Sukhumbhand's Record Victory: Local Vote With National Message

[webfact]

ANALYSIS
Sukhumbhand's record victory: Local vote with national message
Tulsathit Taptim
The Nation



Fear of 'absolute control' may have led to last-minute change of heart for many voters

BANGKOK: -- The Bangkok election winner Sukhumbhand Paribatra and Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra both similarly greeted yesterday's amazing outcome of the most exciting gubernatorial race in recent memory in choked voices. The results, however, underlined vast political differences that confirm Thailand as a country in political impasse, even as the capital set three electoral records.

Sukhumbhand became the biggest gubernatorial race winner - with a record 1.25 million votes - despite having been the most taunted leading candidate in recent times. His party almost decided not to field him and Thaksin Shinawatra reportedly claimed any electricity pole could beat this Democrat. The social media had been full of anti-Sukhumbhand insults.

In the end, the "fear factor" apparently prevailed. Sukhumbhand was fairly popular, but not "that popular", analysts say. His stunning victory, which deceived even those who conducted exit polls, may have owed considerably to voters who had a change of heart at the last minute. He trailed first runner-up Pongsapat Pongcha-roen of the ruling Pheu Thai Party in most, if not all, pre-election surveys. But, just in time, his Democrat Party pulled some arguably nasty punches, reminding Bangkokians disillusioned with Sukhumbhand that their protest vote would benefit Thaksin and bring back "absolute control".

Pongsapat did not do that badly. He surpassed 1 million votes, the first runner-up to do that, but his best was not good enough. Bangkok, like the rest of Thailand, is ideologically divided. Only the city has more supporters of one side than the other.

The Democrat got 1,256,231 votes, compared to 1,077,899 for the Pheu Thai candidate, according to results provided by the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA).

Previously, late Bangkok governor Samak Sundaravej, who later served as prime minister, was the only candidate to win more than a million votes - 1,016,096 - and became the governor in 2000.

Yesterday's voter turnout was 63.98 per cent despite rainstorms in several parts of the capital. A total of 2,715,640 out of the 4,244,465 eligible voters cast their ballots, according to the BMA.

It was the highest turnout for a gubernatorial election in Bangkok. The previous record was 62.5 per cent, set in 2004, when Democrat candidate Apirak Kosayodhin won the election to become governor.

The Election Commission had expected the turnout to exceed 60 per cent while the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration hoped to see a turnout of more than 70 per cent.

Yingluck, apparently on the verge of tears, promised seamless government cooperation with City Hall, an ironic promise given Pongsapat's campaign that he would get better government support than Sukhumbhand did. What was on Yingluck's mind was probably more than the Government House-City Hall liaison. A lot of controversial agendas like charter amendment and issuance of political amnesty will have to take into account yesterday's votes. It would have been easier had Pongsapat won.

As for the Democrats, it was a very close call despite the magnitude of support for Sukhumbhand. Pheu Thai is apparently closing the gap in the city. That and pre-election surveys should give the opposition camp a clear warning that this could be the Democrats' last chance to please the highly fickle and extremely demanding Bangko-kians, whatever their desires are.

Pre-election surveys showed considerable support for independent candidates, apparently at the expense of pro-Sukhumbhand votes. As it turned out, the independents failed to make an impact this time. This perhaps showed that a plunge in Sukhumbhand's pre-poll popularity startled Bangkokians disillusioned with him to make an ideological statement in the polling booths.

Everyone sounded polite and reconciliatory after the unofficial outcome became known. Nobody should be fooled by that, however. The political divide that was clear and present became even more so with the results. The best hope is that Bangkok voters' message will make the Pheu Thai government more careful with controversial political agendas, and prompt the Democrats to play constructive politics that really delivers.

A Pongsapat victory could have diluted Thailand's image as two nations in one country. Sukhumbhand may argue that his triumph has more to do with pollution, safety of city life and transport convenience. He might be right to a degree, but political analysts are saying that the national divide was of big help. Maybe he won because Thailand remains two nations in one country. And that may provide little cause for celebration.

Unless the solemn promises made by both Yingluck and Sukhumbhand yesterday evening after the results became known are kept, that is.

Thai people, however, most probably know better, and after the celebrations of one camp, they expect political realities to reassert themselves real soon.

Pongsapat congratulated Sukhum-bhand and conceded defeat yesterday, shortly after 6pm, well before the official counting had been completed. He said he would continue to work for the benefit of Bangkokians in a different capacity though he was vague as to in what capacity. "If I could, I will do what I can fully," said Pongsapat. He said it would be up to the prime minister to decide in what capacity he could serve the government and the public best.

PM Yingluck, sitting beside Pong-sapat, also had no immediate answer. Yingluck congratulated Sukhum-bhand as well as all those who had voted for Pongsapat and vowed to "seamlessly" work with the re-elected governor.

The premier, who didn't look too pleased during the press conference, however, said that the Pheu Thai government would be pleased to continue to serve Bangkokians. "Pheu Thai will continue to support good policies," she said. "We are ready to seamlessly work with the Bangkok governor. Our duty is to work for everyone."

-- The Nation 2013-03-04

[rubl]

Pheu Thai will continue to support good policies," she said.

In other words, she didn't really say anything

[animatic]

And the list of his policies is not bad.

Whether many will be implemented is moot,

what he suggests are mostly all quite good and logical.

Versus the typical pie in the sky baltant lies and sops to the poor.

If several get implemented we are ahead of the game.

Edited March 4, 2013 by animatic

[belg]

promises, promises, the election is won, so now all can go back as it was, status quo or worse

[Isee]

And the list of his policies is not bad.

Whether many will be implemented is moot,

what he suggests are mostly all quite good and logical.

Versus the typical pie in the sky baltant lies and sops to the poor.

If several get implemented we are ahead of the game.

I would suggest that if they aren't implemeted, then it becomes a moot point as to whether they are 'good' or 'pie in the sky' promises.

[jamhar]

And the list of his policies is not bad.

Whether many will be implemented is moot,

what he suggests are mostly all quite good and logical.

Versus the typical pie in the sky baltant lies and sops to the poor.

If several get implemented we are ahead of the game.

I agree.

You cant implement a plan that you dont have

you cant develop plans if you dont have goals.

I like the goals.

Now comes the hard part.

[lujanit]

Politics is the same in every country that has some form of democracy. It doesn't matter the flavour of the party. Just lie to the public before the election then, if you win and in lots of cases how you win is irrelevant, promptly forget about those promises. Gillard comes to mind with 'never a carbon tax'.

[Arkady]

Another miscalculation by Thaksin. Pongsapat would have been totally obedient to him but why would the majority want to elect another bent cop who is in pocket. Despite all the rigged polls even the mediocre Sukhumbhand proved preferable in the event.

[khunken]

Another miscalculation by Thaksin. Pongsapat would have been totally obedient to him but why would the majority want to elect another bent cop who is in pocket. Despite all the rigged polls even the mediocre Sukhumbhand proved preferable in the event.

Absolutely correct. If a light pole could have beaten Sukhumbhand, doesn't say much for Pongsapat.

[DocN]

Is there something, I am missing here?

Basically everybody I know, said before this election, that the voters-structure in Bangkok is totally different from the volters structure in - let's say - Isan.

So how can this election have a "national message"?

[Siripon]

Is there something, I am missing here?

Basically everybody I know, said before this election, that the voters-structure in Bangkok is totally different from the volters structure in - let's say - Isan.

So how can this election have a "national message"?

Because Thaksin was hoping to use a Pheua Thai victory here to justify pushing through an amnesty bill for himself. He could say even Bangkok wants 'reconciliation', ie a pardon for himself and fellow suspects in multiple crimes.

[Ferangled]

Is there something, I am missing here?

Basically everybody I know, said before this election, that the voters-structure in Bangkok is totally different from the volters structure in - let's say - Isan.

So how can this election have a "national message"?

Personally I think the national message this sends is that PT are gaining popularity in Bangkok, a traditionally staunch Democrat stronghold. They have nearly doubled their votes since the last time Sukhumbhand was voted in.

Can't hep but wonder if all the Northern Thais working in Bangkok were permitted to vote what effect that would have on the results...

[Siripon]

Is there something, I am missing here?

Basically everybody I know, said before this election, that the voters-structure in Bangkok is totally different from the volters structure in - let's say - Isan.

So how can this election have a "national message"?

Personally I think the national message this sends is that PT are gaining popularity in Bangkok, a traditionally staunch Democrat stronghold. They have nearly doubled their votes since the last time Sukhumbhand was voted in.

Can't hep but wonder if all the Northern Thais working in Bangkok were permitted to vote what effect that would have on the results...

Bangkok is fickle, don't forget Samak won by a big margin not long ago and he was no friend of the Democrats. The councillors are mostly Democrat as are the MPs. Only Yingluk helping Pongsapat every day helped boost their figures.

[Ferangled]

Is there something, I am missing here?

Basically everybody I know, said before this election, that the voters-structure in Bangkok is totally different from the volters structure in - let's say - Isan.

So how can this election have a "national message"?

Personally I think the national message this sends is that PT are gaining popularity in Bangkok, a traditionally staunch Democrat stronghold. They have nearly doubled their votes since the last time Sukhumbhand was voted in.

Can't hep but wonder if all the Northern Thais working in Bangkok were permitted to vote what effect that would have on the results...

Bangkok is fickle, don't forget Samak won by a big margin not long ago and he was no friend of the Democrats. The councillors are mostly Democrat as are the MPs. Only Yingluk helping Pongsapat every day helped boost their figures.

Echoes of a line from Gladiator there! Still can't help but wonder if Yingluck alone managed to boost their votes by c 500,000 what effect the numerous Northern workers in the capital would have had if eligible to vote...

[Nickymaster]

PT has been spending hundreds of billions of baht on populism. Their propaganda machine has been working overtime. Tharit has been working overtime trying to dis-credit the Dems. I really thought they had also bought the Bangkok people by now.

This win would have been very important for them and Thaksin. Let's see what happens from here. The spending has to end one day and then they will be judged on return.

Hold tight everybody!

Edited March 4, 2013 by Nickymaster

[rubl]

<p>The number game on votes and their value is interesting. With a two horse race with 23 obstacles in the way, it should have been clear that those two horses would divide the votes. MR Sukhumbhant got 46% which seems the 'normal' Democrats percentage in Bangkok and Pol. General Pongsapat got most of the rest, 39% that is. The 23 obstacles got 15%.

<br /><br />

This polarization is due to national politics and (IMHO) due to the stance of Pheu Thai and PT led government in the election run-up. A seamless co-operation with their candidate promised, PM Yingluck very actively smiling, Thaksin's son joining in, Thaksin offering a telephone pole, polls indicating 15 - 20% lead, voters asked to come in droves.

<br /><br />

Well voters came in droves even with the heavy rain we saw yesterday. Voter turnout 63.98% while 2008 and 2009 only saw about 50%. Now the question for this Bangkok Governor election result: Did voters only vote for a governor or did voters also want to give a message? Not sure, but at least the result should be like a message to Pheu Thai (and the government)</p>

[tragickingdom]

So a Pyres victory for the democrats, who did not even got 50% of the votes. And the Democrat fan letter that goes under the name "the Nation" can sheer that it was a record win, but it ain't. Not even did the winner not get 50% of the votes even the candidate that came in second surpassed Samak's vote with great ease. This can only mean that the DP has lost an enormous amount of goodwill in Bangkok.

[rubl]

Just for the fun of it.

2011-07-03 General Elections Bangkok results
Democrats	1,356,672 Const.	1,246,057 Party list
Pheu Thai	1,277,669 Const.	1,209,508 Party list

2013 4,244,465 voters, 2,715,640 cast (63.98%)
1. MR Sukhumbhant	Dems	1,256,231
2. Pongsapat P.		PT	1,077,899

[dcutman]

So a Pyres victory for the democrats, who did not even got 50% of the votes. And the Democrat fan letter that goes under the name "the Nation" can sheer that it was a record win, but it ain't. Not even did the winner not get 50% of the votes even the candidate that came in second surpassed Samak's vote with great ease. This can only mean that the DP has lost an enormous amount of goodwill in Bangkok.

Better luck next election then.

[animatic]

And the list of his policies is not bad.

Whether many will be implemented is moot,

what he suggests are mostly all quite good and logical.

Versus the typical pie in the sky baltant lies and sops to the poor.

If several get implemented we are ahead of the game.

I would suggest that if they aren't implemeted, then it becomes a moot point as to whether they are 'good' or 'pie in the sky' promises.

The point is he is actually making viable and useful suggestions.

Political promises are kept only in percentages, but increasing the percentages is still progress,

because then it gets larger next tine around.

[who]

The Democrats won because Bangkok dislikes Taksin. The polls got it wrong because Thais don't like to say negative things so when asked if they would support the gov't/Taksin candidate they lied.

[jamhar]

Is there something, I am missing here?

Basically everybody I know, said before this election, that the voters-structure in Bangkok is totally different from the volters structure in - let's say - Isan.

So how can this election have a "national message"?

Someone spent some serious money on this election. I saw posters and banners on every block, every sidewalk. It was spooky walking on the side walk and everywhere you'd look, you see Pongsapat staring at you. and no Dem posters in sight. I was thinking that at the rate the Dem's were being outspent, they had no chance.

To go counter to that spending, among a relatively under educated populous, is a message, IMO.

But you're right Doc, that its just one battle,

and the Dem's won in a place where they could win.

Basically, they held serve.

Tomorrow starts the new work.

But today, I'm gonna GLOAT!

[who]

The Democrats won because Bangkok dislikes Taksin. The polls got it wrong because Thais don't like to say negative things so when asked if they would support the gov't/Taksin candidate they lied.

Edited March 4, 2013 by angiud
Correct font and color

[jamhar]

The Democrats won because Bangkok dislikes Taksin. The polls got it wrong because Thais don't like to say negative things so when asked if they would support the gov't/Taksin candidate they lied.

I agree but with one addition

The polsters didnt just lie,

I think they tried to steer the voters.

People on the fence have a tendency to vote with who they think will win.

Its an old trick.

Again to vote against a perceived winning trend, speaks volume.

Well Done BKK!

[Chrisswe]

No No ! This result is isolated to Bangkok people's only.