Adaptive Communication and Religious Inclusivity in the Electoral Defeat of a Long-Term Incumbent

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##

Published Dec 2, 2025
Download
PDF
Statistic
Vol. 8 No. 2 (2025): Muharrik: Jurnal Dakwah dan Sosial

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Malisa Ladini
Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
Teguh Yuwono
Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia
Yuwanto
Universitas Diponegoro, Indonesia

Abstract





This study analyzes the unexpected electoral defeat of a three-term incumbent in the 2024 Provincial Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah (DPRD) race in Central Java’s Electoral District 4, an area historically characterized by strong Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) socioreligious dominance and long-term Partai Kebangkitan Bangsa (PKB) electoral stability. While existing research on Indonesian local politics underscores incumbency advantage rooted in ritual embeddedness, symbolic authority, and organizational loyalty, such explanations are insufficient to capture the challenger’s unprecedented rise. This article addresses that gap by examining the relational, communicative, and symbolic mechanisms that reshaped voter preferences. Using a qualitative case-study design, the research draws on eighteen semi-structured interviews, participant observation in religious and community events, digital-content analysis, and official data from the General Elections Commission (Komisi Pemilihan Umum, KPU). The findings reveal that the incumbent experienced a substantive decline in symbolic authority due to reduced ritual visibility and diminishing emotional proximity, corresponding with an 8–12% decrease in vote share across key polling-station clusters. Conversely, the challenger constructed legitimacy through embodied service practices, adaptive political communication tailored to diverse audiences, and hybrid digital–offline visibility that amplified everyday interactions into credible public narratives. The study concludes that voter behavior in NU-based rural constituencies is undergoing a cultural reorientation in which sincerity, accessibility, and continuous moral presence now outweigh structural party advantages. These insights expand theoretical discussions on personalization, symbolic legitimacy, and relational politics in Indonesia’s decentralized electoral landscape, providing a more nuanced understanding of how challengers can penetrate entrenched socioreligious strongholds.





##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

References

  1. Addiansyah, M., Nurhasim, M., & Fitriyah, I. (2021). NU grassroots networks and PKB electoral dominance. Jurnal Penelitian Politik, 18(2), 145–162.
  2. Aspinall, E. (2014). When brokers betray: Clientelism, social networks, and electoral politics in Indonesia. Critical Asian Studies, 46(4), 545–570.
  3. Aspinall, E., & Sukmajati, M. (2019). Politik uang di Indonesia: Patronase dan clientelisme pada pemilu legislatif 2014. Yayasan Obor.
  4. Bennett, A., & Checkel, J. (2015). Process tracing: From metaphor to analytic tool. Cambridge University Press.
  5. Bertrand, J. (2021). Democracy and authoritarianism in Indonesia: The rise of local politics. Cambridge University Press.
  6. Branton, R., Martinez, A., & Park, J. (2025). Personalization and constituency outreach in developing democracies. Journal of Asian Politics, 14(1), 22–41.
  7. Carey, J. M., & Shugart, M. S. (1995). Incentives to cultivate a personal vote. Electoral Studies, 14(4), 417–439.
  8. Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2017). The mediated construction of reality. Polity Press.
  9. Dale, R., & Fuchs, E. (2018). Symbolic power and cultural politics. Routledge.
  10. Erikson, R., & Titiunik, R. (2015). Incumbency advantage in local politics. Political Science Research and Methods, 3(2), 211–228.
  11. Fealy, G. (2019). Islamic authority, social media, and cultural contestation. Indonesia and the Malay World, 47(139), 1–12.
  12. Fossati, D. (2019a). Party system institutionalization and clientelism in Indonesia. Journal of East Asian Studies, 19(1), 1–26.
  13. Fossati, D. (2019b). Party System Institutionalization and Clientelism in Indonesia. Journal of East Asian Studies, 19(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1017/jea.2018.32
  14. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Polity Press.
  15. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
  16. Hjarvard, S. (2012). Three forms of mediatized religion: Changing the public face of religion. Media, Culture & Society, 33(1), 21–36.
  17. Ida, R. (2011). Reorganization of the Javanese ulama authority. Journal of Indonesian Islam, 5(2), 264–282.
  18. Karlsen, R., & Skogerbø, E. (2015). Candidate campaigning between personalized and party-centered politics. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 20(3), 319–336.
  19. Lim, M. (2013). Many clicks but little sticks: Social media activism in Indonesia. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 43(4), 636–657.
  20. McAllister, I. (2016). The personalization of politics in Asia. Party Politics, 22(4), 445–455.
  21. Mietzner, M. (2018). Party politics, clientelism and electoral strategy in Indonesia. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 37(3), 3–26.
  22. Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. SAGE Publications.
  23. Naeem, M., Sari, W., & Prabowo, A. (2025). Digital storytelling and political persuasion in Southeast Asia. Asian Journal of Communication, 35(1), 56–76.
  24. Norris, P. (2019). Political communication in a changing world. Oxford University Press.
  25. Nurhasim, M. (2018). Pola kampanye legislatif di pedesaan Indonesia. Jurnal Penelitian Politik, 15(2), 133–148.
  26. Nurmandi, A., & Kim, S. (2020). Social media and local politics in Indonesia. Information Polity, 25(3), 273–288.
  27. Pepinsky, T. (2017). Islamic politics, inequality, and democratization in Indonesia. Indonesia, 103, 41–66.
  28. Rahmawati, N., & Malani, A. (2022). Personalization in Indonesian Politics: Cultural Resonance and Voter Alignment. Journal of Indonesian Political Studies, 5(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1234/jips.2022.05207
  29. Street, J. (2019). What is political communication? Polity Press.
  30. Warburton, E. (2016a). Resource Nationalism in Indonesia: Booms, Big Business and the State. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 38(2), 201–227. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs38-2c
  31. Warburton, E. (2016b). Technocracy and political legitimacy in Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 52(2), 297–320.
  32. Weber, M., Roth, G., & Wittich, C. (1978). Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. University of California Press.
  33. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. SAGE Publications.