Thai political confidence slips as government ratings remain low: Suan Dusit Poll

Confidence in Thai politics remained weak in October, with government and prime-ministerial performance scores falling even as Thais Help Thais Plus topped respondents’ choices of government achievements they liked, according to Suan Dusit Poll.

The overall political index stood at 3.52 out of 10, down from 3.56 in September. Government performance scored 3.40, compared with 3.46 the previous month, while the prime minister’s performance fell to 3.27 from 3.37.

The findings highlight a contrast between recognition for a particular government programme and low ratings for overall political performance.

The survey, released on November 1, 2026, covered 2,036 respondents nationwide through online and field surveys conducted between October 27 and 30.

Relief programme leads government achievement choices

In the question asking which government achievements respondents liked in October, Thai Chuay Thai Plus ranked first:

• Thais Help Thais Plus programme — 50.30%.
• Flood relief measures — 28.51%.
• Addressing the Uthen Thawai issue — 21.19%.

These percentages reflect choices within the government-achievement question, rather than an overall approval rating for the government or the programme.

For the opposition, scrutiny of government operations and spending was the most frequently selected achievement:

• Scrutinising government operations and expenditure — 39.32%.
• Exposing corruption — 32.33%.
• Providing assistance in flood-affected areas — 28.35%.

Ratings fall across 24 of 25 political indicators

October scores were lower than September’s across 24 of the 25 indicators. National security was the only indicator to remain unchanged.

Opposition performance received the highest October score, although it also declined. Efforts to tackle drug problems and influential figures remained the lowest-rated indicator.

The October results, with September scores in brackets, were as follows. All scores are out of 10:

• Opposition performance — 4.30 (4.33).
• Public participation — 4.07 (4.11).
• People’s rights and freedoms — 4.03 (4.04).
• National security — 4.03 (4.03).
• Educational development for the public — 3.93 (3.95).
• Political stability — 3.70 (3.72).
• Disclosure of government information — 3.70 (3.80).
• Overall performance of political parties — 3.68 (3.73).
• Overall social conditions — 3.68 (3.70).
• National development and progress — 3.53 (3.55).
• Safety of life and property — 3.50 (3.51).
• Overall problem-solving — 3.50 (3.57).
• Government administration in line with announced policies — 3.45 (3.52).
• Conduct and behaviour of politicians — 3.45 (3.51).
• People’s living conditions — 3.44 (3.49).
• Government performance — 3.40 (3.46).
• Cost of living, salaries, wages and welfare — 3.30 (3.34).
• Laws and the justice system — 3.28 (3.36).
• Prime minister’s performance — 3.27 (3.37).
• Overall economic conditions — 3.23 (3.30).
• Poverty reduction — 3.22 (3.27).
• Prices of goods — 3.15 (3.17).
• Tackling unemployment — 3.14 (3.18).
• Tackling corruption and promoting transparency — 3.08 (3.11).
• Tackling drug problems and influential figures — 2.88 (2.93).

About a third see no standout government politician

When asked which government politician had played the most prominent role, the largest single response was “none”, selected by 33.18%.

The October results were:

• None — 33.18%.
• Anutin Charnvirakul — 20.12%.
• Yodchanan Wongsawat — 18.87%.
• Ekniti Nitithanprapas — 17.77%.
• Ekanat Promphan — 10.06%.

Rukchanok Srinork led the separate ranking of opposition politicians:

• Rukchanok Srinork — 28.93%.
• Natthaphong Ruengpanyawut — 21.64%.
• Abhisit Vejjajiva — 18.80%.
• Rangsiman Rome — 17.91%.
• Parit Wacharasindhu — 12.72%.

The release did not provide September comparisons for the politician rankings or the achievement questions.

Poll chair questions tangible results

Dr Pornphan Buathong, chair of Suan Dusit Poll at Suan Dusit University, described October’s political environment as pressured by preparations for the no-confidence debate and speculation about a Cabinet reshuffle.

Flooding had caused hardship, while economic and cost-of-living difficulties persisted, she observed.

Pornphan suggested that Thais Help Thais had yet to deliver as much “Plus” as expected. Although the programme had generated some hope, she interpreted the index scores as indicating that overall results were not yet sufficiently tangible.

Academic warns that parliamentary strength is not enough

Assistant Professor Dr Darngnapasorn Na Pombejra, a lecturer in the Bachelor of Political Science programme at Suan Dusit University’s School of Law and Politics, argued that unresolved hardships reflected the accumulation of political problems.

Political actors appeared more concerned with retaining power than finding solutions, she observed, leaving people facing the same difficulties repeatedly.

When announced policies failed to produce visible improvements in daily life, confidence in the government’s competence and sincerity weakened further, she added.

Darngnapasorn also pointed to perceptions of corruption, patronage and unequal law enforcement as factors reinforcing concerns about unequal access to justice. Economic hardship, insecurity and unequal opportunities contributed to a sense that the state was distant from the public.

She called for urgent action, openness to scrutiny and demonstrable improvements, stressing that governing legitimacy depended on performance, transparency and accountability.

Continued erosion of political confidence could turn public disappointment into a crisis of government legitimacy, she warned, even if the administration retained a parliamentary majority.