Thai election analysis: Many reasons behind low turnout

[webfact]

NATION ANALYSIS
Many reasons behind low turnout
Chularat Saengpassa
The Nation



Though fewer people showed up to cast their vote on Sunday, they deserve to be commended for taking a brave stand

BANGKOK: -- The 46-per-cent turnout by voters in the election on Sunday may seem as though Thais turned their backs on the election and want political reform first - when compared to the 75-per-cent turnout in 2011.

But in reality, these numbers are not final. The Election Commission (EC) revealed yesterday that of the 44.45 million eligible voters, only 20.46 million or about 46 per cent turned up. However, votes in nine provinces in the South have yet to be tallied, not to mention votes that will be cast later in the 10,000 or so polling stations that could not open on Sunday.

Yet, the clashes between those wishing to cast a vote and those who wanted to stop the poll show that most Thais still prefer a democratic solution.

This year's voter turnout cannot be compared to the 32 million of the 44 million voters who turned up to exercise their political right in 2005, or the 28.99 million who showed up in 2006 or the 35 million who turned up in 2007, because the circumstances are different.

The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) has unofficially concluded that 1,143,667 of 4,369,120 eligible voters in the capital cast votes and that 516 of the city's 6,671 polling stations were forced to close.

In comparison, as many as 3,019,406 Bangkokians, or nearly 72 per cent of the 4.26 million eligible voters in the capital turned out to vote in 2011.

This year's low-voter turnout should be seen in the context of the protests, with the seizure of ballot boxes, blockades at polling stations, uncertainty by the EC over whether the poll should be postponed or cancelled, doubts over whether the Constitutional Court may nullify the poll, and violence over recent months. These uncertainties explain why the voter turnout in the capital was the lowest in history.

Bangkok is known as a Democrat Party base, as evidenced by the 23 Democrat MPs (versus 10 Pheu Thai MPs) elected in 2011 and a Democrat candidate beating a Pheu Thai candidate during the 2012 city governor's election. However, this year, many Bangkokians chose to ignore the election because it was boycotted by the Democrats and opposed by the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) with their "Bangkok shutdown" campaign.

New phenomena

Another phenomenon emerged in the city this year. Many people were eager to vote and many even took on the job of manning polling stations after some election officials quit on Sunday morning. EC officials at some polling sites, such as the Phaholyothin 24 polling station in Chatuchak district, quit minutes before ballot boxes were unveiled, prompting a few people queuing to cast a vote to step up and serve as "volunteer EC officials".

Meanwhile, voting in the North and Northeast - key bases of Pheu Thai - went through smoothly with more than 60 per cent showing up in northern provinces like Chiang Mai, Tak , Mae Hong Son, Nan, Phayao and Lamphun and more than 50 per cent in the Northeast. It was 57 per cent in Chiang Rai,

However, some provinces in the lower North like Phichit, Phitsanulok, Nakhon Sawan and Kamphaeng Phet, where farmers have been holding protests calling for long-overdue payments for rice sold to the government's pledging scheme, saw a voter turnout of less than 50 per cent. For instance, Constituency 3 in Phichit had a turnout of only 39 per cent, while only 37 per cent showed up at Constituency 4 in Kamphaeng Phet and only 45 per cent showed up in Constituency 5 in Phitsanulok.

In Buri Ram, less than 50 per cent of voters showed up, and it had the largest number of invalid ballots, provincial election committee chairman Pol Colonel Wirat Thadthong said. He said the low turnout could be put down to confusion over political conflicts and uncertainty on whether the poll may be nullified later.

Very different results were recorded in Constituency 1 in Khon Kaen, where a polling station with 850 eligible voters only saw 338 show up, and about a third (124) cast "no votes".

Lamphun EC officials said that 241,209 out of the province's 328,667 eligible voters showed up to cast ballots. There were 60,650 "no votes" and 41,650 invalid ballots.

In the southern border provinces, people clashed with PDRC supporters blocking the Hat Yai Post Office and demanded that ballot boxes be delivered to different polling stations. But in the three southernmost provinces, which are usually plagued by unrest, almost all polling stations operated normally.

Sunday's election was different on several levels, especially as it was organised under a strange context. Yet, those who showed up to cast their ballots should be commended for their bravery. These people stood up in defiance to support democracy and take the country forward.


-- The Nation 2014-02-04

[GentlemanJim]

Seems like the Nation have found themselves a little Red Journo.

[noitom]

The article attempts to manipulate the statistics on the Thai vote that are presented in the chart with wording. The statistics and the chart were prepared by the election commission. What percentage of no votes compared to previous election were the result of EC resignations and refusals to open?

[djjamie]

These people stood up in defiance to support democracy and take the country forward.

Well, they believe in one principle of democracy anyway.

Tis a pity the election will be nullified.

[tx22cb]

Not surprised at the numbers.

The 3 most prominent Dems - Abhisit, Korn, Apirak - posted on their Facebook accounts that they would not vote.

And when you have a 3-line whip like this, the Dems supporters are going to take heed.

[oldsailor35]

Would'nt be Yellow by any chance, would you Jim.

[whybother]

The article attempts to manipulate the statistics on the Thai vote that are presented in the chart with wording. The statistics and the chart were prepared by the election commission. What percentage of no votes compared to previous election were the result of EC resignations and refusals to open?

I would guess zero percent.

You can't vote "None of the above" if the polling booth isn't open.

[virtualtraveller]

No conclusion can be drawn until Feb 28th when further elections have been held, hopefully without obstruction. So, everyone had a chance to vote, or not or 'no vote', and when all is said and done I predict way less than 50% of eligible voters chose a particular party. In which case the election itself fails to produce a quorum an the resulting parliament is minority mandated. Nullify the election, go to plan B, reform first. You had your chance, you failed.

[MaxLee]

Regardless.... Thaksin and Pheu Thai will have their way, no matter the outcome...

[whybother]

No conclusion can be drawn until Feb 28th when further elections have been held, hopefully without obstruction. So, everyone had a chance to vote, or not or 'no vote', and when all is said and done I predict way less than 50% of eligible voters chose a particular party. In which case the election itself fails to produce a quorum an the resulting parliament is minority mandated. Nullify the election, go to plan B, reform first. You had your chance, you failed.

A party could get 20% of the vote and still get 100% of the seats. 50% of eligible voters has nothing to do with producing a quorum.

Also, minority mandated means nothing. PTP were minority mandated in the last election.

[jonclark]

My own view for the reason for the low turn out is that people are sick to death of the whinging, moaning, self obsessed, corrupt, nepotist, criminal politicians that don't give a monkeys chuff for the well being of the country or the people whilst they are all content to throw shit at each other in the comfort of their ivory towers.

The MPs simply don't work hard enough to deserve the vote of the Thai people or the privileges their positions provide.

The low turn out is a big F U to all the political parties. Give the people something to vote for.

Edited February 4, 2014 by jonclark

[thesetat2013]

You should take a closer look at the PTP held areas in the north

Seems that 50-60% turnout was bad. It may be from YLs unpopularity especially since none of the polls in those areas were closed

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[tx22cb]

You should take a closer look at the PTP held areas in the north

Seems that 50-60% turnout was bad. It may be from YLs unpopularity especially since none of the polls in those areas were closed

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

"50-60% turnout" does not sound "bad" to me.

The Dems offered no candidate, so presumably did not vote (taking the cue from Abhisit/Korn/Apirak), and they usually poll 20-25% in the north.

So the "adjusted" turnout would have been 70-85%, which is the norm up here.

[bigbamboo]

You should take a closer look at the PTP held areas in the north

Seems that 50-60% turnout was bad. It may be from YLs unpopularity especially since none of the polls in those areas were closed

Sent from my GT-S5310 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

"50-60% turnout" does not sound "bad" to me.

The Dems offered no candidate, so presumably did not vote (taking the cue from Abhisit/Korn/Apirak), and they usually poll 20-25% in the north.

So the "adjusted" turnout would have been 70-85%, which is the norm up here.

Not so sure about that.

Even in the very red Lamphun three quarters voted and of those nearly half were either no votes or spoiled votes. And remember there was no 'disruption' there either.

Of course it would have helped if the Dems had simply stood on a 'vote for us is a vote for reform' manifesto but whichever way you cut it the PTP vote was significantly down.

Edited February 4, 2014 by bigbamboo

[fab4]

Seems like the Nation have found themselves a little Red Journo.

"little Red Journo"

Oh dear, you really need to let some of that anger go. You condemn the writer of the OP because he had the temerity to suggest that most Thais still preferred a democratic solution and that those who voted should be commended for their bravery?

Or is it really because he said things that you didn't want to hear such as

"But in reality, these numbers are not final. The Election Commission (EC) revealed yesterday that of the 44.45 million eligible voters, only 20.46 million or about 46 per cent turned up. However, votes in nine provinces in the South have yet to be tallied, not to mention votes that will be cast later in the 10,000 or so polling stations that could not open on Sunday."

and

"However, this year, many Bangkokians chose to ignore the election because it was boycotted by the Democrats and opposed by the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) with their "Bangkok shutdown" campaign."

I can only assume this manic adulation of suthep by expats and other "foreigners" on this forum is down to the "anyone but Thaksin" syndrome.

[mightyatom]

I suppose this is what you could call SPIN on a huge scale. Tony Blair could learn from this guy.

Totally massaged and really ignored most of the fundamental reasons.

[DrTuner]

"volunteer EC officials"

I love Thailand, once again my day starts with laughter.

[spirit47]

In the red areas the people pressed to go, and they offer money for areas with high voting counts... When I hate one thing, than its intimidating.

[kikoman]

Seems like the Nation have found themselves a little Red Journo.

"little Red Journo"

Oh dear, you really need to let some of that anger go. You condemn the writer of the OP because he had the temerity to suggest that most Thais still preferred a democratic solution and that those who voted should be commended for their bravery?

Or is it really because he said things that you didn't want to hear such as

"But in reality, these numbers are not final. The Election Commission (EC) revealed yesterday that of the 44.45 million eligible voters, only 20.46 million or about 46 per cent turned up. However, votes in nine provinces in the South have yet to be tallied, not to mention votes that will be cast later in the 10,000 or so polling stations that could not open on Sunday."

and

"However, this year, many Bangkokians chose to ignore the election because it was boycotted by the Democrats and opposed by the People's Democratic Reform Committee (PDRC) with their "Bangkok shutdown" campaign."

I can only assume this manic adulation of suthep by expats and other "foreigners" on this forum is down to the "anyone but Thaksin" syndrome.

Great post, it states exactly what the yellows did not want to hear, I think the this statement said it all ""The people that voted stood up in defiance to support Democracy and take the country forward"

Cheers

[fab4]

Not surprised at the numbers.

The 3 most prominent Dems - Abhisit, Korn, Apirak - posted on their Facebook accounts that they would not vote.

And when you have a 3-line whip like this, the Dems supporters are going to take heed.

Well that's pretty bl88dy obvious. There wasn't a dem represented in the election candidates so regardless of whatever the triumvirate said, those voters who would have voted dem had no one to vote for anyway. If they had been so clever they would have advised their supporters to vote No. If any of the supporters had taken notice of that command, 11 million odd No votes might have made a point.

As it is, the mighty triumvirate are out of work, with no influence on the future of Thailand (save for increasing the wealth of their lawyers) and will remain so until the next election.

[kikoman]

No conclusion can be drawn until Feb 28th when further elections have been held, hopefully without obstruction. So, everyone had a chance to vote, or not or 'no vote', and when all is said and done I predict way less than 50% of eligible voters chose a particular party. In which case the election itself fails to produce a quorum an the resulting parliament is minority mandated. Nullify the election, go to plan B, reform first. You had your chance, you failed.

A party could get 20% of the vote and still get 100% of the seats. 50% of eligible voters has nothing to do with producing a quorum.

Also, minority mandated means nothing. PTP were minority mandated in the last election.

What happened to the yellow promise that the election would not take place on 2-2-14?

"These people that voted stood up in defiance to support Democracy and take the country forward"

There is no way, you can find a victory for the protester's cause no matter how hard you try to twist the facts of the success of the election!

Cheers

[kikoman]

Not surprised at the numbers.

The 3 most prominent Dems - Abhisit, Korn, Apirak - posted on their Facebook accounts that they would not vote.

And when you have a 3-line whip like this, the Dems supporters are going to take heed.

Well that's pretty bl88dy obvious. There wasn't a dem represented in the election candidates so regardless of whatever the triumvirate said, those voters who would have voted dem had no one to vote for anyway. If they had been so clever they would have advised their supporters to vote No. If any of the supporters had taken notice of that command, 11 million odd No votes might have made a point.

As it is, the mighty triumvirate are out of work, with no influence on the future of Thailand (save for increasing the wealth of their lawyers) and will remain so until the next election.

Again you are right, the Democrats missed a golden opportunity by boycotting this election, major miscalculation, had they backed a vote no campaign, instead of blocking the polling places, that no vote could have an impact!

Cheers

[GentlemanJim]

Would'nt be Yellow by any chance, would you Jim.

No oldsailor, not yellow and dislike Suthep with a passion, but I am very much anti-red (read anti-violence, and against dictatorship) and anti-Thaksin as much as one can be. You on the other hand........? The OP narrative is not objective, a real achievement and requiring effort when dealing with a set of numbers from the EC. How come when people despise a criminal thieving sociopath and his brain washed minions it is automatically assumed they support yellow and Suthep? Do you not credit people with the intelligence to dislike both? Or maybe you use yourselves as a benchmark so cannot understand how to do that. Suthep is stuck with no way down and no workable plan, as Confucious would say 'dig your hole before you need the toilet', but that does not for one moment give a single ounce of credibility to the sociopath in Dubai and his minions. Does it? Please explain how you have become such a staunch supporter of the reds. Explain what Thaksin and Shinclan have done for this country (to give you a hand with the scope of this task, answers should likely fit on a postage stamp)

fab4 you have your answer and so does your sidekick kikoman.

[paulklee]

How does that work? Untrained, unvetted, unregulated volunteers just take on the roll of electoral officers at polling stations and that's OK? Doesn't matter what political side you're on - it doesn't seem right, no matter the best of intentions. A polling officer surely is trained in the use of the system, how to ensure votes are cast secretly according to the system and to be on the watch for any kind of voting irregularities. And managing the ballot boxes after polling closes. No doubt the official polling officer will come from a different electoral district so that there is no peer, social or other pressure from the local voting area. But it seems any volunteer, from the very same district, can step up and help "run" the polling office? Are there any procedures to prevent for example criminal groups or individuals from taking over a polling station by "encouraging" the officials to leave and then setting up their own "volunteers"? Maybe the law allows this, maybe not - anybody know? Another court case in the offing?

[smileydude]

Defiance by voting or not voting, this is going to be a very expensive nothing to the tune of 3800 million baht because due to legal technicalities the voting is likely to be anulled.

1. Article 108 states that Elections must be held on a SINGLE day nationwide: FAILED

28 constituencies had no candidates

9 constituencies could not hold elections

9 constituencies had problems in the election process and could not complete their jobs

many candidates had more NO VOTES then votes for them

2. Counting all Votes: FAILED

two million people registered for early voting but were unable to thus these votes cannot be counted on the actual day of voting.

Not being able to include these votes technically is unfair?

What I see is strategic jousting by those with special interests utilizing legal knowledge and manipulating social sentiment.

The democratic process is just a shroud to hide behind.

I see no efforts to find common ground from both sides and trying to find win-win solutions.

Alot of what we see is just part of a charade. The real games are going on during back door negotiations.

Problem is many more people need to die and how much more money do we have to burn for nothing before we finally find a way out?

Edited February 4, 2014 by smileydude

[fab4]

Would'nt be Yellow by any chance, would you Jim.

No oldsailor, not yellow and dislike Suthep with a passion, but I am very much anti-red (read anti-violence, and against dictatorship) and anti-Thaksin as much as one can be. You on the other hand........? The OP narrative is not objective, a real achievement and requiring effort when dealing with a set of numbers from the EC. How come when people despise a criminal thieving sociopath and his brain washed minions it is automatically assumed they support yellow and Suthep? Do you not credit people with the intelligence to dislike both? Or maybe you use yourselves as a benchmark so cannot understand how to do that. Suthep is stuck with no way down and no workable plan, as Confucious would say 'dig your hole before you need the toilet', but that does not for one moment give a single ounce of credibility to the sociopath in Dubai and his minions. Does it? Please explain how you have become such a staunch supporter of the reds. Explain what Thaksin and Shinclan have done for this country (to give you a hand with the scope of this task, answers should likely fit on a postage stamp)

fab4 you have your answer and so does your sidekick kikoman.

No, I don't have my answer from you.

What I do have from you is more polemic about the evil Thaksin. You do not explain why you believe the author of the OP is to your mind, a "little Red Journo" just a plaintive whine about it being "not objective". In what way, you don't say?

Instead we get your laughable blanket description of reds as representing violence and dictatorship, Thaksin as a "criminal thieving sociopath" and his "brain washed minions". You then state that anybody who expresses an even slightly favourable opinion of the same would automatically assume that those who didn't, supported the yellowshirts and sutthep.

Yet you quite happily denounce the author of the op as a "little Red Journo".

Why couldn't he be like you are allegedly, both against the yellow shirts / suthep and Thaksin?

Or does that rule only apply to whoever you denigrate?

[whybother]

No conclusion can be drawn until Feb 28th when further elections have been held, hopefully without obstruction. So, everyone had a chance to vote, or not or 'no vote', and when all is said and done I predict way less than 50% of eligible voters chose a particular party. In which case the election itself fails to produce a quorum an the resulting parliament is minority mandated. Nullify the election, go to plan B, reform first. You had your chance, you failed.

A party could get 20% of the vote and still get 100% of the seats. 50% of eligible voters has nothing to do with producing a quorum.

Also, minority mandated means nothing. PTP were minority mandated in the last election.

What happened to the yellow promise that the election would not take place on 2-2-14?

"These people that voted stood up in defiance to support Democracy and take the country forward"

There is no way, you can find a victory for the protester's cause no matter how hard you try to twist the facts of the success of the election!

Cheers

I'm not sure where you got ""These people that voted stood up in defiance to support Democracy and take the country forward"" as I've never said anything like that.

And I can you point out where I'm twisting facts? I've haven't said anything about whether the election was successful or not, except that it will be about 3 months before parliament gets a quorum so it can start sitting.

[Spartakos]

Another astounding victory of PTP, they have won against their own stupidity which came second.

[rickirs]

These people stood up in defiance to support democracy and take the country forward.

Well, they believe in one principle of democracy anyway.

Tis a pity the election will be nullified.

Maybe Thailand should follow Suthep's idea of abandoning the "one man-one vote" philosophy. I think it should be that for every thai that voted on Feb, 2nd, that each vote should be counted as three votes given the barriers Suthep had erected to prevent the exercise of Thai freedom to vote. "No votes" would be excluded.

[Scamper]

It is too bad that in an article full of interesting statistical information, the writer should need to superimpose on that his own political slant.

" These people stood up in defiance to support democracy and take the country forward. "

Why does he make the blanket assumption that those who did not vote were not trying to achieve the same ends ? And many of those who voted entered a vote of " no ". Did they also fail to protect democracy and move the country forward ? We have enough problems with Prompong presuming what is in the minds of those who vote.