What Northern voters should do
Northern voters are disappointed with the Tinubu administration; this is beyond dispute. But the 2027 elections are around the corner, so a pragmatic strategy is needed. It is argued that the North has ruled for 11 years since 1999. By 2027, the South would have ruled for 17 years. If allowed to continue until 2031, […]
Northern voters are disappointed with the Tinubu administration; this is beyond dispute. But the 2027 elections are around the corner, so a pragmatic strategy is needed.
It is argued that the North has ruled for 11 years since 1999. By 2027, the South would have ruled for 17 years. If allowed to continue until 2031, the South would have ruled for 21 years, 10 years longer than the North has done. This is true before considering how this administration is short-changing the region in every area—from employment to security to deprivation of public amenities to resource allocation.
But we all know that making impulsive decisions has consequences, whether in politics or in our daily lives. Therefore, the northern political bloc needs to reflect carefully before devising an optimal strategy to unseat this administration.
We must not forget that since 2023, the Tinubu campaign team has been campaigning against certain Northern leadership and blaming them for the country’s woes. They have also spent considerable time conditioning Southerners to accept that the South must spend its eight years in power as Buhari did. There is no legal backing for this, but the public has bought this propaganda.
The team has also leveraged divisive claims of “Christian-genocide in the North” together with ethnic favouritism to polarise voters. This has won sympathy for the ruling party, which is also enjoying defections from elected legislators and governors.
As it stands, the ruling party has 32 governors out of 36 governors. Bauchi is the only state in the north led by an opposition governor. Even the FCT is also led by a minister committed to working for Tinubu.
One can rightly argue that northern voters are disillusioned with the ruling party. However, with 18 governors aligned with the ruling party, there is a good chance that Tinubu can win the symbolic 25 per cent even in a free and fair election. The result could stem from National Assembly members canvassing for votes, inducements, and other strategies. Either way, this will leave Tinubu to worry about securing massive votes from the South. To make this strategy ineffective, the North must adopt a different approach.
The notion that northern voters can only be galvanised by a Northerner if Tinubu is to be voted out has to change, as it may be suboptimal in today’s context. For many reasons, the region needs to be seen as a kingmaker, not as a power-grabber.
It is common knowledge that the northern voting bloc has been polarised since the last general elections. To be precise, the voting pattern in the Middle Belt differed from that of the core North in the last elections. Despite worsening socioeconomic conditions, political choices have kept the region divided. Of the 19 northern states, four—Benue, Kogi, Kwara, and Plateau—remain closely aligned with the ruling party.
These Middle-Belt states either have Yoruba-speaking voters or a Christian majority. For obvious reasons, the ruling party has succeeded in uniting voters from these states through a force of negative cohesion towards the predominantly Hausa-Fulani core North. And if these choose to vote differently, it means the northern voting bloc will be truly weakened.
This is why a collective decision is needed to ensure the voice remains relevant when it counts. Progress has already been made over the weekend in Ibadan, as the coalition of opposition parties has agreed to adopt a single unified candidate against the ruling party.
A northern candidate would have been an obvious choice. However, this was tested in 2003, 2011, and 2023. The outcome was disappointing, as the presidency was lost even though many legislators and a few governors were elected. Besides, if one cannot learn from history, one is doomed to repeat it.
Given that the North can guarantee at least 60 per cent for an alternative to Tinubu, it would be logical for the coalition of opposition parties to convene to consider a candidate from the South. A choice like this will allow the candidate to divide Tinubu’s votes in the South while taking a chunk of the votes in the North.
This strategy is the most pragmatic way to unseat the ruling party, but the solution is not as straightforward as it seems. Voters must be convinced that another candidate will not behave like Tinubu and his allies.
Among the Southern candidates, there are only three frontrunners—Goodluck, Amaechi and Obi. Two of the three have been tested, with one having tried his luck in the last election. Of these three, the North will have to consider who will agree to serve one term in office to complete the eight years as required by the ruling party. We all know there is no constitutional basis for this, but it seems to be the best option for unseating the ruling party.
There should also be agreements on certain appointments to avoid a Yoruba-centric financial system or the concentration of investments in a single key city, as is being done in Lagos. There should be specific deadlines for investments, such as rail lines from South to North, oil exploration, AKK pipelines, river dredging, and the completion of major highways in the region.
Above all, the North has to demonstrate that it has the necessary tools to bring about change in the country whenever a leader deviates from an agreement. It does not mean they will snatch the power for themselves, but they have the capacity to make the necessary difference demanded from the electorate.
But, before this happens, the North must work to ensure only one political party is adopted. As it stands, the formidable ADC is facing leadership challenges. If this is sorted, then fine. Otherwise, an alternative must be found quickly, given INEC’s deadlines, which are believed to favour only the ruling party.