Satithorn Thananitichote observes that the election campaign is becoming fierce, with each party aware of its selling points except the Prachachon Party. He worries that if they do not change their approach, they risk losing popularity. He suggests emphasizing economic and livelihood policies over constitutional reform, which still feels distant to voters.
On 10 Jan 2026 GMT+7, Dr. Satithorn Thananitichote, a political science lecturer at Chulalongkorn University, told Thairath he analyzed the overall campaign atmosphere one week after candidate registration opened. Every party is trying to find the best techniques to succeed according to their goals. Major parties—Orange, Red, Blue—aim to win hundreds of seats, while variable parties like Kla and Democrat seek 30-40 seats, and smaller parties hope for just one party-list seat. Each party’s campaign strategy differs: smaller parties focus on generating light buzz or use extreme tactics to attract voters with strong emotions.
Large parties campaign in all areas but face fatigue. Bhumjaithai and Pheu Thai share a similar quiet approach but differ in methods. Bhumjaithai benefits from being the government and doesn’t campaign heavily but works as the current administration to address issues expected by the public within their authority. For example, on New Year’s Day, Anutin visited soldiers at the border as prime minister, not just as Bhumjaithai leader, earning popularity without large rallies.
In short, Bhumjaithai leverages its status as government to profit from public popularity, despite past mistakes, which it has fixed and improved. This advantage lets them avoid much public campaigning.
Pheu Thai has swiftly rebranded by removing figures who caused political wounds during past governments and replacing the prime ministerial candidate with a political newcomer. This makes the public see them as fresh without prior political scars. However, the lingering Shinawatra family association may still cause some to think the candidate resembles past leaders. The party uses young academics as hope for the future and maintains a modest stance, avoiding aggressive moves or self-inflicted damage.
Meanwhile, Prachachon Party faces challenges if it continues its current campaign approach. Carrying the label of the leading party in two elections and aiming to form government for the third time puts excessive pressure on itself. The political climate is unfavorable for Prachachon, which previously succeeded when political atmosphere favored progressive liberal parties like Future Forward and Move Forward. Now, with border issues and global economic uncertainty, people prefer stability and hesitate to entrust hopes to radical change. Voters seek steady survival over risky upheaval, which benefits centrist parties like Democrats, allowing them to endure.
Dr. Satithorn further analyzed that Thai people are not ready for change or parties promising transformation because they desire certainty. Today, the military is seen as a hero protecting the nation and sovereignty. A party perceived as reducing military power is viewed unfavorably. Unlike past coups when the public felt more, now people yearn for tangible, close-to-home stability.
“Prachachon Party must shift to show how it addresses people’s daily lives rather than focusing on structural overhaul. They need to present their policy package more effectively, as their policies already align reasonably with the needs of various groups. The key is how to present these policies to appeal to those affected,” Dr. Satithorn said.
Focusing more on constitutional issues than livelihood problems may make voters see it as distant. If Prachachon adjusts its strategy promptly, its popularity might not fall further. But if it stubbornly continues emphasizing this topic, it risks losing votes by 8 Feb.
Dr. Satithorn also commented on the post-election government, saying that whoever forms the government, it should be stable—not a coalition fighting over positions or dissolving parliament to avoid no-confidence debates. Otherwise, it won’t meet public needs. Hence, the common debate question about which parties will cooperate is not outdated or boring but indicates whether the government will be stable and effective.