may see as reason to do precisely the opposite. Reasons you might not vote for Anutin and BJT Anutin is a conservative politician who represents patronage-based politics. He is widely viewed as an ultra-royalist and has defended what critics describe as an anachronistic and draconian royal defamation law. He has vowed not to reopen Thai–Cambodian border checkpoints and has spoken of building walls, a stance with long-term economic implications. Caretaker Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow of BJT was the only ASEAN foreign minister to break ranks on a key regional issue – the sham junta-sponsored elections in Myanmar. Yodchanan Wongsawat and the Pheu Thai Party Reasons you might vote for Yodchanan and Pheu Thai This is effectively the Thaksin Shinawatra party, and Yodchanan is Thaksin’s nephew. For supporters, the logic is simple: in Thaksin we trust. Thaksin has a proven track record of delivering popular policies, most notably the 30-baht universal healthcare scheme. You identify as a redshirt. You strongly oppose BJT and the People’s Party. Veteran activist Sondhi Limthongkul is now cheering for Yodchanan. Reasons you might not vote for Yodchanan and Pheu Thai This is still the Thaksin Shinawatra party, and Yodchanan is his nephew — another “nepo baby”, albeit a well-educated one. For sceptics: in Thaksin we do not trust. You believe the party is essentially corrupt and self-serving. Pheu Thai promised in the previous election not to form a coalition with BJT, yet eventually did. Sondhi Limthongkul is now cheering for Yodchanan. Natthapong Ruengpanyawut and the People’s Party Reasons you might vote for Natthapong and the People’s Party You voted for the party twice, yet it never had the chance to run the country. The party brands itself as an agent of change, with progressive policies and funding largely drawn from small individual donors. Many of its members are young, well-educated, and seemingly idealistic. It is the only party that has pledged to pursue amnesty for those charged or detained under the royal defamation law. You like Pita Limjaroenrat, Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit, and company. Reasons you might not vote for Natthapong and the People’s Party You dislike the Orange Party and cannot stand what you see as the self-righteousness of some of its supporters. The party remains relatively inexperienced and largely an unknown quantity. It is openly critical of the monarchy. Some prominent members were formerly ultra-royalists. Natthapong’s most “notable” achievement was his surprise support for, and vote backing, Anutin as prime minister late last year. On Cambodia, the party’s stance appears no less hawkish than Anutin’s. When deputy leader Sirikanya Tansakul was asked by local media what came to her mind when she heard the word “enemy”, she replied: “Cambodia.” Natthapong has also been quoted as supporting the use of Gripen fighter jets to strike Cambodian targets. Beyond personalities: the bigger picture If you still cannot decide, it may be worth stepping back and considering Thailand’s broader economic and political context. Earlier this week, the Financial Times described Thailand as the “sick man of Asia”, noting that economic growth has stalled for five years. GDP growth hovers around 2%, higher only than Myanmar’s among ASEAN countries. This stagnation is the result of nine years of authoritarian and semi-authoritarian military rule, followed by nearly three more years of political instability marked by deep-state interference. Even this election offers no guarantee of a decisive victory or lasting stability. Under these conditions, existing economic engines should be kept running. Yet Anutin is campaigning on a promise not to reopen the Thai–Cambodian border, effectively shutting down one such engine for the long term — despite Japan recently calling for the border to be reopened due to severe supply-chain disruptions lasting more than six months. Some Thais appear not to grasp basic economic realities, or to show sufficient concern for the country’s future. A key Orange Party list candidate involved in economic policy recently told me that, based on Thailand’s fundamentals, the maximum achievable GDP growth is only about 3%. According to the Financial Times, Thailand’s slowdown stems from deep structural problems: political instability, an ageing population, a shrinking workforce, high household debt, and declining competitiveness in manufacturing and tourism. These factors have weakened public spending and eroded foreign investor confidence. Local media also reported this week that Kriengkrai Thiennukul, chairman of the Federation of Thai Industries and the Joint Standing Committee on Commerce, Industry and Banking (JSCCIB), warned that growth in 2026 could fall below 2%, citing additional risks from delays in preparing the 2027 budget. Can this Sunday’s election lift Thailand out of prolonged stagnation and end its two-decade political divide? I hope voters bear these realities in mind when making their decision. Still, I am not overly hopeful and see little light at the end of the political tunnel. Clinging to hope remains necessary — but hope alone is not enough. Regardless of the election outcome, political hatred must be reduced and common ground sought if the country is to move forward and address its mounting economic challenges.