By Dr Lamin Keita
The CepRass survey on the prospective winners of the 2026 presidential election offers a remarkable glimpse into the country’s current political landscape. As an instrument designed to capture public opinion and forecast electoral outcomes, the survey provides precious insights into voter preferences and party standings at this juncture. The data presented by CepRass is impressive in its scope and methodology, reflecting considerable effort to assess the sentiments of Gambian citizens across diverse demographic groups. Such surveys contribute meaningfully to our understanding of political dynamics, but it is essential to recognise that they are not deterministic factors that will inevitably dictate election outcomes, especially when variables such as electoral fairness and freedom are taken into account.
One of the commendable aspects of CepRass’s survey lies in its comprehensive approach to sampling and data collection. By employing a representative sample spanning urban and rural regions and diverse socioeconomic groups, the survey aims to capture a broad spectrum of Gambian public opinion. This inclusivity enhances the reliability of its findings at this particular moment in time. Moreover, by focusing on voter intentions rather than mere party popularity, CepRass presents a more nuanced picture that can inform both political stakeholders and observers about potential trends leading up to 2026. Nevertheless, it is crucial for political parties to interpret these results with caution, given that public opinion is inherently fluid and susceptible to change in response to evolving political events or campaign strategies.
Despite its strengths, reliance on any pre-election survey as a definitive predictor overlooks several critical factors inherent within Gambia’s electoral context. Most importantly, the legitimacy of election outcomes hinges fundamentally on whether elections are conducted freely and fairly. In countries where electoral processes face challenges such as voter intimidation, media bias, or administrative irregularities, polling data may not accurately reflect the votes cast on Election Day. Even renowned political scientist Nate Silver, known for his data-driven insights, faced challenges in his predictions during the 2016 presidential election between Trump and Clinton and again in the 2024 presidential election. This highlights the unpredictability inherent in political forecasting. Therefore, while CepRass’s findings may indicate prevailing voter inclinations under ideal democratic conditions, they do not guarantee similar results if systemic issues undermine electoral integrity. This distinction highlights why surveys should be viewed as informative tools rather than conclusive determinants.
The survey findings reinforce my perspective on the country’s electoral situation. However, two key factors are indispensable for winning and ensuring free and fair elections: coalition-building among opposition parties and the promotion of transparency in the electoral process. The recent survey constitutes an impressive effort to capture current political sentiments ahead of the 2026 presidential election. It offers valuable insights into which parties might have an advantage given the current voter preferences. However, these perceptions must be contextualised within broader considerations about electoral fairness and democratic practices in the country. Unarguably, no survey data can definitively predict election outcomes without assurance that elections remain free from coercion or manipulation. While it is useful for analysis and discourse among scholars, practitioners, and parties alike, CepRass’s findings should be interpreted with measured expectations regarding their predictive power for 2026.
