This article examines a perennial factor in Kenyan politics, that of communal identity, and how it was mobilised in the context of the March 2013 elections. Using survey data it tracks attitudes regarding a unique feature of these elections: the (still-expected, if bitterly challenged) International Criminal Court (ICC) cases of Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto, of the Kikuyu and Kalenjin communities, respectively, for their alleged roles in the widespread violence that followed the disputed 2007 election. Remarkably, notwithstanding this ethnic divide at the time, their 'defendant' status provided, first, the personal, and subsequently, the communal foundation for their political union and ultimate triumph over then prime minister Raila Odinga, becoming Kenya's new president and deputy-president, respectively. In exploring this success, the paper uses nationally-random survey data which also reveal the degree to which Kenyans became increasingly polarised as the elections drew nearer. In addition, qualitative material from media coverage and personal interviews suggests just how such polarisation occurred. The conclusion raises several questions about the way various possible scenarios involving the ICC issue could yet reconfigure the ethnic alliances evidenced in this recent and controversial election, and about the salience of ethnic identity in Kenya's electoral politics more generally. INTRODUCTION: ETHNIC IDENTITY VS ISSUE POLITICS?A rumour that Eldoret North MP William Ruto was to be appointed internal security minister circulated in Mt Kenya at the height of March 2008 coalition-Cabinet negotiations between President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga unsettled many residents.

The debate continues about the causes of the post-election violence that led to the most serious challenge to Kenya's national integrity since independence. However, there is one aspect of the pre-election period about which there is little disagreement: the far more frequent and widely disseminated results of opinion surveys by several research organisations than in any previous election year. Often controversial and provoking highly acrimonious exchanges, these polls and the alleged motives of those behind them became central features of the various campaigns. While their precise contribution to the violence cannot be determined, this analysis makes use of a selection of such results to consider this issue while arguing that: (1) they achieved considerable accuracy in tracking fluctuations in the candidates' standings in what was a very fluid political landscape; (2) the reactions to them highlighted enduring and significant commonalities within the political class; and (3) this polling experience is certain to have longer-term effects on the country's political culture.

The past 30 years have seen political surveys, particularly those related to elections, evolve from an occasional novelty to a staple feature of the Kenyan political scene. This chapter considers several issues with regard to these surveys. These include: (1) the practical challenges in conducting them as well as recent technological advances; (2) the reasons why a high level of suspicion is often attached to election polls in particular, and the main rhetorical forms that such suspicion takes; and, (3) several factors likely to affect the future of such surveys, beyond the widespread awareness of and considerable public support for them, especially the attitudes of those in, and aspiring to, power. It concludes by suggesting that the recent “proliferation” of such polls is no guarantee of their continuation.

No abstract

F THERE WAS any doubt that New Mexico is a two-party state it was I removed by the 1968 elections. The Republican party had its gubernatorial JNand state auditor incumbents returned, won both congressional seats, and added one member on the state's lower chamber (for 26 of the 70 representatives in the new House) .1 The sweep in the congressional races were the first Republican congressional victories since 1928. As Table 1 shows, Republican strength has been especially notable in presidential and gubernatorial contests in the past twenty years. Republican candidates have won six of the last eleven gubernatorial elections and have taken the state's electoral votes in three of the last six presidential elections. Despite this persistent strength, 1968 is the high point for New Mexican Republicanism since it was overwhelmed by the New Deal. TABLE 1 DEMOCRATIC PERCENTAGE OF TWO-PARTY VOTE IN MAJOR RACES, 1948-68 * Seats were not designated by position until 1960; 1948-58 figures are Democratic portion of four candidate totals each year. t Seats were districted. t Average of percentages for each year not raw totals; 1948-58 figures used for both congressional seats.The 1968 campaign had as a background three developments with long-range implications for the state: severe problems of public school finance, the movement led by Reies Lopez Tijerina to assert ancient land-grant claims, and the prospect of a constitutional convention. The last item drew the least public attention. A November referendum requiring the legislature to call a convention was approved 1 No state Senate elections were held. In the six weeks after the general election, there were three Senate vacancies through a death and two changes of address. Of the latter, one was C. Fincher Neal, Democratic majority whip. Mack Easley (Lea County) became whip. Appointments to vacancies did not change the party division of 17 Republicans and 25 Democrats.