MP SPEAKS I am aware that my initial response to the Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar by-elections results have been reported as me blaming the voters for BN's win.

I have explained previously on the social media on the need to carry out a root cause analysis (a term so familiar to people with engineering background or quality system) to identify the real factors that motivate the voters to vote the way they did.

This is a normal process out of which we are able to identify areas to intervene.

Only plans or programs or strategies born out the correct identification of root cause analysis can yield the improvement needed to win the next general election.

My conclusion was the racial/religious sentiments as well as the goodies and cash handouts splurged during the campaigning were the two most important factors.

I reiterated my view previously that unless and until voters (and our society) can move beyond these two tools deployed by the BN, it is unlikely there will ever be a change.

Some quarters quickly saw this as my blaming the voters.

Umno jumped on the bandwagon and for the last few days I had the prime time slot on mainstream TV stations demonising me.

One minister called me a dictator, the other one said that I was the disease, and another one said I never fought for rakyat.

While it is understandable that Umno behaves this way, I find it ridiculous that other non-traditional media (often considered more independent) also behaved the same way.

No one in fact had disputed with facts and evidence (the scholarly way and objectively) that my diagnosis of the root causes was wrong.

The most widely accepted public verdict was the voters did not vote because they were disillusioned with the infighting of Pakatan Harapan (intra- and inter-) and PAS.

However, no empirical data has been offered so far to support this apart from the outpouring of criticisms on the social media.

Even some political analysts who only days before the poll predicted a stronger showing by Harapan compared to PAS did not revisit their earlier prediction and instead joined the bandwagon of "opposition bickering" as the main reason for the results.

I was not frustrated with the outcome of the election nor the decision of the voters in those constituencies.

If anything, I was relieved that finally we have an empirical set of data to work on to formula intervention strategies.

What I was frustrated was the tendency of the public, civil society leaders, analysts and commentators not to call a spade a spade.

Even worse, while the lack of unified opposition forces was a key issue that needs to be addressed, the simplicity of the thinking that puts all the blame on the opposition bickering to the point of ignoring the flagrant abuse of money/rewards; the race/religion sentiments and a plethora of other electoral abuses by the BN is counter productive.

It is ironic that while the public seems to appreciate the extent of corruption in the country, it seems oblivious to the massive corruption in the form of electoral bribery practised by BN that I get the feeling as if the public expects Harapan to win in spite of this electoral bribery.

Instead of focusing on the immorality of using taxpayers money to win votes by bribing the voters with a list of promised projects, many analysts and some civil society leaders seem to consider this (electoral bribery through promised projects) as a matter of campaign strategy i.e local issue versus national issue.

A lot of the comments on social media concur that goodies, cash offered and delivery of infrastructure projects promised did make a difference.

They (on social media) commented that for voters from lower income families, it is better to take the cash offered because that can meet their immediate need as opposed to listening to Harapan's heavy issues on national corruption, excessive spending etc.

I find it inconsistent that while many among the public indirectly admitted that electoral bribery was rampant, yet they seemed offended when I stated just that as the root cause analysis.

I am not that perturbed with this attitude and what's important is to concentrate on the future intervention.

The analysis

My team had completed a stream by stream analysis of the results for both Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar. It was a relief that it was not as Armageddon-ish as it was made out to be.

Summary of my take on the analysed results:

1) Malay support for BN at status quo

The percentage of Malay support for Umno is status quo with no substantial increase (59 percent in Kuala Kangsar and 60 percent in Sungai Besar).

The shock that gives rise to the feeling that Harapan was routed was because there was no dramatic decrease despite all the issues (GST, 1MDB, Tabung Haji, Mara and the Rosmah jet scandals).

People missed the point that despite the massive money being spent (allegedly RM400 per person distributed, more goodies and projects offered) and the persistent racist and religious attacks on Harapan/Amanah/DAP; Umno could only maintain the status quo.

When we contrast this against all the weaknesses on Harapan's part, should we improve this (in normal circumstances), a two to three percent Malay swing in semi-rural seats like Kuala Kangsar and Sungai Besar is possible in the next general election.

2) Harapan sees increased support from Malay middle class

There was a notable increase of support for Harapan in both Sungai Besar and Kuala Kangsar among Malay middle class and young voters (stream three and four shows a modest one to three percent increase and we won Bukit Residen, a notable Malay middle class polling district in Kuala Kangsar).

Considering these seats are semi-rural, the swing can be expected to be higher in semi urban/urban seats.

3) PAS' support sliding to pre-2008 position

PAS bagged circa 26.6 percent Malay support for Kuala Kangsar and 30.6 percent in Sungai Besar at the time when their campaign ​massively benefited from​ Umno/BN.

No bad news or attacks on PAS and PAS’ attacks on Harapan given full coverage. PAS was also facing Amanah which had been pictured (rather successfully) as selfish DAP ​lackeys.

It can be expected that if the candidates had been from PKR, the percentage of Malay support for PAS in both seats would have been lower and may come to 24 percent - which was their base as shown in the 2004 general election.

In other words, while PAS may think they had won the day because they had the second highest share of Malay votes; they are definitely retreating and sliding towards the pre-2008 position.

Harapan/Amanah got 9.5 percent Malay support in Kuala Kangsar and 8.6 percent in Sungai Besar.

This is the worst case scenario for Harapan because Amanah is the​ ​newest party, hence lacking in recognition and machinery.

Harapan also entered the semi-rural seats in the worst circumstances because of the ​long time taken to decide to enter the fray due to the negotiation with PAS​​ ​etc

We have to run the simulations for a spectrum of Malay support for all our seats but my gut feeling is our (Harapan/PKR) Malay support in semi-urban seats can go to ​20​ percent and in urban seats like Pandan can reach ​30​ percent.

4) Chinese swing to BN even with normal turnout 

The Chinese voters’ turnout was lower by 21 to 28 percent.

However even if we take into account a normalised turnout, we still see a swing of five to seven percent to Umno/BN though I think this is very much localised because of the promises and goodies given by BN.

5) Wake up call for one-on-one fight

Therefore, while the defeat was a wake-up call to concentrate on one-to-one contest with PAS, it is also a confirmation that it was not a rout ​nor has the public abandoned Harapan.

If Chinese turnout normalises during the general election plus early preparations and good machinery, as well as BN having less firepower​ ​(cash, goodies, projects)​ ​during a general election – my guess is we may still make a strong​showing.

RAFIZI RAMLI is MP for Pandan and PKR secretary-general.