The Democrats Need A Presence In The Northeast

[Lite Beer]

EDITORIAL

The Democrats need a presence in the Northeast

By The Nation

Party will always be second best until it wins support from voters in Isaan

The Democrats are still pondering the question of what went wrong. If the analyses by some senior election strategists of Thailand's oldest political party are any indication, it seems that they are only half way through. The appointment of Yingluck Shinawatra as Pheu Thai prime ministerial candidate was praised, begrudgingly, as a smart move. The promotion of "populist" policies were deplored as cunning but something the Democrats could not compete against. Poor economic timing and the lingering shadow of Thaksin Shinawatra have also been blamed.

For one thing, those are mainly external factors. It's true that Yingluck's appointment was one stone killing many birds. She was a Thaksin representative without the usual hostility. She was a new kid in the political town. And she is a woman. All of a sudden, the Pheu Thai Party's election campaign was sexed up and romanticised. The Democrats, on the other hand, had the politically bruised Abhisit Vejjajiva to contend with. He had extremely loyal fans who treated him almost like a rock star wherever he went. But Abhisit did not attract new support for the ruling party.

It's also true that Pheu Thai's bold election promises - not least the pledge to increase the minimum daily wage to Bt300 - worked. The opposition had Thaksin to thank for their success. Take away unfavourable consequences, his anti-drug policy was delivered and his much-taunted "Bt30 cures every disease" vow was implemented. The village fund programme was also carried out, and its recipients couldn't care less what critics had to say about it. The Democrats had their own crowd-pleaser election promises to offer, but who were they to compete with the "populism master"?

Again, it's true that the election was taking place at a bad time economically as far as the Democrats were concerned. Voters went to the polls with fresh memories of rising prices of eggs, the shortage of cooking oil and a corruption scandal that accompanied it. Last year's unprecedented flooding and the government's much-criticised slow response did not help either.

Then there was the issue of last year's political turbulence in Bangkok. Many people believed that if Abhisit had called a snap election right after the May 19 infamy, his party would have had a better chance, or at least won in the capital in an even more convincing manner. That is debatable, of course. While the Democrats could have achieved a greater victory in the city, votes in the provinces could have swung even more to Pheu Thai.

What we have not heard much about from the Democrats are what internal factors they think contributed to the July 3 defeat. Abhisit's resignation as party leader was more like a matter of formality than an admission of what went amiss within the party. There have been talks about a big communications gap between "planners" and "doers" during the election campaign. But being a government fighting an opposition virtually headed by an ex-leader in exile, there should have been enough advantage to cancel out such an alleged shortcoming.

We are back to the original, "too-obvious" cause of the Democrats' woes - their long-lasting failure to get a sizeable share of political support in the Northeast. They can blame external factors all they like, but the truth is, as long as they can't establish considerable presence in the most populous region, they will never win an election. Being popular in the South and, most of the times, in the capital can only get the Democrats this far.

Again and again, the Democrats have been told to leave their comfort zone and listen to what people in other parts of the country want and feel. This doesn't mean the other parties in Thailand's "regionalism" politics should not do the same. It's only that the need to "reach out" is greater when the Democrats are concerned. Pheu Thai can be crushed in Bangkok and remain non-existent in the South but still can win every election. Without support in the upper parts of Thailand, the Democrats are as good as they currently are - second best.

Political division is making the Democrats' chances in the Northeast look even more remote. The results of so-called blind polls in the poverty-stricken region saw people favouring the Democrats' policies more than Pheu Thai's if they weren't told which parties those policies belonged to. It will be an uphill battle to win the Northeast's hearts, but simple statistics on the population and numbers of regional House seats show that the Democrats do not have another choice, whether Abhisit returns to the helm or not.

-- The Nation 2011-07-24

[Thaddeus]

Democrats need presents in the North-east.

[Ricardo]

Democrats need presents in the North-east.

'presents' to obtain a 'presence', very good !

But as the OP points out, the Dems' policies are actually preferred to the PTP ones, in a 'blind test', so what makes the difference ?

I don't think it would be positive for democracy, or helpful for chances of reconciliation, but perhaps the Dems need a propaganda-machine as strong as the Reds' one, to reverse some of the brainwashing ?

Edited July 24, 2011 by Ricardo

[RedNIvar]

"The Democrats need a presence in the Northeast"

What gave that away, the constant losses maybe. What is lacking is the sincerity of the Dems in the eyes of the people. Hey, as the article says the people preferred the Dems policies in the blind test.

[ballpoint]

What the Democrats need is education in the North East. Even when in power they have had to rely on coalition partners from this area to form a government. Coalition partners who themselves rely on the uneducated for their votes. For that reason education has never been, and, if they have any say in the matter, never will be, a priority of the local NE parties. And that includes those who were absorbed by the TRT/PPP/PTP. It simply isn't in their interest to have a thinking electorate who would question how the policies were to be achieved, the liklihood of achievement, and actually consider what effect they would have on the country, and therefore their own futures, in the long run, should they be achieved.

[daboyz1]

This is all about Thaksin. Bottom line.

[ginjag]

Democrats need presents in the North-east.

Took the words from my thinking==The north east needs presents from the Dems.

[hammered]

The democrats will have to move away from pandering internally to only their southern and bangkok factions first. The few times anyone from the Isaan, North or even East has sensed a little power or position in the party they have immediately been undermined since probably Sanan. They need to establish faces from regions they are underrepresented in and overhaul their entire part structure in these regions to enable ideas to come up rather than be parachuted in from the Bangkok and Southern controllers. However, the factions that control the Dems are very entrenched and will likely continue to divide the spoils of party and regional power at the expense of chance to win. The new exec will almost certainly be loaded with the usual faces from the usual areas and they will likely beg the unelectable and hated in the Isaan and across swathes of the North Abhisit to return as leader and go about modern, less corrupt nonsense that nobody outside a couple of towns cares about and doesnt make much sense when your only chance of power is by linking to the most corrupt and backwards looking small parties.

It is a big big problem for the Democrats and made considerably worse by what has happened since 2006 and likely well beyond their ultra-conservative nature to reform

[Artisi]

"The Democrats need a presence in the Northeast."

Must be the understatement of the year.

[Johpa]

Democrats need presents in the North-east.

What they need to do is somehow eradicate the underlying racism against the Isaan/Lao folks that is a predominate social value amongst the Sino-Thais and their assimilated Central Thai and Southern Thai partners.

[Siam Simon]

Democrats need presents in the North-east.

'presents' to obtain a 'presence', very good !

But as the OP points out, the Dems' policies are actually preferred to the PTP ones, in a 'blind test', so what makes the difference ?

I don't think it would be positive for democracy, or helpful for chances of reconciliation, but perhaps the Dems need a propaganda-machine as strong as the Reds' one, to reverse some of the brainwashing ?

I think the problem is not their propaganda machine: It's what said machine have to work with. If the Dems want to win support as the party of decency and honesty, they have to put the corrupt old guard out to roost and severely cut their ties to Old Establishment (the two problems have an umbilical attachment imo). Any political party anywhere can reinvent itself: Look at how the UK's Labour party turned things around in the 1990's. I am of the opinion that Abhisit and Korn are the best way out of this for the Dems, if they are allowed to cut those truly awful ties to the past: Two of the most honest politicians in Thailand making a clear statement of intent. With the support of a few modern-thinking influential backers, it can work.

[Deeral]

Abhisit and the military have had several years to develop a presence in both the North and North East but they chose a path of suppression and repression. THey have reaped what they have sewn

[tig28]

All of this creative thinking on the election result seems to overlook the fact that this result is the second best performance achieved by the Democrats this century!!

In the 5 elections held since 2001 (maybe 4.5) the maximum number of seats ever won be the Democrats was166.

In light of this --- the latest result of only 7 less seats is excellent for them. Abhisit has done very well to achieve this result.

[DP25]

The northeast has been controlled by the same old oligarchic families for generations and that is not likely to change. The Demcrats are unlikely to make significant headway unless a faction were to defect. Even PTP failed in it's efforts to punish defectors, the local elites won the last election like they always do and will continue to do so, even ones who were 'traitors' and switched parties. The patronage system is too strong

[Deeral]

The northeast has been controlled by the same old oligarchic families for generations and that is not likely to change. The Demcrats are unlikely to make significant headway unless a faction were to defect. Even PTP failed in it's efforts to punish defectors, the local elites won the last election like they always do and will continue to do so, even ones who were 'traitors' and switched parties. The patronage system is too strong

not a good assessment - the "oligrarchical" system applies throughout Thailand it is just which way it is orientated that differs.

THe fact remains that they have had the largest slice of the vote for years and continue to do so despite the other ruling elite's efforts to disband them

[Deeral]

The northeast has been controlled by the same old oligarchic families for generations and that is not likely to change. The Demcrats are unlikely to make significant headway unless a faction were to defect. Even PTP failed in it's efforts to punish defectors, the local elites won the last election like they always do and will continue to do so, even ones who were 'traitors' and switched parties. The patronage system is too strong

not a good assessment - the "oligrarchical" system applies throughout Thailand it is just which way it is orientated that differs.

THe fact remains that they have had the largest slice of the vote for years and continue to do so despite the other ruling elite's efforts to disband them

[hammered]

The northeast has been controlled by the same old oligarchic families for generations and that is not likely to change. The Demcrats are unlikely to make significant headway unless a faction were to defect. Even PTP failed in it's efforts to punish defectors, the local elites won the last election like they always do and will continue to do so, even ones who were 'traitors' and switched parties. The patronage system is too strong

But the defectors failed to win places they should have won if what you say is correct. The family oligarch thing is breaking down slowly. Those in the Isaan who see what is happening stick with Thaksin and the reds to avoid power sliding from them. The leper at the side of the road comment by a PTP MP in the Isaan summed it up. Sure the oligarchs still have power but it is being trimmed back if you go against the tide