ABSTRACT
Elections were called early in Kazakhstan in 2011, despite being originally planned for 2012. President Nursultan Nazarbayev, who had been in power since 1989, decided to run for another term rather than calling for a referendum that would have simply extended his presidential term limits until 2020. Scholars lack a systematised understanding of the outcomes induced by the institutions of mass political mobilisation under authoritarian conditions. The majority of cases are situated in the cell with 'pro-incumbent' electoral outcomes, or outcomes that are predictable for the incumbent. In reality, this category is the norm under competitive authoritarian regimes: the incumbent retains political power or hands it over to his or her successor. Electoral outcomes and protests are artificially dissected, despite their strong connection. If a universally hated dictator loses elections, it does not make any sense to organise a mass upheaval.
