KPU vote vaunting pattern riddled with PSYWAR tactics


IO – Votes entered in KPU’s Situng (vote count information system) as of 23:15 WIB, April 29, 2019, still show Jokowi in the lead and within the margins of error of the quick counts published on April 17. The results so far show Jokowi at 56.21% and Prabowo at 43.78%. Currently, the pattern of incoming votes neatly matches the quick count results which had Jokowi at 54%. In fact, in the Situng, Jokowi is doing better than he did in the quick count.

When observed in more detail, the counting pattern of the KPU is clearly manipulative, with the KPU entering voting station data that favors Jokowi earlier than other voting stations causing the percentages wanted at around 56%. This way of entering vote data seems (or certainly is?) intended to give the impression that Jokowi has won the Presidential Election. Especially when considering voting station data entered is already at around 53% of the total. On the other hand, this manipulative strategy is also intended to destroy the hopes of Prabowo supporters causing them to lose their fighting spirit.

As a result, Prabowo supporters must remain fully vigilant and not be distracted by this war of nerves known as PSYWAR (psychological warfare) or PYSOP (psychological operations), an attempt to impact the minds of the public causing them to think the data revealed is correct.

There are a number of things that show the vote counting results in the KPU are far from conclusive. First, inaccurate data entered into the system, which always benefits Jokowi still often occurs. If Jokowi has truly already won, inaccurate data inputs should have stopped, as the KPU would not want to stain the serial number 01 candidate’s victory. Ongoing inaccurate data in the system can be seen as a sign that Jokowi’s victory is in fact an illusion, and a PSYWAR is being carried out so the hopes of the public and Prabowo supporters are destroyed causing carelessness in detecting inaccurate data. If true, then it isn’t impossible that the additional votes for the serial number 01 candidate as a result of inaccurate data will remain if not reported.

Second, take the example of Bengkulu. According to a quick count from a certain survey institute, Jokowi won handily in Bengkulu with 58.78% of the vote while Prabowo only received 41.22% of the vote. In fact, according to KPU’s Situng, which has reached 100% input, Prabowo instead won Bengkulu receiving 50.13% of the votes. Here it can be seen very clearly that the doctrine which states the quick count is always right no longer holds true in this presidential election. Bengkulu is a testament to that.

Furthermore, although the total votes entered into the system have reached 53%, and Jokowi has received 56% of the vote, this does not mean Jokowi has automatically won. To understand this let us look at the illustration in Table 1 which contains the voting data from Bengkulu. Here, Bengkulu has 1,168,147 voters according to the Permanent Voters List (DPT). Say, that for the first vote counting session, 53% of the total votes or 619,118 votes have been entered into the system. Jokowi has won 359,088 votes or 58% and Prabowo has won only 42% or 260,030 votes. Until this point, according to the PSYWAR, Jokowi looks as if he will win big in Bengkulu by around 16%. However, what happens next? For session 2 of data inputs, there are 47% of the votes or 549,029 votes left and it turns out Prabowo wins 325,553 votes, or 59.3%, and Jokowi only wins 223,476 votes or 40.7%, causing Prabowo to win in Bengkulu with a total of 50.13% of the votes. This could happen as voting pockets which favor Jokowi were been entered into the system first. What is left to be entered into the system are vote pockets in favor of Prabowo causing him to win with a large difference, perhaps even larger than the difference in the first session of data inputs. See Table 1.

Bengkulu Session 1 Inputs Session 2 Inputs Total Votes
Votes 619,118 549,029 1,168,147
Percentage 53.00% 47.00% 100.00%
Session 1 (53%) Candidate 01 Candidate 02 Total (53%)
Votes 359,088 260,030 619,118
Percentage 58.00% 42.00% 100.00%
Session 2 (47%) 223,476 325,553 549,029
Percentage 40.70% 59.30% 100.00%
Bengkulu Total Candidate 01 Candidate 02 Total (100%)
Votes 582,564 585,583 1,168,147
Percentage 49.87% 50.13% 100.00%

Table 1: Illustration of Bengkulu Input Data with Two Sessions

The same pattern that occurred in the Bengkulu version could have taken place nationally. First, per province, the pattern of data entered which favors Jokowi has been entered in the first session, causing Jokowi to appear to win big in that province. For instance, East Java, which is currently favoring Jokowi with 66.88% of the votes. Second, between provinces, data input patterns for provinces with large Jokowi voting pockets are filled first, such as in Central Java, which is already 63.6% input. Meanwhile, data input for Prabowo’s voting pockets are slowed, such as in West Java which is only at 32.3%, Banten at 47.8%, and East Java at 44.9%, far behind the data entered from Central Java.

As a result, the vote counting still has a long way to go, especially if this voting pattern is to be maintained. Progress will be slow, and we should be ready for the PSYWAR. If the people can defend against the PSYWAR well, keep alert in regard to inaccurate data input, then slowly the opponent will panic and make more mistakes.

Hopefully democracy can be upheld, and remain vigilant!