Dear Editor,
The political message coming from the National People’s Party (NPP) and its supporters, particularly the assertion that “the game is over” when the game has only just begun, deserves serious reconsideration. In politics, confidence is an asset, but complacency is a liability. A ruling party that mistakes its incumbency for an electoral guarantee risk discovering, rather too late, that public patience has limits, political loyalties are negotiable, and the opposition can become formidable when previously fragmented forces find common ground.
President Adama Barrow and the NPP must therefore begin asking a more consequential question. Not whether they have the machinery of government, the advantage of incumbency or the confidence of their supporters, but whether they have sufficiently consolidated their political base, strengthened their relationships with the electorate, empowered credible political figures, and prepared for the possibility of a far more competitive presidential and National Assembly election.
The game is not over. Indeed, the most consequential phase of the contest may still lie ahead.
For an incumbent administration, the appropriate response to emerging political challenges is neither panic nor triumphalism. It is strategic introspection, organisational discipline, measurable performance and an unambiguous commitment to political renewal.
President Barrow must understand that governing a country and winning another mandate are related but distinct responsibilities. A government may point to projects, appointments, infrastructure and development programmes, yet still face an electorate concerned about the cost of living, employment, electricity, public services, accountability and the distribution of economic opportunities. Political communication cannot permanently substitute for public satisfaction. Neither can slogans compensate for weaknesses in organisation, persuasion and trust.
The NPP must move beyond the comforting language of victory and confront the arithmetic, psychology and practical realities of electoral competition.
Mohammed Jallow
Brusubi
Mai Fatty and his “logic” on term limits
Dear Editor,
So a long while ago, when I was a miseducated idealist of sorts, I studied criminal justice in university with ambitions of becoming a constitutional lawyer someday. Anyway, while in university, one class I took that I thoroughly enjoyed was Logic! I’m inclined to say that all that stayed with me in that class were logical fallacies! In further training, I was taught to recognize these fallacies when people make them, and to this day, that remains one of my favorite pastimes. If you’re a lawyer and you can’t recognize logical fallacies in arguments, I urge you to take the time and learn about them.
Apparently, Mai Fatty missed that class at whatever law school he claims to have graduated from! It’s either that or, like many of the colonially bewigged ones roaming this colonial space, they believe they are far more intelligent and smarter than everyone else. Had Mai sat in class to learn about logical fallacies, he’d not be defending Adama Barrow’s greed for power with “others do it too.” Not in those exact words, but that’s the sentiment! It’s like Suntou telling him, “Mai, stop scamming people,” and Mai retorts, “Suntou, you’re a scammer too!” Or someone tells him, “Mai, you were the one crying over the constitution that your benefactor Adama Barrow torpedoed, and you have since changed tunes.” Then he retorts, “American politicians do that too!” You see the fallacy? It’s called the Tu Quoque fallacy!
Mai would have done better had he limited himself to his false claim that “there is evidence that having no term limit is linked to ingenuity and prosperity.” How they can stand before the public and utter untruthful statements is a testament to the death of shame in this colonial space. This is the same Mai Fatty who once said of Adama Barrow: This singular fact and grave error of judgment constitute an act of betrayal of the principles that created the Coalition, and seriously call into question the issue of integrity and moral propriety,
Instead of addressing the greed for power or the need for term limits, he wants to bamboozle with nonsensical statements about other countries doing it too. If it ain’t the unthinking cry that “the law does not forbid it,” then they settle for whataboutism in claiming that others don’t have term limits either. In Mai’s warped logic, because others don’t have term limits, that makes it right! See how unthinking some of us can be? Mai once literally shed tears, claiming, “Never again will we allow selfish politicians to derail a national course.” I hope Mai takes a long, hard look at himself if he has the capability. Mai once also said this: Let me go further to confidently say that I am the next President of The Gambia after Barrow…” Well, Mai, I guess you are going to have to wait a lot longer cos Adama ain’t trying to leave! And seeing how spineless some of you are, I guess we’re lucky that your party remains comatose.
Mai, encouraging Barrow to remain in power because he is feeding you today, will deny you the chance of ever becoming president tomorrow. At the rate you are going, you are killing your own dream. Do better
Alagie Saidy Barrow
USA
