Welcome to the country where (vulgar) money politics is a common norm. Can you win a (local) election without money to buy votes? Very unlikely.
So money matters, but can you win the game if you have less money than your opponent? You might think it can't be. Money speaks and more money speaks louder.
But perhaps you can still make it.
Suppose your opponent has paid IDR 50,000 for each possible voters, and with the money you have, you can only pay IDR 10,000. My strategy would be to declare that I will give that IDR 10,000 to the voters, not now, but only after I win the election.
The rational voters will take IDR 50,000 from my rival, but vote for me. Why? Because it increases their probability to get additional IDR 10,000 from me --the amount that I will disburse only when I get elected.
But maybe things won't be that easy, my opponent might know my trick. If so, he/she will think that IDR 50,000 is too high and go for, say, IDR 15,000 --he/she is still richer than me, remember?
Let the game repeats. At the end of the day, we have the most efficient money bribe rate, do we?