Bhumjaithai’s move is not confusion. It is optionality dressed as stability.
- What they announced
Thai PBS reports Bhumjaithai resolved to submit 2 prime ministerial candidates: Anutin Charnvirakul as No.1 and Foreign Minister Sihasak Phuangketkeow as No.2.
Thai PBS also reports that Suphajee Suthumpun and Ekniti Nitithanprapas said they will continue working with the party if Bhumjaithai becomes the core government-forming party. 
Bangkokbiznews adds that the party informed media of the decision via a journalists’ Line group around 22:30, and that Sihasak had accepted the nomination. 
- What they want people to feel (the frame)
Thai PBS describes the party’s justification as “work continuity” and “suitability for the current situation,” with Anutin presented as the continuity figure and Sihasak presented as the fit for the moment.
This is a classic psychological conversion:
If the public feels uncertainty, they are invited to “choose continuity.”
- The crack
Here is the contradiction the public should notice.
The Nation reported that Sihasak publicly denied the rumour that he was a Bhumjaithai PM candidate, saying he had no political ambition and was focused on foreign affairs.

Then, within days, Thai PBS reports the party formally lists him as the No.2 PM candidate. 
That sequence matters because it shows this was not public deliberation. It was controlled timing: deny while unofficial, confirm when locked.
- The mechanism
Thailand’s election calendar is now compressed after the dissolution of parliament. Thai PBS reports Anutin dissolved parliament on Dec 11, effective Dec 12, setting the timeline for the 2569 election cycle.
In that environment, the most valuable political asset is not ideology. It is bargaining power.
Two PM candidates creates a switchable face:
If Anutin is acceptable to coalition partners, he leads as “continuity.”
If Anutin is blocked by coalition math, the party can pivot to the foreign minister as a more internationally comfortable option, while still keeping the PM claim inside Bhumjaithai’s control.
That is what optionality looks like in Thai coalition politics.
- Why the public should care
This framing matters because “continuity” can be used as a shortcut to avoid scrutiny.
When a party says “the situation requires continuity,” the public should ask for:
Clear definition of the situation
Clear evidence of the threats being invoked
Clear explanation of why continuity requires two PM nominees
If those are not provided, “continuity” becomes a permission slip for power without accountability.
- Questions that corner the strategy
What specific “current situation” that Bhumjaithai is invoking, and what evidence supports it.
If Bhumjaithai is confident in one leader for continuity, why does Bhumjaithai need two PM candidates. 
Why did the foreign minister deny PM-candidate rumours, then accept the No.2 slot days later. 
Is this “continuity,” or is it coalition leverage packaged as reassurance.
Midnight
