Role of the Botoh as Political Brokers and Gamblers during the Tulungagung Local Election of 2018

Mohammad Darry Abbiyyu

Abstract


Current studies on the botoh generally focus on gambling in village-head elections (pilkades) and how its role transforms from pilkades to local elections (pilkada). However, this article defines the botoh as a political broker and gambler during the 2018 local election of Tulungagung Regency. This research found that the botoh’s way of persuading voters had a positive effect on an unfavorable candidate and helped him win. This study conducted in-depth interviews of “big” botoh, observed field operation patterns, and collected documents from related parties. The practice of gambling during pilkada is categorized into three types: ngapit, leg-leg’an, and biting. This article argues that the roles of the botoh as a political broker and gambler are caused by high-stakes gambling, compensation from candidates to be part of the campaign team, and the direct election process. In this context, candidates are likely to entrust the botoh with an important role within their campaign teams, because they are considered to understand the characteristics of voters.


Keywords


botoh, political broker, clientelism, gambling

Full Text:

PDF

References


Akbar, M. Fachri Ilham. 2019. “Peran Botoh dalam Pemilihan Kepala Desa: Studi Konflik Politik Kepala Desa Sotabar, Kecamatan Pasean, Kabupaten Pamekasan.” Undergraduate Thesis. Airlangga University, Surabaya. http://repository.unair.ac.id/91809/

Aspinall, Edward, and Wawan Mas’udi. 2017. “The 2017 “Pilkada” (Local Elections) in Indonesia: Clientelism, Programatic Politics, and Social Networks.” Contemporary South East Asia 38 (3): 417–26.

Aspinall, Edward, and Ward Berenschot. 2019. Democracy for Sale: Pemilihan Umum, Klientelisme, dan Negara di Indonesia. Jakarta: Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.

Auyero, Javier. 2001. Poor People's Politics: Peronist Survival Networks and Legacy of Evita. Durham: Duke University Press.

Baldwin, Kate. 2013. “Why Vote with the Chief? Political Connections and Public Goods Provosion in Zambia.” American Journal of Political Science 57 (4): 794–809.

Brusco, Valeria, Marcelo Nazareno, and Susan C. Stokes. 2004. “Vote Buying in Argentina.” Latin America Research Review 39 (2): 66–88.

Carty, R. K. 1981. “Brokerage and Partisanship: Politicians, Parties and Election in Ireland.” Canadian Journal of Political Science 14 (1): 53–81.

Chandra, Kanchan. 2007. “Counting Heads: A Theory of Voter and Elite Behavior in Patronage Democracies.” In Patrons, Clients, and Policies of Democratic Accountability and Political Competition, ed. Herbert Kitschelt and Steven I. Wilkinson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 80–109.

Creswell, John W. 2016. Research Design: Pendekatan Metode Kualitatif, Kuantitatif, dan Campuran. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Darwin, Rizkika Lhena. 2017. “The Power Female Brokers: Local Elections in North Aceh.” Contemporary Southeast Asia 39 (3): 532–51.

Fajariyah, Titis Sukma. 2014. “Peran Botoh Dalam Proses Pemilihan Kepala Desa (Study Kasus di Desa Waru Barat Kecamatan Waru Kabupaten Pamekasan.” Undergraduate Thesis. University of Muhammadiyah Malang, Malang. http://eprints.umm.ac.id/eprint/3370

Fitriyah. 2018. “Botoh dalam Pilkada: Studi Kasus Dua Daerah di Jawa Tengah.” Dissertation. Diponegoro University, Semarang.

Finan, Frederico and Laura Schechter. 2012. “Vote Buying and Reciprocity.” Econometrica 80 (2): 863–81.

Gans-Morse, Jordan, Sebastian Mazzuca, and Simeon Nichter. 2013. “Varieties of Clientelism: Machine Politics during Elections.” American Journal of Political Science 58 (2): 415–32.

Hartati, Acidieni, Arika Yustafida Nafisa, and Trias Tuti Hidayanti. 2019. “Botoh dalam Pilkada: Studi Pola Kerja dan Transformasi Botoh dalam Pilkada Kudus 2018.” Jurnal Polgov 1 (1): 121–56.

Holland, C. Alisha and Brian Palmer-Rubin. 2015. “Beyond The Machine: Clientelist Brokers and Interest Organizations in Latin America.” Comparative Political Studies 48 (9): 1187–223.

Interview with Adib Makarim (Head of PKB Tulungagung Branch and Vice of Margiono-Prisdianto Campaign Team). March 23, 2019.

Interview with Ahmad Djadi (Head of Partai Nasdem Tulungagung Branch). March 21, 2019.

Interview with Dasar (Senior Botoh in Tulungagung). March 20, 2019.

Interview with Dio Jordy Alvian (Son of Syahri Mulyo). March 20, 2019.

Interview with Ponidi (Botoh in Manding Village, Pucanglaban District). March 26, 2019.

Interview with Rendra Kurniawan (Botoh Coordinator in Ngantru District). March 20, 2019.

Interview with Satria Wicaksono (Botoh in Kalidawir District). March 23, 2019.

Interview with Suharminto (Member of Tulungagung DPRD). February 7, 2019.

Interview with Supriyono (Head of PDI-P Tulungagung Branch and Speaker of Tulungagung DPRD). February 7, 2019.

Larreguy, Horacio, John Marshall, and Pablo Querubín. 2016. “Parties, Brokers, and Voter Mobilization: How Turnout Buying Depends upon the Party’s Capacity to Monitor Brokers.” American Political Science Review 110 (1): 160–79.

Lawson, Chappell and Kenneth F. Greene. 2011. “Self-Enforcing Clientelism.” Presented at Conference on Clientelism and Electoral Fraud, Juan March Institute, Madrid, Spain, June 29–July 1, 2011.

Nichter, Simeon. 2008. “Vote Buying or Turnout Buying? Machine Politics and Secret Ballot.” American Political Science Review 102 (1): 19–31.

Stokes, Susan C., Thad Dunning, Marcelo Nazareno and Valeria Brusco. 2013. Brokers, Voters, and Clientelism: The Puzzle of Distributive Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Tawakkal, George Towar Ikbal, Nurdien Harry Kistanto, Hasyim Asy'ari, Ari Pradhanawati, and Andrew D. Garner. 2017. “Why Brokers Don't Betray: Social Status and Brokerage Activity in Central Java.” Asian Affairs: An American Review 44 (2): 52–68.

Widyarini, Dyah Ayu. 2017. “Botoh Politik Dalam Pemilihan Kepala Desa Jabung Kecamatan Talun Kabupaten Blitar.” Undergraduate Thesis. Brawijaya University. http://repository.ub.ac.id/id/eprint/5097

Zarazaga, Rodrigo. 2014. “Brokers Beyond Clientelism: A New Perspective Through The Argentine Case.” Latin American Politics and Society 56 (3): 23–45.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.7454/jp.v6i1.284

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2020 Mohammad Darry Abbiyyu