If elections were decided solely by who could produce the sharpest slogan, the wittiest social media post or the loudest political jab, campaigning would be much easier. Fortunately—or unfortunately for political strategists—voters usually expect something more. As Johor heads towards another state election, one curious feature of Pakatan Harapan's (PH) campaign is that it often resembles the campaign of a coalition trying to score political points rather than one preparing to govern one of Malaysia's most economically important states. Instead of projecting confidence as a government-in-waiting, much of PH's campaign appears occupied by a series of political narratives that generate headlines but contribute relatively little to answering the question voters ultimately care about: Why should PH govern Johor?

  As Johor heads into another state election, one familiar campaign theme has once again taken centre stage: the economy.  Political parties routinely claim that economic growth, investment inflows, rising exports or employment opportunities are proof that voters should reward them with another mandate. Conversely, opponents argue that economic challenges such as inflation, the cost of living or a weaker currency demonstrate the incumbent's failure. Yet beneath these familiar campaign narratives lies an important irony. In reality, it is often difficult—if not impossible—to attribute economic success or failure solely to any particular political party. Johor presents perhaps the clearest example of this complexity.