Does low voter turnout risk handing seats to traditionalist parties?

Question

Accepted Answer

Low voter turnout could help traditionalist parties win seats in Johor and Negeri Sembilan
Low turnout in Johor on July 11 and in Negeri Sembilan on August 1 is portrayed as increasing the odds of seats going to Barisan Nasional and Perikatan Nasional, which the columnist frames as traditionalist parties. The argument is that “to go or not to go” voters are seen as being disinclined by Pakatan Harapan’s past performance yet also uninterested in other parties, creating a vote pattern that can translate into BN and PN seats. In contrast, the piece links higher turnout with progressive voters showing up and with Pakatan and like-minded parties benefiting from the state-level contests.
High turnout is expected to matter for who wins executive control
The piece stresses that voting decides who runs a state by determining who gains executive power through legislative representation. It adds that if people do not vote, the state is still run the next day regardless of how many voters show up on election day, so absence from the ballot does not stop government from being formed. This framing is used to argue that turnout levels can shape the distribution of seats and power.
The column links “apathy plus incentives” to BN and PN seat gains
A specific contrast is drawn between different states, with Semenanjung described as facing “apathy mixed with traditional incentives” that can yield seats for BN and PN. It states that in Johor and Negeri Sembilan, the key dynamic is whether voters stay home or turn out, and it treats that choice as a direct factor in how seats are awarded. The columnist also notes that high turnout is viewed by Pakatan leaders as beneficial for them, implying that low turnout would not favour that outcome.
Progressive voters are urged to vote even if disappointed with Pakatan
The piece characterises some voters as “disillusioned” with Pakatan but also not drawn to BN or PN, and it treats that middle group as a decisive bloc in the polls. It argues that progressive voters should still turn out and vote, even if they remain upset about Pakatan’s performance, because the alternative parties are described as committed to limiting social evolution. It also claims that those traditionalist parties intend to bury progressive values.
The elections are framed as a test of “substantial” change
The columnist points to past political change, including the fact that voters sent a former prime minister to prison, as evidence that voting can deliver significant outcomes. It then links the current Johor and Negeri Sembilan contests to a longer reform timeline, using Jawaharlal Nehru’s 1947 line about redeeming a pledge “not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially.” Within that narrative, the July 11 and August 1 polls are presented as deciding which side of “substantial things” falls, implying that low turnout could tilt results toward traditionalists.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Does low voter turnout risk handing seats to traditionalist parties?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

2

0

0

Share with friends