HERE’S something everyone should know about the 2025 Sabah polls – what you see is not what you get.
What looks like reality on the ground is very different from what is actually going on.
Let’s unearth those hidden currents – the quiet negotiations, shifting loyalties, financial manoeuvring, and unspoken voter sentiments – in certain seats that truly shape Sabah’s political landscape.
By looking beyond the surface, we can get a much clearer picture of who might actually form the next government.
There is voter movement, for one.
A political analyst might feel a candidate is headed for defeat because of murmurs on the ground, say, in seat L.
But the analyst needs to travel 10km to another constituency, which we will call seat GG, to know the truth.
The pengundi putih (white voters, or your party’s strong supporters) in that adjacent seat have already been transferred to seat L.
On polling day, the politician you thought would lose has an extra 1,000 votes from the nearby GG seat.
In a rural area where pengundi putih lack their own means of travel or public transport, how do you get them from their villages to the polling stations?
That’s when duit minyak (petrol money) becomes essential.
A candidate needs trusted operatives who will not pocket too much of the duit minyak and ensure that transport, food and pocket money are provided in rural and remote polling districts.
The pengundi putih might be the politician’s voters, but they need to be mobilised as some villages are a 10km, one-hour journey on dusty, laterite roads from the polling centre.
The voters will then need to have their breakfast and lunch before voting, unlike in urban seats in Sabah or Peninsular Malaysia. Here, voting takes half a day.
If there’s no duit minyak, how can the villagers afford to vote?
Targeting pengundi putih is systematic – the politician has identified who his supporters are.
But some politicians don’t rely on surgical strikes. They go for carpet bombing.
That’s when they “bomb” (a Sabah euphemism for distribution of money) a particular area without discriminating on whether it is pengundi putih, kelabu (grey as in fence sitter) or hitam (voters against you).
The going rate of a “bomb” can be from RM50 to RM1,000, depending on how rich the politician is or whether he really wants to win the seat.
Some politicians will not bomb the “pengundi hitam” as it is pointless to give money to a voter who will smile and say “tatap (for sure)”, and then go ahead and vote for the candidate or party of their choice.
Aside from money, backroom deals are also made in coffeeshops or the lobby lounges of luxury hotels in Sabah.
A candidate may think he will win a seat as he already has a deal with a party from within his coalition, which will deliver the votes to him – but he could be in for a surprise.
The division head of that party might take his money but still sabotage him. That’s because if the candidate loses, the division head would be the candidate the next time around.
Conversely, in another seat, the frontrunner may need to make a deal with an angry party leader, who is upset that he or his men did not get to contest, in favour of a national party.
The frontrunner needs to strike a deal with the mini warlord of that seat so his party’s supporters – a sizable number, usually – will vote for him.
There are also vote banks – for example, the army votes – that favour certain parties.
Voters on the ground might dislike the party that’s contesting, but the party could have top-ranking leaders who can secure army votes – and victory – for their candidate.
Then, there’s the matter of phantom voters.
The Royal Commission of Inquiry on Immigrants in Sabah, which released its report in 2014, found evidence of irregularities, including the presence of “phantom voters” in the Sabah electoral roll.
However, the coalition that had systematic control over the phantom voters has lost its grip on them.
These phantom voters are still in the system and are key to winning seats in the east coast of Sabah, which is closer to the southern Philippines.
The 2025 Sabah polls might not be won by rhetoric on the ground, but by the intricate, often opaque, operations underground – where money talks, loyalties shift and phantom voters still cast their long shadows.
