For a long time, local elections had been trivialised and dismissed as an insignificant gauge of public opinion.
However, stiffening competition between parties in national politics has been the reason many are now seeing local polls in a completely different light.
In fact, the Provincial Administrative Organisation (PAO) chairman elections, which elect people to the highest positions on local administrative bodies, are being viewed as a prequel to the general election less than three years from now.
It is no wonder then that PAO chairman elections in strategic provinces have attracted prominent figures from major parties to campaign rallies as the stakes are high.
A source said PAO races are barometers of a political party's popularity even though voters' behaviour in local and general elections are worlds apart.
For instance, PAO polls choose public office holders who deal strictly with local issues, with the scope of their work being limited to the boundaries of their respective provinces. That said, the size of the electorate is not that great so certain conveniences such as advance voting or outside-constituency voting are non-existent in local polls.
All PAO chairman polls are supposed to take place on the same day in February next year, as the chairmen's terms expire at the same time.
However, some, including those closely linked to major parties, have employed a tactic to boost their chances of re-election. They have resorted to quitting their posts early while still popular and seeking re-election. Also, waiting until February would only allow competitors to build strength.
All eyes were fixed on the main opposition People's Party and the ruling Pheu Thai Party, the two biggest parties, respectively, who were set on a collision course in some PAO elections.
The most-watched contest was in Udon Thani, where any amicable ties remaining between the two parties were close to being torn to shreds.
Now, on opposing sides, the two parties were once close allies during the Prayut Chan-o-cha administration. They were both opposition parties and belonged to the pro-democracy group.
But after the departure of the Prayut administration and the failed attempt to form a new government together, Pheu Thai and the then Move Forward Party (MFP) -- the PP's predecessor -- parted company.
Nonetheless, the MFP, as the leading opposition party, was criticised for being soft on Pheu Thai. It came across as being half-hearted in scrutinising the government's performance, and its leaders appeared to hold their tongues when they had the chance to go on the offensive against Pheu Thai in and outside of parliament.
So it raised quite a few eyebrows when the PP, which was formed when the MFP was ordered dissolved by the Constitutional Court for attempting to subvert the constitutional monarchy, fired a broadside at Pheu Thai in the recent PAO chairman poll in Udon Thani.
On one of the rally stages, Chaithawat Tulathon, a former MFP leader and now a member of the Progressive Movement and a People's Party campaign assistant, slammed former premier Thaksin Shinawatra for suggesting the PP was bent on passing too many laws, saying the government has failed to grasp the concept of constructive legislative duty.
Mr Chaithawat also criticised government MPs for being lame ducks in their legislative work. He also rebuked Thaksin, who is deeply respected by Pheu Thai, for having claimed during the Udon Thani PAO campaign that the government was dismantling monopolies in the energy sector to make the cost of living more affordable.
"[So] why is the energy concession still in the hands of a single company?" he said.
The source said: "The gloves are off."
The PP might have figured that being too friendly with Pheu Thai would have a negative impact, the source said. With the next general election not too far off, it was high time the PP presented itself as a strong and dependable alternative in the national polls.
Also, the more Pheu Thai is beset by threats to government stability the PP will have more opportunities to make inroads among undecided voters by positioning itself as an untainted and non-controversial party.
Issues threatening government stability include the Thai-Cambodian memorandum of understanding (MoU) on joint development in the Gulf of Thailand and the reported move to nominate former finance minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong as chairman of the Bank of Thailand board. This comes amid allegations he will be Pheu Thai's proxy to bend the country's financial policies to the party's will.
Aside from the growing rivalry between Pheu Thai and PP, the Democrat Party was given a rude awakening when it was defeated in the PAO chairman contest in Nakhon Si Thammarat on Nov 24.
Some analysts said it was the first sign of the Democrat Party being emasculated after traditionally putting up a strong showing in most constituencies across the South. However, the party's eagerness to join the coalition government led by Pheu Thai, its arch-rival, may have been the last straw prompting many Democrats to switch sides and vote for Warin Chinawong, a former provincial chamber of commerce chairwoman.
The Democrats voting for Ms Warin was punishment for Kanokporn Detdecho, who was defeated. Ms Kanokporn, who belongs to the Detdecho political dynasty in the province and is a former Nakhon Si Thammarat PAO chairwoman, received 294,559 votes whereas Ms Warin won the PAO election with 328,603 votes.
The Detdecho family is led by Chaichana Detdecho, a Nakhon Si Thammarat MP and deputy leader of the Democrat Party.
Is it worth the trouble?
A bill proposed by Pheu Thai list MP Prayuth Siripanich aimed at preventing military coups has divided opinion into two camps.
Prayuth: 'Coup bill' splits opinions
Yet, both sides share the same doubt about its effectiveness, according to observers.
Under the bill seeking to revise the Defence Ministry Administration Act, the cabinet would have the authority to endorse the appointment of generals proposed by a committee consisting of the defence minister and the chiefs of the armed forces.
The bill also proposes amending Section 35 by prohibiting the use of military force or military personnel to seize or control the government's administrative power.
It calls for harsher penalties against military officers who violate or are suspected of planning to violate Section 35. These officers can be suspended by order of the prime minister to allow for an investigation.
While both sides doubt whether the bill can do what it is intended to do, one argues against it as they believe it could give politicians undue influence over Defence Ministry affairs.
Moreover, military figures may feel threatened and create conflict between the government and the armed forces as the bill could see their control reduced.
The other camp speaks in favour of the bill, believing it is still worth "experimenting" with. At the very least, the country would have a layer of legal protection against future coup attempts and raise awareness that coups should not be tolerated.
Jade Donavanik, a scholar and president of the College of Asian Scholars' Faculty of Law, said the contentious bill is an attempt to limit military power, and some "deep state" players believe it could undermine the institution of the monarchy.
He said the bill has ventured into areas where even democratic countries like the US hesitate to get involved.
In those countries, there are mechanisms in place to limit political involvement in military appointments and the selection of high-ranking officials to ensure professional independence, according to the analyst.
However, Mr Prayuth's bill allows the prime minister and the defence minister to interfere in the allocation of military roles and responsibilities while curbing powers related to declaring martial law, he said.
Currently, military officers can declare it within their jurisdictions, but to lift it requires royal approval.
Mr Jade believes that coalition parties are unlikely to support the proposal. "It will be extremely hard for the bill to sail through parliament," he said.
At least two coalition parties -- Bhumjaithai and United Thai Nation (UTN) -- and the opposition Palang Pracharath Party (PPRP) have openly criticised the bill and vowed not to support it if it is tabled in parliament.
Bhumjaithai leader Anutin Charnvirakul was quoted as saying that there are only a few conditions that provide a precursor for coups, and such conditions stem mostly from politicians.
"I've witnessed several coups in the past since the Chatichai Choohavan administration was ousted by one in 1991. Coups can be avoided if certain conditions do not occur," Mr Anutin said.
The PPRP described the bill as a move to weaken the military and said it could be turned into a tool for political gain, with PPRP spokesman Piya Tavichai saying that the party, under the direction of PPRP leader Gen Prawit Wongsuwon, would do all it can to block the bill.
According to Mr Jade, coups are best prevented through clean and fair politics along with the implementation of policies that promote education, healthcare, job security, and economic development, all of which contribute to stability in the country.
When the military stages a coup without a justifiable pretext, it is like smashing a raw egg against a rock -- the egg [coup] breaks and becomes useless.
"But if politicians do their job right, any coup attempt would fail, like a raw egg breaking against a rock. A coup is made possible by the misconduct of politicians," he said.
Prime Minister and Pheu Thai leader Paetongtarn Shinawatra, plus party heavyweights such as Phumtham Wechayachai, have distanced the party from the proposed amendment, saying it has not sponsored it.
Mr Prayuth's bill is open for public opinions until Jan 1 on parliament's website. It is one of three bills seeking to amend the Defence Ministry Administration Act.
The two others are sponsored by the main opposition People's Party and former defence minister Sutin Klungsang.
