₦airaland Forum

For a party that wants to deliver Nigeria, NDC is spending an embarrassing amount of time trying to deliver itself from itself.

Now we are told that **Dickson and Obi have “resolved” their dispute after a three-hour closed-door meeting.** For a new party, that is hardly a badge of strength. It is more like a newborn baby already needing family intervention before it has even learned how to sit. A platform that has barely arranged its own chairs is already promising to rearrange the entire furniture of the federation.

That is the comedy of NDC.

It was advertised as a fresh rescue vehicle, but from the beginning it has looked more like a borrowed bus full of restless passengers fighting over the front seat. First came the drama of defections, then the quarrels over tickets, then the Aisha Yesufu noise, then the Dickson boundary-drawing, and now a “closed-door peace meeting” as if the party is already an old house full of inherited bitterness.

There is a proverb for this: **the man who cannot carry his own mat should not boast of carrying the market stall.**

If this is what NDC looks like before the real campaign even starts, what will happen when governorship tickets, presidential strategy, zoning fights, and regional egos begin to clash fully? A party that needs emergency reconciliation before it can even settle into itself should be humble in its language of national redemption.

Because the truth is simple:

**NDC has not yet shown Nigeria a government-in-waiting. It has only shown Nigeria a quarrel-in-progress.**

And that is the putdown at the heart of it all:
**before NDC talks of delivering Nigeria, it should first prove it can survive itself without another closed-door rescue operation.**

Streetinvestor2:
So if the north don't vote obi because he is biafran (igbo))
They will now vote the drug baron because he has been Yoruba president for the past 3 yrs.Let the north vote Atiku. It is still OK for SE

You have actually proved my point. Instead of answering the issue of judgment, you ran straight into tribal reduction and abuse. The article did not say the North should reject Obi because he is Igbo. It said a serious candidate should avoid statements that deepen existing suspicion in a fragile country. That is called political judgment.

And as for the “drug baron” line, abuse is not argument. If you have facts, present them. If not, then you are only using insult to dodge substance.

The real issue remains simple: when a man knows there is already a perception problem around him, wisdom demands that he speak and act in ways that reduce it, not inflame it. Obi did the opposite.

There is a proverb: when the soup is hot, a wise man blows gently; he does not put firewood under the pot. Obi keeps adding firewood where caution is needed. That is the point.

givedemwotowoto:
I wonder if OP sat down to write this rubbish when Tinubu said he’ll negotiate with Biafra agitators during the 2023 elections

What about Tinubu?” is the usual refuge of people who cannot defend Obi on the substance. If my article is rubbish, challenge the facts and the reasoning.
But once you abandon Obi’s statement and run to Tinubu, you have already admitted you cannot rescue Obi from the point being made.

When a man cannot wash his own hands clean, he starts pointing at another man’s dirty fingernails.

A counterargument answers the issue. Whataboutism only advertises discomfort.
Deflection is not rebuttal.

CharlesCNG:
One of the most revealing questions in political discourse is also the simplest:

Who is your candidate?

It is easy to criticise those in power. In fact, criticism is necessary in a democracy. Governments must be held accountable, policies must be scrutinised, and leaders must never be beyond reproach.

But criticism alone is not a political programme.

Too often, public discourse degenerates into an endless catalogue of complaints without any serious discussion about alternatives. Every policy is condemned, every decision is attacked, and every challenge is laid at the feet of the incumbent. Yet, when asked the most basic question — *Who is your candidate?* — many suddenly become evasive.

Why?

Because identifying a candidate means subjecting that person to the same standards being demanded of the incumbent. It means discussing policies, priorities, competence, experience and, above all, feasibility.

It is impossible to compare records and plans if one refuses to identify the alternative being proposed.

After all, elections are not academic debates. Somebody must govern. Somebody must make difficult decisions. Somebody must pay the bills.[/i]

Opposition worthy of power must answer four simple questions:

What would your candidate have done differently?

What is your candidate's plan for 2027?

How does your candidate intend to pay for it?

And finally,

Who exactly is your candidate?

Because anti-incumbent sentiment is not a manifesto.

Complaints are not policies.

And anger, no matter how passionately expressed, is not a substitute for leadership.[i]

Who is your candidate?

What exactly would he have done differently in 2023?

What is his plan for 2027?

How does he intend to pay for it?

Because elections are not referendums on anger.

They are choices between competing visions.

And every vision must eventually submit itself to the test of practical reality.

Kukutente23:
I really did not want to counter your thread as it seems more like a paid writeup drawn from AI but it seems you're beginning to believe your own falsehood which is a most dangerous thing. Lest you go to town with it feeling funky, take note of the following:

1. Fuel subsidy removal is not an achievement. Previous govts have tried to remove subsidy since 1999 most notably in 2012. Ironically, this same president mobilised people against the move then. And it was a popular move mainly because subsidy removal is an antisocial move. The cost of preventing the removal in 2012 and hypocritically removing it on the first day in office ultimately being borne by the masses. In 2012 when subsidy was removed, petrol price moved from 87 to 145 which is 85% increase. Conversely, in 2023, it moved from 197 to 630 at first instance and is now over 1300 which represents around a 700% increase. The difference in percentages (an alarming 615) is the opportunity cost of delaying that removal by 11 years which Tinubu is directly responsible for in the final analysis. So in actual fact, he should be apologising to Nigerians for making them lose 615% cushion over 10 years only to cluelessly throw them in the deep end. More importantly, the removal of subsidy has led to an increase in poverty rate by 10points from 51% to 63% in the space of 3 years. A policy that increases poverty can't be said to be a good economic move in the final analysis after all the idea behind an economy is meeting the needs of the people with the minimum cost.

2. As for multiple exchange rate, he can take credit for that but only so far as the fact that the mess was created by his fellow party man and former political ally Buhari whom he supported all through the creation of the mess. So it comes across again as hypocrisy if he supported his ally to mess up the forex and kept mute only to do an about turn when he got into office. Again, the currency devaluation was so badly mismanaged that the exchange rate was nearing N2000 to $1 before his govt reacted to bring things under control. This led to massive cost push inflation as manufacturers grappled with high input costs and led to price inflation at the shelf leading to shrinkage in real household income and massive high cost of living the likes that have never been witnessed in this country. Imagine an inflation rate of over 30%!!

3. False. Nigeria has been having a favourable BoT and BoP since 2021. Go and check your facts. More importantly, Nigerians positive Balance of Trade is not due to increased export activity but a massive fall in import demand due to weak currency which has seen our neighbours currency rise in value above ours for the first time since independence. Today, 1 CFA Franc is 2 naira. Meanwhile I'm 2022, the year before this regime, 1 CFA Franc was 0.68 naira. That's an over 200% gain over the naira in just 2 years. How is that something to celebrate? This has led to imprt being more expensive leading to a lot of manufacturing companies that depend on foreign inputs closing shop.

4. The fundamentals for the reserves rise is more foreign loans and a lot of foreign portfolio investments. These are being driven by Nigeria’s high interest rates which means high yield for bonds. This fundamentals are not really one to build an economy with. The focus should be on FDI which has remained weak and export proceeds which have also not been on the rise especially commensurate with the fall in imports as well. Of course, the effect is seen in the high debt servicing rate which has led to poor capital releases for the Federal budget, a situation that has led to 30% budget performance over 3 cycles and multiple budgets running and even rollovers. A strong external reserve should ordinarily lead to stronger imports but that's not seen to be the case here.

5. This is another lie. The fiscal deficit has widened. The budget performance of 30% and rollovers already shows weak fiscal performance so how can fiscal deficit be reduced when your budget is performing poorly. Where did you learn your economics from Op?

6. What is driving investor confidence is high interest rates and not the fundamentals of a thriving economy. That's why the investments is basically in portfolios and not real investments. This is not a serious progress for the economy. You can't build economic resurgence on portfolios that can disappear in a twinkle of an eye

7. Ratings are good but only so far as ease of getting loans and portfolios investments. They have no effect on the real economy or the average household income which incentivizes savings and investments in SMEs that should drive an economy

8. The Fx backlog inherited from the mismanagement by his political ally whom he supported and encouraged were cleared with loans. Nothing special here. The loans have to be repaid and some will be with our crude oil like the Afreximbank loan

9. State finances improved but at a high cost to households finances. Nigerians are poorer today than they've ever been in their lifetime. 63% poverty rate with attendant massive insecurity is no joke. Robbing Peter to pay Paul or being a robinhood for looting governors is nothing to applaud.

10. Oil and gas contributions to the Federation account is actually at its lowest ebb compared to the pre-covid era. The irony is that oil is selling at a premium presently and while Nigerians are feeling it at the pumps, while they are not seeing any improvement in national income especially from oil which used to be the main contributor. Oil income has massively plummeted through mismanagement inherited from his political ally some of which he has replicated or even taken up a notch.

In essence, Nigerians are actually worse off economically in this govt. Thank you

MY RESPONSE TO REASON NUMBER TWO

YOU WROTE
2. As for multiple exchange rate, he can take credit for that but only so far as the fact that the mess was created by his fellow party man and former political ally Buhari whom he supported all through the creation of the mess. So it comes across again as hypocrisy if he supported his ally to mess up the forex and kept mute only to do an about turn when he got into office. Again, the currency devaluation was so badly mismanaged that the exchange rate was nearing N2000 to $1 before his govt reacted to bring things under control. This led to massive cost push inflation as manufacturers grappled with high input costs and led to price inflation at the shelf leading to shrinkage in real household income and massive high cost of living the likes that have never been witnessed in this country. Imagine an inflation rate of over 30%!!

MY RESPONSE

Nobody disputes that the unification of the exchange rate came with pain. Inflation rose sharply and households and businesses felt the impact.

But let us separate two questions:

Was the multiple exchange rate regime unsustainable?

And if so, what was the alternative?

The old system encouraged arbitrage, corruption and rent-seeking. Those with privileged access bought dollars cheaply from official windows and sold them at huge profits while ordinary Nigerians and genuine manufacturers suffered. Virtually every serious economist, the IMF, the World Bank and many opposition figures agreed that the system was unsustainable.

So yes, there was pain in dismantling it.

But delaying reforms does not make them easier. It often makes them more painful.

The more important question is this:

What exactly would your candidate have done differently in 2023?

Would he have maintained the multiple exchange rates indefinitely?

Would he have continued rationing dollars and subsidising privileged access?

If not, how would he have unified the exchange rate without an initial adjustment?

More importantly:

What is your candidate's plan for 2027?

How does he intend to pay for it?

And finally, who exactly is your candidate?

Because criticism is easy.

But governing requires choices, and every choice has costs.

Kukutente23:
So where is the N4trn now? Has the borrowing stopped? Where is the effect of the borrowing now in the economy?

I have not blamed Tinubu alone for the anti-subsidy removal protest. What I'm calling attention to is the hypocrisy of preventing previous govts from carrying out a policy only for you to turn around and attempt to take credit for the same policy. It's like Judas being responsible for the killing of Jesus and then turning around to say he is responsible for the work of salvation that was done by the death of Jesus. Judas should be ashamed not pompous.

I find the questions about what my candidate will do most annoyingly absurd. Tinubu has not done anything different from those he criticised and you adulate him. Yet you're asking me to tell you what my candidate will do different. Why didn't you ask Tinubu what he'll do different when he was protesting against subsidy removal in 2012? Have you asked him what he's doing differently in terms of loans compared to previous govts? So why are you asking the same questions you refused to ask him from others? Besides, he's the one on seat now and should be the one telling us how he's handled the ship of state economy-wise instead of gaslighting the opposition about what they'll do. If you're in a vehicle being driven by a drunk driver, do you ask what the next driver will do differently before kicking the drunk dude out of the driver's seat? A failure should be removed. Not manufacturing excuses.
Thank you

This is a thoughtful response, but I think it misses a few important points.

First, nobody said the ₦4 trillion previously spent on subsidy magically disappeared poverty or eliminated borrowing. The point is that an unsustainable fiscal leak was removed. Stopping a leak does not instantly make a house beautiful; it simply prevents further damage.

Second, on hypocrisy, I agree that politicians should be held accountable for their previous positions. Tinubu can be criticised for his 2012 position. But inconsistency is not unique to him. Many who supported subsidy removal then oppose it today, while many who opposed it then support it now. Politics is full of ironies.

Third, I completely agree that the incumbent must be judged. That is the essence of democracy.

But democracy also requires comparison.

Removing a driver is not enough. Someone else must take the wheel.

And that is where your analogy breaks down.

Before removing the driver, any responsible passenger would want to know:

Who is the replacement?

Can he drive?

Does he have a destination?

Does he have fuel?

Or are we merely changing drivers because we are angry?

That is why the question of alternatives is not absurd. It is essential.

No serious electorate chooses between perfection and imperfection. They choose between available alternatives.

So yes, judge Tinubu.

But also tell Nigerians:

Who is your candidate?

What exactly would he have done differently in 2023?

What is his plan for 2027?

How does he intend to pay for it?

Because elections are not referendums on anger.

They are choices between competing visions.

And every vision must eventually submit itself to the test of practical reality.

One of Peter Obi’s recurring political weaknesses is not only what he believes,
but how often he says the wrong thing in the wrong way on the wrong issue.
Call it the[b] unforced-error syndrome[/b]: the habit of speaking loosely on sensitive national questions in ways that create avoidable political damage, reopen old suspicions, and hand opponents free ammunition.

That matters because a president is not judged only by good intentions. He is judged by[b] judgment[/b].
And judgment begins with knowing that not every thought should be uttered carelessly, especially in a country as fractured and security-sensitive as Nigeria.

Take his latest comments on Nnamdi Kanu. Obi said there was “no reason” to keep Kanu in detention and also said that, if in government, he would “discuss,” “engage,” and “consult” agitators. ([Punch Newspapers][1])
On paper, that may sound compassionate. In political reality, it is reckless. Kanu is not just any noisy dissenter. A Nigerian court convicted him on terrorism-related charges in 2025, and reporting on separatist sit-at-home enforcement linked that campaign to hundreds of deaths in the South East.
So when Obi speaks as though the issue is merely about somebody “calling people names on radio,” he sounds less like a future commander-in-chief and more like a politician handling a dangerous national-security matter with dangerous softness.

Then there is the electricity promise problem. In 2022, reporting tied to Obi’s campaign messaging said he would raise generation to 25,000MW by 2025 if elected. In 2026, the promise on his new platform became 10,000MW in four years.
A serious politician should explain that shift clearly. Instead, it reinforces the impression of a man who often[b] speaks in tidy numbers first and leaves the harder operating details for later.[/b][/i]

The same pattern appears in his wider politics. Reuters reported that Obi left the ADC-led opposition arrangement amid internal conflicts and mistrust, then moved again into NDC to run for president in 2027.
That by itself is not a verbal slip. But it fits the larger image problem: a politician whose political brand is often driven by headline moments, moral signaling, and emotionally satisfying statements, while critics keep asking whether the deeper discipline of coalition management, strategic restraint, and hard institutional thinking is really there.

That is the syndrome.

It is not merely that Obi talks. Politicians must talk. It is that he too often talks in ways that shrink him. He takes issues that require presidential steel and recasts them in the language of [i]soft sentiment, abstract goodwill, or overneat promise.

He sounds humane, but not always hard-headed. He sounds earnest, but not always weighty. And in national politics, that can be costly.

A wise politician knows that words are like matches in harmattan: once struck carelessly, they can burn more than intended.[i][/i]

Peter Obi’s problem is not that he speaks too much alone. It is that he too often speaks without the strategic restraint, balance, and gravity that Nigerians should expect from someone asking to be commander-in-chief. (God Forbid Bad Thing)**

One of the most revealing questions in political discourse is also the simplest:

Who is your candidate?

It is easy to criticise those in power. In fact, criticism is necessary in a democracy. Governments must be held accountable, policies must be scrutinised, and leaders must never be beyond reproach.

But criticism alone is not a political programme.

Too often, public discourse degenerates into an endless catalogue of complaints without any serious discussion about alternatives. Every policy is condemned, every decision is attacked, and every challenge is laid at the feet of the incumbent. Yet, when asked the most basic question — *Who is your candidate?* — many suddenly become evasive.

Why?

Because identifying a candidate means subjecting that person to the same standards being demanded of the incumbent. It means discussing policies, priorities, competence, experience and, above all, feasibility.

It is impossible to compare records and plans if one refuses to identify the alternative being proposed.

After all, elections are not academic debates. Somebody must govern. Somebody must make difficult decisions. Somebody must pay the bills.[/i]

Opposition worthy of power must answer four simple questions:

What would your candidate have done differently?

What is your candidate's plan for 2027?

How does your candidate intend to pay for it?

And finally,

Who exactly is your candidate?

Because anti-incumbent sentiment is not a manifesto.

Complaints are not policies.

And anger, no matter how passionately expressed, is not a substitute for leadership.[i]

Kukutente23:
I really did not want to counter your thread as it seems more like a paid writeup drawn from AI but it seems you're beginning to believe your own falsehood which is a most dangerous thing. Lest you go to town with it feeling funky, take note of the following:

1. Fuel subsidy removal is not an achievement. Previous govts have tried to remove subsidy since 1999 most notably in 2012. Ironically, this same president mobilised people against the move then. And it was a popular move mainly because subsidy removal is an antisocial move. The cost of preventing the removal in 2012 and hypocritically removing it on the first day in office ultimately being borne by the masses. In 2012 when subsidy was removed, petrol price moved from 87 to 145 which is 85% increase. Conversely, in 2023, it moved from 197 to 630 at first instance and is now over 1300 which represents around a 700% increase. The difference in percentages (an alarming 615) is the opportunity cost of delaying that removal by 11 years which Tinubu is directly responsible for in the final analysis. So in actual fact, he should be apologising to Nigerians for making them lose 615% cushion over 10 years only to cluelessly throw them in the deep end. More importantly, the removal of subsidy has led to an increase in poverty rate by 10points from 51% to 63% in the space of 3 years. A policy that increases poverty can't be said to be a good economic move in the final analysis after all the idea behind an economy is meeting the needs of the people with the minimum cost.

2. As for multiple exchange rate, he can take credit for that but only so far as the fact that the mess was created by his fellow party man and former political ally Buhari whom he supported all through the creation of the mess. So it comes across again as hypocrisy if he supported his ally to mess up the forex and kept mute only to do an about turn when he got into office. Again, the currency devaluation was so badly mismanaged that the exchange rate was nearing N2000 to $1 before his govt reacted to bring things under control. This led to massive cost push inflation as manufacturers grappled with high input costs and led to price inflation at the shelf leading to shrinkage in real household income and massive high cost of living the likes that have never been witnessed in this country. Imagine an inflation rate of over 30%!!

3. False. Nigeria has been having a favourable BoT and BoP since 2021. Go and check your facts. More importantly, Nigerians positive Balance of Trade is not due to increased export activity but a massive fall in import demand due to weak currency which has seen our neighbours currency rise in value above ours for the first time since independence. Today, 1 CFA Franc is 2 naira. Meanwhile I'm 2022, the year before this regime, 1 CFA Franc was 0.68 naira. That's an over 200% gain over the naira in just 2 years. How is that something to celebrate? This has led to imprt being more expensive leading to a lot of manufacturing companies that depend on foreign inputs closing shop.

4. The fundamentals for the reserves rise is more foreign loans and a lot of foreign portfolio investments. These are being driven by Nigeria’s high interest rates which means high yield for bonds. This fundamentals are not really one to build an economy with. The focus should be on FDI which has remained weak and export proceeds which have also not been on the rise especially commensurate with the fall in imports as well. Of course, the effect is seen in the high debt servicing rate which has led to poor capital releases for the Federal budget, a situation that has led to 30% budget performance over 3 cycles and multiple budgets running and even rollovers. A strong external reserve should ordinarily lead to stronger imports but that's not seen to be the case here.

5. This is another lie. The fiscal deficit has widened. The budget performance of 30% and rollovers already shows weak fiscal performance so how can fiscal deficit be reduced when your budget is performing poorly. Where did you learn your economics from Op?

6. What is driving investor confidence is high interest rates and not the fundamentals of a thriving economy. That's why the investments is basically in portfolios and not real investments. This is not a serious progress for the economy. You can't build economic resurgence on portfolios that can disappear in a twinkle of an eye

7. Ratings are good but only so far as ease of getting loans and portfolios investments. They have no effect on the real economy or the average household income which incentivizes savings and investments in SMEs that should drive an economy

8. The Fx backlog inherited from the mismanagement by his political ally whom he supported and encouraged were cleared with loans. Nothing special here. The loans have to be repaid and some will be with our crude oil like the Afreximbank loan

9. State finances improved but at a high cost to households finances. Nigerians are poorer today than they've ever been in their lifetime. 63% poverty rate with attendant massive insecurity is no joke. Robbing Peter to pay Paul or being a robinhood for looting governors is nothing to applaud.

10. Oil and gas contributions to the Federation account is actually at its lowest ebb compared to the pre-covid era. The irony is that oil is selling at a premium presently and while Nigerians are feeling it at the pumps, while they are not seeing any improvement in national income especially from oil which used to be the main contributor. Oil income has massively plummeted through mismanagement inherited from his political ally some of which he has replicated or even taken up a notch.

In essence, Nigerians are actually worse off economically in this govt. Thank you

Thank you for this . i will be responding to your points one by one and be asking pertinent questions. i will appeal that we keep this issue based debate civil.
here is the first point i will like to respond to.
YOU WROTE
1. Fuel subsidy removal is not an achievement. Previous govts have tried to remove subsidy since 1999 most notably in 2012. Ironically, this same president mobilised people against the move then. And it was a popular move mainly because subsidy removal is an antisocial move. The cost of preventing the removal in 2012 and hypocritically removing it on the first day in office ultimately being borne by the masses. In 2012 when subsidy was removed, petrol price moved from 87 to 145 which is 85% increase. Conversely, in 2023, it moved from 197 to 630 at first instance and is now over 1300 which represents around a 700% increase. The difference in percentages (an alarming 615) is the opportunity cost of delaying that removal by 11 years which Tinubu is directly responsible for in the final analysis. So in actual fact, he should be apologising to Nigerians for making them lose 615% cushion over 10 years only to cluelessly throw them in the deep end. More importantly, the removal of subsidy has led to an increase in poverty rate by 10points from 51% to 63% in the space of 3 years. A policy that increases poverty can't be said to be a good economic move in the final analysis after all the idea behind an economy is meeting the needs of the people with the minimum cost.

MY RESPONSE

Subsidy removal was not presented as painless. It was presented as necessary.

By 2022, Nigeria was spending about ₦4 trillion on petrol subsidy — money that could not go to roads, schools, hospitals, security or states. Even the World Bank warned that the reform would hurt at first, but was needed to avoid a fiscal crisis.

The real question is not whether subsidy removal caused pain. It did.

The real question is: should Nigeria have continued borrowing trillions yearly to subsidise petrol, including for smugglers and richer consumers?

Also, blaming Tinubu alone for an 11-year delay is convenient politics. PDP, APC, labour, civil society and almost every major politician played politics with subsidy at different times.

So here are my simple questions:

If your candidate became President in 2023, would he have kept petrol subsidy?
More importantly, what is your candidate's plan for 2027?

Because elections are about the future, not merely anger over the past.[i][/i]

5. I ask the another question:

How will your candidate pay for it?

Where will the money come from?

And if yes, with what money?

If no, what exactly would he have done differently?

Finally , Finally. Who is your candidate?
Remember, let's keep this civil. no insults.
Next i will respond to your second point and promise to respond to all your points.

Ofunaofu:
You say criticism is cheap, but hardship is expensive, and Nigerians are paying for it daily. The things you stated that your candidate did, the policies you praise have only delivered nothing but soaring inflation, a weaker naira, worsening insecurity, persistent blackouts, and unbearable living costs.

Before asking others for a blueprint and what they will do differently, explain why the current one you are supporting is producing so much suffering. Leadership is measured by results, not promises. And right now, the results are speaking louder than any opposition manifesto.

Here is a strong response you can use:

**You are twisting the point. Nobody said hardship is cheap. The whole point is that reform comes with sacrifice, especially when a country has spent years living on subsidy, artificial exchange rates, and postponed decisions. The pain Nigerians feel is real. But pain alone is not proof that the remedy is wrong. Bitter medicine does not become poison simply because it is bitter.**

**Macro and micro are not enemies. Macro tells you whether the foundation is being repaired — reserves improving, external accounts turning positive, FX rules becoming clearer, investor confidence returning. Micro tells you whether that repair has fully reached the kitchen, transport park, and market stall. Right now, the macro signs show the engine is stabilizing, even if the passengers are still uncomfortable. That is the point you are missing.** Reuters reported Nigeria posted a **$6.83 billion balance-of-payments surplus in 2024**, while net FX reserves rose sharply and the IMF said the reforms have **boosted stability**, even though poverty and hardship remain severe.

**So yes, suffering is loud. But pretending the old distortions were sustainable is dishonest.
A leaking roof makes life miserable when you repair it in the rain — but that does not mean you should stop repairing it and return to sleeping under collapse.
Leadership is not measured only by today’s discomfort. It is also measured by whether someone had the courage to stop the drift, confront the distortion, and begin the repair.**

sweerychick:
I'm not brother dear, I'm Mrs. I will update on my preferred candidate of choice soon

Sorry about that... my sister.

brain54:
A court of law trailed the man and found him guilty...


Obi came out to say "no reason". The man amazes me sometimes when he speaks!

You are absolutely right.
A court of law heard the matter, followed the evidence, and found the man guilty. Yet Peter Obi came out to say there was “no reason.”
That is not compassion; that is poor judgment wearing a gentle face.
A man who wants to be commander-in-chief( God forbid bad thing !) should not sound like someone waving away what the courts have settled.
There is a proverb: when elders have washed their hands and pointed to the dirt, a child should not come dancing around the stain as if it is soap.
Obi amazes people because he keeps speaking on grave matters with the lightness of a man discussing market gossip, not national security.
Brainless!

sweerychick:
This is a counter thread to the original topic 10 reasons why I would vote for Tinubu 2027 by CharlesCNG.

1. “Hardest economic decisions instead of preserving a lie”
Fuel subsidy and FX liberalization were bold, yes. But they replaced one pain with another.
• Inflation is still choking households: NBS put April 2026 inflation at 15.69%, up from March. World Bank projects 23.0% for 2025. • Poverty is up, not down: World Bank data shows 50.9% of Nigerians lived below $3/day in 2025, vs 47.7% in 2024. 69.6% are under $4.20/day. • FX reform helped investors. Market women in Port Harcourt are still watching food prices double. “Stability” depends on where you stand.
2. “Economy hurting less chaotically”
Reserves and BoP surplus don’t pay rent.
• Power generation average was 4,633MW in 2025, not 6,000MW. Per capita electricity dropped 20% from 187 kWh in 2023 to 150 kWh in 2025. • If reserves are up and light is worse, that’s not “less chaos” for ordinary people.
3. “States financially stronger”
FAAC jumped after subsidy removal. True.
• Most states still owe salaries/pensions. More money in FAAC hasn’t meant minimum wage compliance or projects you can see. • Poverty rose while FAAC rose. If state revenue is up and 50.9% of people are poor, the money isn’t reaching citizens.
4. “Most serious progress on state police”
The bill passed House and Senate 2nd reading on June 11, 2026. That’s progress.
• It’s still not law. Needs 2/3 of State Assemblies + presidential assent. Dozens of similar bills died at that stage. • NPF is still broken. 37 underfunded state police forces won’t fix insecurity if training, pay, and equipment don’t change.
5. “Power supply forward… nearly 6,000MW”
That was a March 2025 peak, not sustained supply.
• FG’s new target is 8,500MW by Dec 2026. You don’t set that target if you’re stable at 6,000MW. • 2025 average = 4,633MW. Installed capacity is 13,500MW but we use <40% of it. • ₦185bn paid gas debts. That’s debt service, not new plants.
6. “Higher education more stable than ASUU-darkness era”
We avoided an 8-month strike. Low bar.
• ASUU ran a 2-week warning strike Oct 13-22, 2025 after a 14-day ultimatum. • UNILAG ASUU went on indefinite strike March 10, 2026 over “amputated salaries”. Taraba State Uni ASUU also struck Feb 2026. • 9 issues from 2009 agreement unresolved. Part-payment in 2023 didn’t end the fight.
7. “Real student-support pipeline: 1.38M beneficiaries, ₦242bn”
NELFUND numbers are real: ₦242.4bn to 1.38M students by April 2026.
• Upkeep is ₦20,000/month. That’s ∼$13. With food inflation where it is, that’s 5 days of feeding. • Private uni students excluded. If that’s your only option, you get nothing. • Verification delays still lock students out. NELFUND itself warned unverified 2024/2025 applications would be cancelled.
8. “Raised the minimum wage”
He did.
• Inflation ate it first. At 15.69% inflation, the increase was eroded before many states even paid it. NLC still threatened strikes in June 2026 over non-payment. • Poverty still rose. Wage hikes without productivity + power + security don’t change real income.
9. “Building long-term tools… consumer credit”
Credit-guarantee framework is good policy.
• Credit without power is a debt trap. Manufacturers’ #1 complaint is still electricity. If your shop has no light, a loan just buys you a generator you can’t fuel. • Still mostly announcement stage. Until disbursement data drops, it’s not “not only speeches” yet.
10. “Governs like a man carrying burden, not performing outrage”
That’s vibes.
• Insecurity is why state police is back on the table. Banditry, kidnapping, farmer-herder clashes still dominate daily news. • “Endurance” only matters if it delivers. After 3 years: poverty 50.9%, power 4,633MW avg, ASUU still issuing strike bulletins.
Bottom line:
Tinubu took tough calls. Nobody’s denying that. But “serious direction” has to show up in your pot, your meter, and your safety. Right now the macro slides say “reforming,” the micro slides say “we’re still bleeding.”

By sweerychick (critical thinker and staunch advocate for good governance)

My brother, do you even have a candidate? I have already stated what my candidate has done. The burden is now on you to tell us clearly what your own candidate — whether Obi, Atiku, or anybody else — will do differently. Not just what Tinubu has done wrong, but what your man will do better, how he will do it, and how Nigeria will pay for it. Criticism is easy. Alternative is leadership. Complaint is cheap. Blueprint is serious. So if you have a candidate, bring his plan to the table. If all you have is anger against Tinubu, then you are not yet presenting a government — you are only presenting frustration.

Peter Obi’s recent comments on Nnamdi Kanu are another troubling example of weak political judgment. Years ago, Kwankwaso’s camp argued that many northern voters already viewed Obi through the lens of IPOB and Biafra, and that this perception damaged his acceptability in the North. Instead of working carefully to neutralize that suspicion, Obi has now reopened it with remarks suggesting there is “no reason” to keep Kanu detained and that he would “engage” agitators if he were in power.

That is politically reckless.

There is a Yoruba proverb that fits perfectly: if people already whisper that a man is a thief, he should not be seen dancing with a goat. Whether the suspicion is fair or not is no longer the immediate issue. The issue is that a wise leader avoids conduct that deepens dangerous doubt.

A future commander-in-chief should sound firm, balanced, and reassuring to the whole federation. He should know the difference between lawful grievance and movements tied to coercion, fear, and bloodshed. Instead, Obi too often sounds soft where the office of president requires steel.

That is why this matters. A man seeking to lead Nigeria should rise above ethnic emotion and sectional sentiment. But with comments like this, Obi risks sounding less like a national leader and more like an ethnic agenda champion chasing a federal title.

And this goes beyond perception. A future commander-in-chief must sound like a guardian of the state, not a politician too eager to blur the line between grievance and violent agitation.
He should be reassuring the whole federation that he will be firm, balanced, and nationally minded. Instead, Obi too often sounds like a man handling a dangerous national-security issue with the softness of a sectional politician.[i][/i]

That is why this matters. A president must rise above ethnic sentiment and local emotional pressure. When Obi speaks this way, he risks sounding less like a national leader and more like an ethnic agenda champion in search of wider office.

Obi is totally unfit for leadership. simple.

Peter Obi’s latest remarks on Nnamdi Kanu show, once again, a troubling weakness in political judgment. In 2022, Kwankwaso’s camp argued that many northern voters already viewed Obi through the prism of IPOB and Biafra.
Now, in 2026, Obi has again said there is “no reason” to keep Kanu detained and that he would “engage” and “consult” agitators if he were in power.

That is politically reckless. There is a Yoruba wisdom that fits this perfectly: if people already whisper that a man is a thief, he should not be seen dancing too closely with a goat. Whether the suspicion is fair or not, a serious leader avoids gestures that deepen it. That is the problem here. Obi is not simply expressing compassion; he is reopening an old perception problem he should be trying to close.

Counterigbolies:
that's what we are saying, he made u so drunk that u couldn't think straight.

Check the present worth of eko Atlantic n tell me the worth of peter obi brewery which is now reduced to nothing

Tell him Eko Atlantic is not a rumour, it is a skyline. And now Phase 5 is on the way. That is what Tinubu's visionary audacity looks like: not endless grammar, but a city literally pushing back the Atlantic.

sweetjohn:
Nothing way anybody go fit tell me. Nairaland had been bought by APC. Last election they discovered that anything Obi used to pull thousands of likes, APC had to bribe the owners of nairaland to add up likes on any abuses targeted at Obi and also ban at any slightest comment against APC from Obi supporters inother to reduce their likes. It is a simple research I conducted. Anyone can conduct the same. Go through last elections period comments and see for yourselves and compare it with now. Also notice that any topic against PO, the first ten comment pull high likes and nonesense comment against Obi and the Obidient. Those are APC handiwork. I strongly believe it’s a plan strategy to make it look like nairalanders don’t like PO and that Nigerians love the failed Tinubu regime but the realities in the real world says differently.

Another clear proof to further buttress my findings is that anytime you quote this APC nairaland handlers they reply you in a minuete. It shows they were planted here to always engage and attack. They are jobless and have nothing to do than fight anything Obi and Obidient. Notice they are not even selling their failed president bc there is nothing to sell about him.

This is the classic refuge of a weak argument: when reality becomes uncomfortable, invent a conspiracy. Nairaland is now APC. Likes are now bribed. Replies are now evidence of payroll. So in your world, every disagreement must be purchased because it cannot possibly be genuine. That is not analysis; that is political superstition.

If Obi is as strong as you claim, defend him with facts. But once every criticism becomes “APC bought them,” you are no longer debating politics — you are running a shrine of excuses.[i][/i] A man who blames the mirror for his face will never see himself clearly.

And let us be honest: the reason some anti-Obi comments attract support is not always because APC paid for them. Sometimes it is because people are tired of Obidient abuse, arrogance, and excuse-making. Not every reply is a bribe. Not every disagreement is a plot. Sometimes people simply disagree with you.

There is a proverb: the child who is afraid of every sound in the night will soon begin to call the moon a thief. That is where this kind of thinking leads — paranoia replacing reason.

If you have evidence, bring it. If all you have is suspicion, then stop dressing imagination as research. In politics, facts are stronger than feelings, and conspiracy is not a substitute for argument.

fergie001:
Peter Obi addressing Nigerians in Washington DC

when Obi says there is “no reason” to keep Kanu detained and speaks broadly of engaging agitators, he sounds less like a future commander-in-chief and more like a politician handling a sensitive ethnic flashpoint with dangerous softness. That is politically damaging.

Reuters also reported that a 2025 study linked separatist sit-at-home enforcement in the South East to more than 700 deaths.

A. Economy and Public Finance — 10

1. He ended the petrol-subsidy drain.
The subsidy regime had become a huge fiscal leak; ending it removed a major structural burden from the treasury.

2. He tackled the multiple-exchange-rate distortion.
The old FX system was opaque and distortionary; reforms moved Nigeria toward a more transparent market.

3. He helped move Nigeria back into external surplus.
Nigeria posted a $6.83 billion balance-of-payments surplus in 2024, showing that the external account stopped bleeding the way it had.

4. He strengthened foreign-exchange buffers.
Net FX reserves rose sharply to $34.8 billion by end-2025, improving Nigeria’s external safety cushion.

5. He narrowed the fiscal deficit.
Tinubu said the fiscal deficit fell from 5.4% of GDP in 2023 to 3.0% in 2024, helped by stronger revenues and reforms.

6. He improved investor sentiment.
Reuters reported that reforms helped revive investor confidence, with foreign investors returning to local-currency bonds and other instruments.

7. He won ratings improvement.
Moody’s upgraded Nigeria’s rating in 2025, citing stronger external and fiscal positions.

8. He reduced the old FX-backlog problem.
A big part of the reform agenda was clearing backlog pressures and restoring market credibility after years of FX rationing.

9. He improved state finances through higher shared revenues.
Higher federation inflows after subsidy removal gave states more money to work with.

10. He attacked oil-and-gas revenue leakages.
Tinubu directed that oil and gas revenues owed to government be paid directly into the federation account, reducing the old deduction-heavy system

Kukutente23:
There's no need to counter a meaningless tripe

Fifty Problems Tinubu Has Solved or Seriously Addressed Since 2023 PART 1

A. Economy and Public Finance — 10

1. He ended the petrol-subsidy drain.
The subsidy regime had become a huge fiscal leak; ending it removed a major structural burden from the treasury.

2. He tackled the multiple-exchange-rate distortion.
The old FX system was opaque and distortionary; reforms moved Nigeria toward a more transparent market.

3. He helped move Nigeria back into external surplus.
Nigeria posted a $6.83 billion balance-of-payments surplus in 2024, showing that the external account stopped bleeding the way it had.

4. He strengthened foreign-exchange buffers.
Net FX reserves rose sharply to $34.8 billion by end-2025, improving Nigeria’s external safety cushion.

5. He narrowed the fiscal deficit.
Tinubu said the fiscal deficit fell from 5.4% of GDP in 2023 to 3.0% in 2024, helped by stronger revenues and reforms.

6. He improved investor sentiment.
Reuters reported that reforms helped revive investor confidence, with foreign investors returning to local-currency bonds and other instruments.

7. He won ratings improvement.
Moody’s upgraded Nigeria’s rating in 2025, citing stronger external and fiscal positions.

8. He reduced the old FX-backlog problem.
A big part of the reform agenda was clearing backlog pressures and restoring market credibility after years of FX rationing.

9. He improved state finances through higher shared revenues.
Higher federation inflows after subsidy removal gave states more money to work with.

10. He attacked oil-and-gas revenue leakages.
Tinubu directed that oil and gas revenues owed to government be paid directly into the federation account, reducing the old deduction-heavy system

ngmgeek:
You're not worth a response because you failed to make sense. Arguing with a kitchen table makes no sense 😕

Calling someone a kitchen table does not answer a single point. It only confirms that you came to the discussion without argument and are now trying to leave with insult. Empty heads often borrow big mouths.

A serious mind responds to points. A shallow one responds to people. Thank you for showing the difference.

frank317:
where did he mention terrorist?

IPOB may call itself agitation, but once a movement is proscribed, linked to killings, and tied to coercive sit-at-home enforcement, it has crossed far beyond ordinary protest.

What about Nnamdi Kanu?
As of late 2025, Reuters reported that a Nigerian court convicted him on terrorism-related charges and sentenced him to life imprisonment, saying his broadcasts and orders incited deadly attacks on security forces and civilians. So, in current Nigerian legal terms, he is not merely “an agitator”; he is a convicted figure in a terrorism case.

Is IPOB violent?
There is substantial evidence of violence linked to IPOB, its factions, or armed groups claiming allegiance to it. Reuters reported that weekly “sit-at-home” enforcement and related attacks in the South East were linked to more than 700 deaths in a report published in 2025. Reuters also reported attacks on security forces and civilians in the region, including the killing of at least 30 travellers in Imo State in May 2025, amid police accusations against IPOB and its affiliates. Nigeria’s sanctions page also cites specific killings attributed to IPOB militants, including the murder of a woman, her four children, and six others in Anambra in 2022

damoobaba:
Obi wey Mumu. Someone that even said he doesnt know the problem of Nigerians, so why does he want to be President? That guy even Mumu pass Goodluck Jonathan. Such person is not permitted to be President over an intelligent ethnic group like the Yorubas. We will go our own way instead of Obi to be our President. Someone that even people from other southeastern states did not benefit anything from when he was Governor.

Peter Obi’s 2023 brand was sold with [b]maximum hype [/b]and moral packaging, but over time the gap between branding and political substance has become harder to hide. What looked fresh in 2023 now looks overmarketed in 2026. And when critics raise this, some Obidients do not answer with facts; they answer with insults and emotional blackmail.

Kokaine:
But the impression I had of obi the messiah is that he will come and cleanse the land with brutal force.

In 2023, branding carried Obi far. But in politics, as in the market, no label shines forever once the buyer opens the package.
The problem with overmarketing is simple: eventually, the public stops admiring the wrapper and begins to inspect the goods.

HamedAmed:
Always read before commenting, he said AGITATORS he didn't say terrorists. Criminals are not agitators they are simply non-state actors.

Yes, he said agitators, not terrorists. But wise leadership does not speak as if all agitators are harmless democrats. Some are peaceful dissenters; some become gateways to organized coercion and violence. A serious leader must know the difference, define the line clearly, and show what happens when that line is crossed.
Take IPOB for example, In ordinary political language, IPOB presents itself as a separatist/agitation movement. But in Nigerian law, IPOB has been proscribed and designated as a terrorist group by the government and appears on Nigeria’s sanctions list.
So, politically, supporters may call it agitation; legally in Nigeria, it is treated as a terrorist group. That is the distinction.
But then Peter obi who wants to be President of Nigeria does not believe they are. Confused and unfit!

Bossladyy:
https://gazettengr.com/i-will-negotiate-with-agitators-if-i-become-president-obi/

Obi has no clue or alternative plan to insecurity. he is confused.

Obi is presenting empathy as if it were a full security strategy. It is not. A president must know when to listen, when to isolate, when to prosecute, and when to crush violent threats. In this statement, Obi sounds less like a commander-in-chief and more like a man hoping every armed problem can be talked into civility. That is not firmness. That is fuzziness dressed up as compassion.

BigCowHornn:
Please I'm please stop disturbing us go and vote for tinubu 1 million times I don't care


As long as dollar crosses the 2,000 naira mark I support you with destroy your country

You are free not to care, but anger is not an argument.
I am not “disturbing” you; I am stating my political position, just as you are stating yours. And if your only response is to wish economic disaster on the country because you hate Tinubu, then you have already exposed the weakness in your own politics.
Serious citizens do not pray for Nigeria to burn just to prove a partisan point. We all buy fuel, pay rent, and feed families. That is exactly why some of us support reforms that may be painful now but are meant to stop a bigger collapse later.

You can disagree, but do not confuse bitterness with patriotism. A man who says he loves the village should not pray for the market to catch fire because he hates the chief.

Kukutente23:
Exactly what a bot would say
The post you quoted was actually on your side and insulting Obi not you as you concluded. So it's definitely not an Obidient account
If you were not a bot you'll see that
What constitutes a standard response if I may ask

I no get time to dey shalaye. If that particular account no be Obidient, no wahala. But the pattern remains the same: less substance, more insult, more distraction. If you have a counter, drop it. If not, no need for long grammar.

sweerychick:
OP Tinubu took tough calls. Nobody’s denying that. But “serious direction” has to show up in your pot, your meter, and your safety. Right now the macro slides say “reforming,” the micro slides say “we’re still bleeding.” check my counter thread in politics section.

I agree with you. but macro still matters.
Macro is important because a sick foundation cannot produce a healthy house.

If the exchange rate is chaotic, reserves are weak, subsidy is bleeding government, and debt is choking the treasury, then life at the market stall will only get worse over time.

So macro improvement is like repairing the engine of a bus.
Passengers may still be sweating inside for now, but if the engine is not fixed, the bus will not move at all. A fair conclusion is this: the reforms are working at the level of stabilization, reserves, ratings, market confidence, and some structural repair — but they are not yet working enough in the kitchen, transport park, and market stall. Both things can be true at the same time.

Kukutente23:
It's obvious this is a bot account
Seun take note

Thank you . but it is not. i sometimes repost a standard response for nincompoops who cannot address issues frontally.

TemplarLandry:
He speaks like an imbẹ́cile. Add that.

Thank you for proving the point of my article. When Obidients cannot answer substance, they quickly switch to abuse.

“slowpoke” is not an argument; it is what people use when they have run out of one. If my ten reasons are weak, address them one by one.

But once you abandon the issues and start attacking the writer, you have already confessed that the facts are heavier than your response.

There is a proverb: when a man cannot untie the knot, he begins to curse the rope. Insult may satisfy anger, but it never defeats substance. In the end, the empty drum makes the loudest noise, but it still remains empty.