In politics, polls are like mirrors. Some use them to groom their image, while others choose to shatter the glass when the reflection turns unpleasant. Yet, as long as it is backed by a valid methodology, a poll is more than just a tool for measuring popularity and electability – it serves as a gauge of whether the government remains on a track approved by the public.

President Prabowo Subianto should take a close look in the mirror provided by a recent survey – assuming he still has faith in polling organizations. Prabowo has repeatedly said he puts little trust in surveys because, he claims, they are funded by certain interests. This is, of course, a practical excuse: if the results are good, polls are proof he is doing a good job, while if they are bad, the results are called into question.

According to a poll released by Saiful Mujani Research and Consulting (SMRC), in July 2026, public satisfaction with Prabowo's performance had fallen to 51.1 percent. Eight months before, the figure was still 81.2 percent. This fall is in line with increasingly negative public perceptions of the economic and political situation and law enforcement over the 20 or so months since the start of his administration.

And the fall in electability is just as drastic. The President's electability rating plunged from 35 percent in November 2025 to 14.5 percent in July 2026. The two previous presidents, Joko Widodo and Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, enjoyed a political "honeymoon" for the first two years of their administrations. The data from SMRC show that the electability of both men increased to around 44 percent. In political science, the initial period of an administration often provides the easiest way to find momentum to build public confidence before problems start accumulating to erode support.

Therefore, the fall in Prabowo's public satisfaction and electability cannot be dismissed as simply a statistical fluctuation. These figures reflect the failure of the government to meet public expectations.

In the social-economic sphere, the government continues to push through its free nutritious meal and red-and-white village cooperative programs despite the increasingly tight fiscal situation. And the implementation of these programs has been marked by a series of poisonings, problems with the supply of goods and services, and allegations of corruption. Meanwhile, the most pressing needs – improvements to schools, the creation of jobs, and improving people's purchasing power – have not shown any meaningful improvements.

However, the easiest way to restore public trust is to show the willingness to admit mistakes and correct them. But what has happened is exactly the opposite. Prabowo prefers to respond to criticism with condemnation. He has invited his critics to leave Indonesia, then labeled them "foreign lackeys" or "londo ireng." These statements may bring applause from fanatical supporters, but they seldom result in public confidence on a wider scale.

The President needs to remember that legitimacy does not end at the ballot box. Authority is maintained through public trust that is built every day. If critics are labeled and insulted, it is not only the voice of the president that becomes louder, but also the sound of the alarms indicating an erosion of public confidence. In politics, what is often most dangerous is not the mouths of the critics, but the tongue of the leaders themselves.

– Read the complete story in Tempo English Magazine

Source: https://en.tempo.co/read/2116669/a-reflection-of-the-authority-of-the-prabowo-administratio