This paper examines how support for opposition-aligned candidates among Kuwaiti citizens varies with the social composition of their surroundings. Previous research on the origins of support for oppositions offers mixed expectations: some studies indicate that opposition emerges from processes of elite competition, while others suggest that opposition emerges from economic marginalization. As most of this research has been directed at understanding the strategic interaction between regimes and opposition parties, the applicability of these theories to cases where political parties are weaker, as in the case of Kuwait, is unclear. Using elite interviews, election results, archival material, and census data from 1981 to the present, this paper challenges a widespread critique of electoral politics in Kuwait as exclusively "tribal." These critiques view tribalism as inimical to ideas of electoral participation centered on the idea of a rational, atomistic citizen who deductively and freely selects a candidate without family, kin, or social pressure. This paper traces the origins of the contemporary opposition in Kuwait, beginning with the restoration of the National Assembly in 1981. I argue that in electoral districts where elites represented minority “groups” (tribal, familial, or sectarian), they were more likely to use Islamist and liberal ideological labels to mobilize citizens. I trace these patterns across several historical electoral districts and tribes. The presence of practices such as “tribal primaries” seemingly reflects the resilience of the tribe as a traditional and hierarchical social organization in Kuwait. But tribal and kin-based encounters with electoral institutions and jurisdictional boundaries belie a view of electoral politics as exclusively tribal. The paper traces how elites representing minority groups were more likely to use ideological labels to obtain electoral support. These findings suggest the value of understanding how identity and ideology have shaped Kuwait's electoral landscape and patterns of oppositional politics over time.