2. Key decision factor: performance over party
On voter motivation, respondents were asked what most influences their choice of district councillor.
Clear results showed that on-the-ground performance and proven ability outweighed party affiliation.
“Work performance in the area” ranked first at 33.95%. This was followed by policy proposals addressing local issues (17.51%), regular presence and engagement in the community (16.93%), and personal credibility (15.50%).
By contrast, party affiliation was a decisive factor for only 5.37% of respondents.
The findings underline that sustained local work and visible results remain the most powerful factors shaping voter confidence.
3. Urgent policy demands: welfare and flood management
When asked what issues they most want district councillors to prioritise, two major concerns emerged equally at the top.
Both social welfare for elderly people, children, persons with disabilities and community health services, and flood-related problems such as drainage systems, canals and waterlogging recorded 20.46% each.
Other priorities included road safety issues such as sidewalks, crossings and accident-prone areas at 17.88%, waste management and environmental cleanliness at 13.77%, and transparent district budget management alongside faster complaint resolution, also at 13.77%.
The results reflect strong public expectations for both improved quality-of-life services and more effective infrastructure management in the capital.
4. Public attitudes: support for capable individuals over party alignment
Respondents were also asked whether Bangkok councillors should belong to the same team as the Bangkok governor.
A plurality of 45.75% said it was not necessary, as long as the councillor is competent and effective in delivering local work.
A further 27.64% believed councillors should belong to the same team as the governor to ensure smoother coordination.
Meanwhile, 11.57% said it depends on the individual candidate rather than party affiliation, while only 7.61% preferred councillors from opposing teams as a check-and-balance mechanism.
Overall, the data suggests voters prioritise results and local effectiveness over party structure or political alignment.
5. Bangkok governor race: Chadchart maintains strong lead
In the final and most prominent section of the survey, respondents were asked who they would support if a Bangkok governor election were held today.
Chadchart Sittipunt retained a dominant lead, with 58.41% support across the city.
This was significantly ahead of undecided voters or those without a preferred candidate, who accounted for 17.21%.
Other contenders trailed by a wide margin, including Chaiwat Sathawornwichit at 8.46%, Mallika Boonmeeetrakul Mahasook at 7.99%, and Anucha Burapachaisri at 4.48%. All other candidates combined, including “none of the above”, made up around 3.44%.
The findings indicate that more than half of Bangkok voters remain firmly behind Chadchart Sittipunt for a return to City Hall leadership. However, when it comes to Bangkok councillor elections, the same voters appear to distribute their support across individuals rather than party lines, clearly distinguishing between the governor and local council roles.
The ‘swing vote’ factor: 20% undecided bloc
The survey also identified a significant bloc of around 20% as swing voters, particularly concentrated in inner-city and suburban districts such as Dusit (64.71%), Nong Chok (55.00%) and Rat Burana (50.91%).
These voters are mostly working-age residents who do not strongly align with any political party and tend to make final decisions within 48 hours before voting.
This high level of uncertainty in the councillor race contrasts sharply with the governor race, where Chadchart’s lead is already decisive.
The uncertainty is driven by two main factors: voters are carefully filtering “capable local candidates”, with 33.95% prioritising performance and 45.75% focusing on individual ability. At the same time, they are still comparing policies that best address daily life concerns, particularly flood management and social welfare for vulnerable groups, both at 20.46%.
When combined, the 45.75% who prioritise individual capability and the 27.64% who prefer coordination with the governor show that 73.39% of respondents expect high-performing councillors capable of effective administration.
Demographic profile of respondents
- Gender: male 45.93%, female 50.30%, LGBTQ+ 2.70%, not specified 1.07%
- Age: 18–25 (12.64%), 26–35 (17.63%), 36–45 (19.24%), 46–59 (25.46%), 60+ (25.03%)
- Occupation: private employees 22.05%, freelancers 20.75%, unemployed/retired 14.95%, business owners 12.85%, homemakers 11.72%, civil servants/state enterprise employees 10.67%, students 7.02%
- Education: bachelor’s degree 36.12%, upper secondary/vocational 18.70%, diploma/higher vocational 16.89%, lower secondary 13.63%, primary or below 9.53%, postgraduate 5.13%
