₦airaland Forum

Sometimes, the greatest success is not what makes the headlines, but what quietly stops making headlines.

For over two decades, ASUU strikes became as predictable as Nigeria's rainy season. Parents stopped planning graduation dates. Students stopped believing that a four-year course would last four years. Every academic calendar came with an invisible footnote: "Subject to ASUU strike."

Then something changed.

Since President Bola Tinubu assumed office in May 2023, Nigeria has not witnessed the prolonged nationwide ASUU shutdowns that once crippled public universities. There have been disagreements, ultimatums and negotiations, but classrooms have largely remained open while talks continued.

That matters.

A university is like a moving train. Every unnecessary stop throws passengers off schedule, delays destinations and increases the cost of the journey. For years, Nigerian students were passengers on a train that seemed permanently parked at the station.

Today, many students can once again plan their lives with greater certainty. Parents can budget with more confidence. Employers can recruit graduates on time. Universities can sustain research, complete semesters and protect their academic calendars.

Does this mean every problem in tertiary education has been solved? Certainly not.

Lecturers still deserve better welfare. Universities still need more funding. Infrastructure gaps remain. These are legitimate issues that require continued attention.

But let us not pretend that stability has no value.

For years, many Nigerians demanded one simple thing: "Let our children stay in school." Today, that wish is closer to reality than it has been in many years.

Critics are free to debate the government's economic policies. That is democracy.

But intellectual honesty also demands acknowledging progress where it exists.

Sometimes, the biggest achievement is not building a new classroom.

It is making sure the classroom stays open.

Kukutente23:
Unfortunately I'm not Peter. But Nigeria's borrowing is presently unsustainable and no one even knows where the money is going.

I just noted yesterday that Tinubu has not equipped the military with even a single aircraft since he took office. All the aircrafts they are using and taking delivery of are those from Buhari administration.

As for if nelfund should be scrapped, I certainly think so. It is not sustainable. The 1% allocation for it should rather be given to the schools and tied to specific projects and research that will attract more grants to our universities and make them more self-sustaining.

The fees are too high. They should be reviewed downwards.

I remember Tinubu proposed to scrap TETFUND until the senate rejected it. TETFUND should be futher empowered to build more infrastructure and facilities in our tertiary institutions. Students loans have generally failed in the West. I don't see why we should replicate it with our high corruption index

Unfortunately, much of your supporting argument does not survive fact-checking.

Nigeria's debt burden remains a serious concern. However, the picture is more nuanced than you are suggesting .
When President Tinubu assumed office, debt servicing was consuming almost all federal revenue, leaving very little fiscal space. Since then, revenue growth and reforms have reduced that ratio to roughly half of federal revenue, while longstanding obligations such as the foreign airlines' trapped funds have been substantially cleared. So, while debt sustainability remains a challenge, the claim that "nobody knows where the money is going" is an exaggeration. Borrowing is tied to published budgets and approved projects, even if Nigerians are right to demand greater transparency and better value for money.


Your aircraft claim is even weaker. It is true that some aircraft delivered under Tinubu were ordered during Buhari’s administration, including the T-129 helicopters contracted in 2021. But it is false that Tinubu has not equipped the Air Force with a single aircraft. By December 2024, the Nigerian Air Force reported 12 advanced aircraft acquired under the administration, including King Air, DA-62, T-129 and AW-109 platforms. The administration also initiated the purchase of 24 M-346 fighter-attack jets and 10 AW-109 Trekker helicopters. Inherited procurement and new procurement can exist simultaneously.

On NELFUND, abolishing it is a legitimate policy position—but reallocating its funding to universities does not solve the student’s immediate problem.
A laboratory project may improve the institution, but it will not pay the fees or upkeep of the poor student who is about to withdraw. That is like renovating a hospital while sending the patient home because he cannot afford admission.

The present law provides NELFUND with 1% of taxes, levies and duties collected by the federal revenue service, alongside appropriations, repayments and investment income. It is therefore not simply a loose “1% allocation” that can be transferred without changing the law and replacing the support students currently receive.

The TETFund claim contains a half-truth. The original tax-reform proposal would eventually have removed TETFund’s share of the new development levy by 2030. That proposal was rightly criticised. However, the National Assembly rejected the defunding arrangement, and the final 2025 law retained funding for both TETFund and NELFUND through the development levy. Tinubu did not simply issue an executive order to “scrap TETFund.”

Finally, “student loans have failed in the West” is too sweeping. America’s mortgage-style loan system has severe default problems, but income-contingent systems operate differently: repayments rise with income and can protect low earners from unaffordable fixed payments. Researchers recognise both advantages and fiscal risks. The lesson is to design Nigeria’s system carefully—not to declare every student-loan model dead.

By all means, demand lower fees, stronger TETFund investment and tighter NELFUND oversight. But abolishing the bridge before constructing another one leaves poor students stranded in the river.

The real policy question remains: How will universities receive more funding while financially vulnerable students are kept in school—and precisely where will the replacement money come from?
Finally, i say this, since i remember your moniker, support whoever is your candidate which obviously is NOT Tinubu.

i will support my candidate which obviously IS President Tinubu.
The Last time agree to disagree. but i always love the civil manner of our exchanges .

Brendaniel:
I've noticed that Tinubu is not the major problem of Nigeria, he is only a product of it, if you look closely at the regions celebrating the student loan, they are majorly from 2 regions and for me, these 2 regions are the major destroyers of Nigeria, the major problem of Nigeria is rooted in ideology, ideology that produced Buhari and Tinubu as president and support their evil ways...

You can try to excuse the politicians and cronies who benefit financially by supporting this evil, but you ask yourself, what is the benefit of those supporting them without any financial benefit?

The Answer?

Ideological satisfaction

Your comment perfectly illustrates what is wrong with our politics.

Unable to rebut a policy on its merits, you retreat into regional stereotyping.

Instead of asking whether the student loan is helping Nigerian students, you ask which regions are celebrating it—as though access to education has an ethnic or regional passport.


The irony is striking. You accuse two regions of "destroying Nigeria," yet it is this kind of blanket ethnic and regional demonisation that has done enormous damage to Nigeria's national cohesion for decades.

As for your question, "Why do some people support Tinubu without financial benefit?"

The answer is simple.

The same reason millions supported Peter Obi without being paid.


Perhaps the more important question is this: if everyone who disagrees with you must either be "evil" or "paid," when exactly did you leave room for honest differences of opinion?

Your kind of mindset does not strengthen democracy—it suffocates it.

If you believe the student loan is bad, tell Nigerians what should replace it.

Should it be scrapped? Should universities return to fully subsidised education? How will that be funded?

Which taxes will you raise, or which budget will you cut?

That is the conversation mature democracies have.

Blaming entire regions is easier than producing a workable alternative, but it has never built a nation.
Policies should be judged by evidence, not by the ethnicity or geography of those who support them.

AMINDA:
It is to put paid to all these theories and bring lasting peace through facts that made Elrufai decide to run on muslim-muslim ticket after his then deputy, Bala Bantex was ostracised by his own people in Southern Kaduna. Bala stepped down as Elrufai's deputy due to backlash and ran for senate but his own people refused to vote for him. He later died of a broken heart. Elrufai ran on muslim-muslim ticket in his second tenure and won with over a million votes. Uba Sani also retained same muslim-muslim ticket in 2023 and won Isah Ashiru despite a lot of Muslims voting for Ashiru as well. Uba Sani deciding to pick a Christian is a political decision because his strategy from day one is to win back the Christian bloc considering the little margin he won with. That was why he moved against Elrufai. He wagered that if Ashiru gets the Christian votes, along with most of the Muslim votes like he was set to do, then he (Uba) will be defeated. He is still not home and dry because beyond propaganda, his performance as governor is nothing to write home about and religion is still a huge factor in Northern politics, just as ethnicity is in the Southwest.

P.S: None of these politicians are truly religious. They simply exploit religious, ethnic and tribal sentiments to win elections. The biggest pawns are the people.

Your analysis conveniently reduces every political development in Kaduna to electoral arithmetic while ignoring the larger transformation taking place.

Here is the truth, Kaduna Has Moved On— Supporters of El-Rufai’s Politics of Religious Division Have Not

Yes, Uba Sani won narrowly in 2023—730,002 votes against Isa Ashiru’s 719,196. Naturally, every intelligent politician studies a narrow victory and expands his coalition.
But choosing a Christian running mate does not prove that Uba Sani’s reconciliation programme is “propaganda.” It proves that he understands something El-Rufai refused to accept: Kaduna cannot be permanently governed like two hostile communities sharing a compound.

Immediately after El-Rufai left office, the Kaduna State House of Assembly—dominated by people from the same political establishment—turned its searchlight on his administration. and the wider political class has clearly refused to follow him into opposition. So it is not uba sanni that betrayed el-rufai, it is el rufai cantakerous character that so easily alienates.

More importantly, Southern Kaduna’s elected leadership has been moving toward the APC. Federal lawmakers Amos Magaji and Donatus Matthew joined the party, alongside state legislators Ali Kalat, Henry Mahra, Emmanuel Kantiok and Samuel Kambai. Senator Sunday Katung and Representative Daniel Amos subsequently submitted APC nomination forms for 2027. So let anyone claiming Southern Kaduna has rejected Uba Sani name more than two major elected officeholders there who have not crossed over.

Your argument that El-Rufai’s Muslim-Muslim ticket was some unbeatable electoral masterstroke also collapses under the figures.

With Christian Bala Bantex as his running mate in 2015, El-Rufai won 1,117,635 votes and defeated the PDP by 631,802 votes. With a Muslim-Muslim ticket in 2019, his vote declined to 1,045,427, while his victory margin shrank to 231,259. He won, certainly—but he performed better with a religiously balanced ticket.

What drove the Muslim-Muslim experiment was therefore not electoral necessity. It was El-Rufai’s personal ideological gamble—his attempt to prove that religious inclusion could be discarded without electoral consequences. He later described it as his “most daring decision,” while his leaked remarks revealed how deliberately religion had been deployed as a political instrument.

El-Rufai is undeniably intelligent and administratively capable. But competence without character is like a powerful vehicle without brakes: impressive until it reaches a crowded road.

Uba Sani did not create the distance from El-Rufai. El-Rufai’s arrogance, divisive politics and inability to sustain relationships created it.

Kaduna has not merely changed drivers.

It has rejected the politics of driving one half of the state over the other.

Validated:
One of the few things APC and Tinubu supporters have been hawking as achievement is the Fraudulent Students Loan Scheme. I call it Fraudulent because the supposed beneficiaries are being short changed by a failed system orchestrated by APC and Tinubu's failure.

Take a student currently at UNILAG. Total fee per semester is about N200k, all inclusive. To assist him/her, government gives him_her Student Loan. The student goes to town to "celebrate" this fraud?

Let's take a step back to 2013. UNILAG highest fees was N19000 (go and verify). So Tinubu, upped that by 10 times, and give you Loan to pay it. How smartly Fraudulent?
Now the meat of it is that, in 2013, parents had jobs, so can afford to pay their children school fees. Petrol was N87, $1 was N187. Cement was about N450, today, Tinubu's bad governance has pushed all the cosst to 25 times in several cases. Unemployment has risen by 20 times, purchasing power has been eroded. So parents can no longer afford to send their wards to school abd fulfiil their parental obligations.

Need I ask, when these student graduate, what would they be doing? Fry Akara and Kulikuli or join banditry? Because in the last 3 years of Tinubu's presidency, not a single job has been created. All they create is "we go", "we shall recruit "" FG plans to". Just mouth, no action.

Let us look back for once. Tinubu's generation enjoyed free education, plus free meal, free hostels, etc. In fact if you got NCE, you automatically got a free VW Beetle (Brand New).
The generation after them, went to school for free and got paid as student. My eldest brother was a beneficiary.

My generation got bursary awards, courtesy of first civilian government of OBJ and co, up to GEJ. Now, this generation is getting loans laced with poisonous "inflated" school charges.

The more reason TINUBU MUST GO.

The Achievement Nobody Wants to Talk About: Three Years Without an ASUU Strike by CharleCNG.

For over two decades, ASUU strikes became as predictable as Nigeria's rainy season. Parents stopped planning graduation dates. Students stopped believing that a four-year course would last four years. Every academic calendar came with an invisible footnote: "Subject to ASUU strike."

Then something changed.

Since President Bola Tinubu assumed office in May 2023, Nigeria has not witnessed the prolonged nationwide ASUU shutdowns that once crippled public universities. There have been disagreements, ultimatums and negotiations, but classrooms have largely remained open while talks continued.

That matters.

A university is like a moving train. Every unnecessary stop throws passengers off schedule, delays destinations and increases the cost of the journey. For years, Nigerian students were passengers on a train that seemed permanently parked at the station.

Today, many students can once again plan their lives with greater certainty. Parents can budget with more confidence. Employers can recruit graduates on time. Universities can sustain research, complete semesters and protect their academic calendars.

Does this mean every problem in tertiary education has been solved? Certainly not.

Lecturers still deserve better welfare. Universities still need more funding. Infrastructure gaps remain. These are legitimate issues that require continued attention.

But let us not pretend that stability has no value.

For years, many Nigerians demanded one simple thing: "Let our children stay in school."
Today, that wish is closer to reality than it has been in many years.

Critics are free to debate the government's economic policies. That is democracy.

But intellectual honesty also demands acknowledging progress where it exists.

Sometimes, the biggest achievement is not building a new classroom.

It is making sure the classroom stays open.

Kukutente23:
Pray for God's blessings first
I'm sure you need it more than Tinubu
Then pray for God to bless those poor students who are rejoicing over 20k a month that they'll be expected to pay back. These are the folks that need God's blessings in their lives
Your present prayer is hypocritical and not from a pure mind
God doesn't pay attention to the prayers of hypocrites

Thank you. We also pray that one day God will grant Blueprintless Peterthe wisdom, clarity and courage to answer the questions he keeps avoiding.

Will he scrap NELFUND?

Will he retain it?

If he retains it, how will he improve it?

If he scraps it, what exactly will replace it?

How will he fund free or cheaper tertiary education without returning Nigeria to unsustainable borrowing or higher taxes?

The difference is simple: with President Tinubu, Nigerians can point to what he has done and debate whether it is right or wrong. With Peter Obi and Atiku , we are still waiting to hear what he would do differently—and, more importantly, how he would pay for it.

Politics is not won by condemning every policy. It is won by presenting a superior, costed and credible alternative.

Until then, "I can do better" remains a slogan, not a governing plan.

esnbrutality:
I dont read rubbish...you ought to understand that intelligent people speak with few words.

Congratulations. You proved that a sentence can be both very short and completely pointless.

That's the Obidient version of "less is more"—less reasoning, more confidence.

Just another Obidient post where insult is doing the work of argument.

Validated:
One of the few things APC and Tinubu supporters have been hawking as achievement is the Fraudulent Students Loan Scheme. I call it Fraudulent because the supposed beneficiaries are being short changed by a failed system orchestrated by APC and Tinubu's failure.

Take a student currently at UNILAG. Total fee per semester is about N200k, all inclusive. To assist him/her, government gives him_her Student Loan. The student goes to town to "celebrate" this fraud?

Let's take a step back to 2013. UNILAG highest fees was N19000 (go and verify). So Tinubu, upped that by 10 times, and give you Loan to pay it. How smartly Fraudulent?
Now the meat of it is that, in 2013, parents had jobs, so can afford to pay their children school fees. Petrol was N87, $1 was N187. Cement was about N450, today, Tinubu's bad governance has pushed all the cosst to 25 times in several cases. Unemployment has risen by 20 times, purchasing power has been eroded. So parents can no longer afford to send their wards to school abd fulfiil their parental obligations.

Need I ask, when these student graduate, what would they be doing? Fry Akara and Kulikuli or join banditry? Because in the last 3 years of Tinubu's presidency, not a single job has been created. All they create is "we go", "we shall recruit "" FG plans to". Just mouth, no action.

Let us look back for once. Tinubu's generation enjoyed free education, plus free meal, free hostels, etc. In fact if you got NCE, you automatically got a free VW Beetle (Brand New).
The generation after them, went to school for free and got paid as student. My eldest brother was a beneficiary.

My generation got bursary awards, courtesy of first civilian government of OBJ and co, up to GEJ. Now, this generation is getting loans laced with poisonous "inflated" school charges.

The more reason TINUBU MUST GO.

The Student Loan Is Not a Fraud—It Is a Safety Net Created Because the Old System No Longer Exists by CharlesCNG.

The assertion that the student loan is a fraud is not only foolish but very economically shallow.
The writer strings together nostalgia, half-truths and unsupported claims, hoping nobody notices the contradictions.

First, let's address the biggest deception.

The writer says UNILAG fees were about ₦19,000 in 2013 but are now around ₦200,000, then blames Tinubu.

Really?

Was President Tinubu the Visitor to UNILAG in 2013? Did he fix university fees across Nigeria?

Federal universities determine their charges through their governing councils under laws that long predate this administration. In fact, many universities adjusted charges because decades of artificially low fees had become financially unsustainable amid inflation, rising utility costs and deteriorating infrastructure.

Now to the student loan.

The Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND) does NOT increase school fees.

It exists because many students who would otherwise drop out can no longer pay those fees upfront. Calling the loan fraudulent because fees are high is like calling an ambulance the cause of an accident simply because it arrived at the crash scene.

The writer then jumps from school fees to petrol prices, cement prices and exchange rates as though these challenges began in May 2023. Nigeria's economic distortions—including fuel subsidies, multiple exchange rates, mounting debt and chronic underinvestment—built up over many years. The current reforms are painful, but pretending they were created overnight is political fiction.

Then comes perhaps the boldest claim: "Not a single job has been created in three years."

That is simply not true.

Employment is created not only through direct government recruitment but through private-sector investment, infrastructure projects, manufacturing expansion, agriculture, digital technology, MSMEs and entrepreneurship. To claim Nigeria has created zero jobs in three years is not analysis; it is political exaggeration.

The nostalgia about free education also deserves context.

Yes, earlier generations benefited from lower tuition and generous public spending. But Nigeria's population has exploded from about 55 million in the early 1970s to well over 230 million today. University enrolment has expanded dramatically, while government revenues have not kept pace. No serious economist believes the fiscal conditions of the 1970s can simply be recreated in today's Nigeria.

Most developed countries—including the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia—operate student loan systems because they recognise that expanding access to higher education often requires shared financing rather than expecting every family to pay upfront.

A student loan is not a punishment. It is an investment in human capital. calling it a fraud because it helps students remain in school is like condemning a life jacket because someone fell into the river.

The real question is simple:

Would the writer of this poorly thought-out propaganda thrash prefer that hundreds of thousands of students simply abandon their education because they cannot afford today's fees?

If their answer is no, then he must also explain what practical alternative his sponsors propose beyond slogans and nostalgia.

esnbrutality:
Hehehehe

See groove. So APC chairman went to the Bunker to get orientation? IS APC chairman the President?

Desperate to cover shame

Thank you for proving exactly why Peter Obi's argument on Seun Okinbaloye's programme was so misguided.

The APC Chairman is NOT the President. He is the National Chairman of the ruling party. His responsibility is to explain the party's political decisions, defend its strategy and communicate its position. That is precisely what party chairmen all over the world do.

Peter Obi's suggestion that only the President should answer virtually every major question betrays a poor understanding of how modern governments function. Presidents do not personally brief the nation on every policy, security operation, political decision or party matter. That is why governments have ministers, presidential spokesmen, party officials, advisers and agency heads.

By your reasoning, every minister, every party chairman and every presidential spokesman should keep quiet until the President appears. That is not governance; that is personality cult politics.

Ironically, this is one of the clearest examples of why many critics question Obi's readiness for the presidency. He often reduces the complex machinery of government to a one-man show, when leadership is fundamentally about building institutions, delegating responsibility and empowering competent people to speak and act within their mandates.

A President who insists on speaking on everything is not demonstrating strength. He is demonstrating poor delegation. And a presidential aspirant who thinks that is how government should work is only reinforcing concerns about his understanding of executive leadership.

NaijaHelper1:
That's the average Nigerian for you. Conflating composure for competence. A man spent 20 minutes analysing the effect of his own party's anti democratic back door shenanigans but totally ignoring the cause, people now say he's speaking intelligently. I could have said we're an airheaded race but then I remember the education system is ruined and I don't blame the people that believe this empty interview is worth the data I just spent watching it.

You are right that composure alone is not competence. But you then commit the opposite error: you confuse partisan dislike with intellectual emptiness.

Professor Nentawe Yilwatda was not praised merely because he sat upright and spoke polished English. Viewers noticed that he followed the questions, understood the political issues being raised, organised his arguments logically and responded without quarrelling with the interviewer.

You may disagree with his defence of the APC. That does not make the explanation unintelligent. A defence lawyer does not become foolish simply because you dislike his client.

You also claim that he discussed the effects of his party’s actions while ignoring their causes. Yet that is an argument to be demonstrated with specifics—not a verdict to be announced with insults about Nigerians being “airheaded.”

Ironically, the same Seun Okinbaloye recently interviewed Peter Obi. Obi confused anecdotes and BS for governing blueprint and failed to understand that repeatedly saying "I know what it takes" is not the same as demonstrating how he would do it.
That is the real contrast.

Yilwatda was analysing political structures, party behaviour and electoral incentives. Obi was often presenting personal anecdotes as evidence of presidential preparedness. One came with an argument that could be interrogated; the other frequently arrived with a basket of stories and expected Nigerians to mistake it for a blueprint.

So no, people did not necessarily mistake composure for competence. They recognised that the chairman could remain inside the question, develop a line of reasoning and defend an uncomfortable position.

Disagree with Yilwatda’s conclusions by all means. Identify the facts he omitted and provide the missing evidence. But dismissing the entire interview as empty—while offering insults instead of a counterargument—does not prove the chairman lacked intelligence.

It merely proves that resentment is not analysis, and contempt is not a substitute for rebuttal.

arantess:
he is the air they breathe.

without him, they wont be fulfilled.

its only a fruitful tree that people throw stones at.

meanwhile tinubu is still in his bunker

The Problem is that you obidients said we should go verify, and now you DO NOT want to hear the feedback. You must.

And what many critics say they have found is not a detailed governing blueprint, but vague promises, broad generalities, recycled talking points and unanswered questions.

They argue that the carefully marketed image of 2023 has gradually given way to a politician who is unprepared, underdeveloped, imprecise, inconsistent, reactive, superficial, unfocused and light on policy detail.

In their view, the gap between branding and governing substance has become increasingly difficult to ignore.
A beautifully wrapped package may attract attention on the shelf, but sooner or later, every buyer wants to know what is inside.
If opening the box reveals emptiness and some maggots, but only attractive packaging, disappointment is inevitable.

That, perhaps, explains why Peter Obi increasingly dominates political conversations.
He is no longer being judged by the expectations created in 2023, but by the answers he provides today.
And in politics, every interview is an oral examination, every public appearance is a policy test, and every microphone is a courtroom where words become evidence.

And before the usual chorus starts—"What about Tinubu?"—let me answer that in advance.

The comparison is misplaced.

President Tinubu is the incumbent. Nigerians are not evaluating him on the strength of interviews alone; they are evaluating him against his record in office—his policies, reforms, appointments, infrastructure, security, the economy and the results they produce.

The burden of proof is heavier on the challenger than on the incumbent's rhetoric. The incumbent is judged primarily by what he has done; the challenger is judged by what he convincingly demonstrates he can do.

youneedjesus:
Every conversation seems to be around Peter Obi.

Why Every Political Conversation Seems to End Up About Peter Obi by CharlesCNG.

Peter Obi himself recently asked critics to stop talking about him and focus on Nigeria's problems.

Ironically, it is Peter Obi who keeps pulling the conversation back to Peter Obi.

Politics has a simple rule: the person who dominates the headlines also attracts the greatest scrutiny. The more frequently you speak, the more opportunities you create for people to examine your words, compare your positions and test your claims.

A popular proverb says that a fish would never be caught if it kept its mouth shut.
In politics, every interview, every speech and every public appearance becomes fresh material for supporters and critics alike.

Part of Peter Obi's appeal in 2023 was the careful branding of a disciplined, competent and technocratic alternative. Many Nigerians ,especially the youth ,projected onto him the answers to problems that had frustrated them for years.
But elections eventually move beyond branding. They enter the harder stage of interrogation.

People no longer ask only, "What is wrong with Nigeria?"NOW They ask, "What exactly would you do differently?"

HEREIN LIES PETER OBI'S CURRENT UNRAVELLING.

Peter Obi's recent interviews have generated intense debate. Critics argue that while Obi can, like most political commentators od the past and present, easily identify Nigeria's challenges, he has not matched that criticism with the level of policy detail many voters now expect on issues such as power, security, exchange-rate management and fiscal reform.

Politics is like sitting for an examination. During revision, confidence is enough. Inside the examination hall, however, every answer sheet is marked.

The same public that applauded broad campaign slogans in 2023 is increasingly demanding specifics in 2027.

This is why conversations keep returning to Peter Obi. Not because his critics are obsessed with him, but because as a declared presidential candidate every major statement he makes is naturally subjected to public scrutiny.

That is the burden of seeking the presidency.

The sad fact with Peter obi is that every time he talks, the more he persuades Nigerians that HE DOES NOT HAVE a practical, coherent and implementable alternative.



In the end, political packaging can open the door, but only substance keeps it open.
Like a beautifully wrapped gift, the wrapping attracts attention—but sooner or later, everyone wants to know what is actually inside.

Peter Obi’s latest meeting with former President Olusegun Obasanjo has revived speculation that the former president may endorse him again in 2027.

Obasanjo publicly supported Obi in 2023, describing him as the candidate with an edge over his opponents. Yet that endorsement delivered more prestige and publicity than votes.

Obi received 85,829 (14.6% ) votes in Ogun State, while Bola Tinubu polled 341,554. He even lost Obasanjo’s own polling unit in Abeokuta North, where Tinubu received 56 votes against Obi’s nine.

Obasanjo may still support Obi,but there are also reasons not to assume his position is settled.

During President Tinubu’s Ogun State visit on April 4, 2026, Obasanjo,for the first time, joined other prominent Ogun leaders in receiving the president publicly and cordially. Courtesy is not endorsement, but it shows that Obasanjo has not closed his political doors to Tinubu.

The truth is that in 2027 , Obasanjo could endorse Obi, sit on the fence or remain officially neutral.

Perhaps the most interesting question is not whether Olusegun Obasanjo will endorse Peter Obi again. The real question is what happens if he does not.

If he endorses Obi again, he will likely be celebrated as a courageous elder statesman. But if he remains neutral—or backs another candidate—will he suddenly become "tribal," "compromised," "bought over," or an "old man who has lost touch"?

Recent political history suggests that prominent figures who once stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Obi often become the subject of harsh criticism after they part ways with him.

Will the same Obidients who hailed Obasanjo as a visionary statesman in 2023 continue to respect his judgment if he declines to endorse Peter Obi in 2027?

Or will he suddenly become a "tribalist," a "compromised old man," an "establishment puppet," or someone who has "been bought"?

We have seen this pattern before.

Dr. Doyin Okupe, Peter Obi's first Campaign Director-General, was once celebrated as a brilliant strategist and loyal patriot. The moment he parted ways with Obi, many of the same voices that once applauded him turned on him with relentless insults and character assassination.

The same happened to Kenneth Okonkwo, who went from being one of Obi's most visible spokespersons to becoming the target of fierce online attacks after disagreeing with the movement.
He even have his tribal identity questioned in the process!!
Just to mention two examples out of many.

Will Obasanjo become the next casualty if he refuses to repeat his 2023 endorsement?

That would reinenforce uncomfortable truth about obidients: respect is often conditional.
Public figures are praised when they validate Peter Obi, but once they express a different political judgment, they risk being branded as compromised, tribalistic, corrupt or irrelevant.

Democracy does not require blind agreement. A mature political movement- should be able to accept that respected individuals may reach different conclusions without being subjected to abuse.

If Obasanjo endorses Obi, that is his democratic right. If he chooses another candidate—or remains neutral—that is equally his democratic right.

The real test will not be Obasanjo's decision. The real test will be the reaction of those who are today shouting "Hosanna!"

Will they continue to honour him as a respected elder statesman? Or will the cries of "Hosanna!" suddenly become cries of "Crucify him!"

Will he overnight become "compromised," "tribalistic," "bought over," or another member of the so-called establishment simply because he exercised an independent political judgment?

That moment, more than Obasanjo's eventual endorsement, will reveal whether the admiration was rooted in principle—or merely in political convenience.
YOUR GUESS IS AS GOOD AS MINE.

Dshocker:
Stockholm syndrome has made you love your oppressors, and made you think suffering is a normal way of life.

It is quite terrible.

Calling it "Stockholm syndrome" is just a slogan. It doesn't answer the actual argument.

First, President Tinubu cannot honestly be described as the architect of Nigeria's economic crisis.
He inherited an economy weighed down by unsustainable fuel subsidies, multiple exchange rates, mounting debt, and years of structural distortions.
What he has done is perform painful but necessary surgery on a patient that was already in intensive care. No surgeon is blamed because the patient screams when a rotten limb is being cleaned to save the body.

Second, criticism is easy; solutions are harder.
If Peter Obi says Tinubu's approach is wrong, Nigerians deserve to hear **his** alternative. So far, we have heard plenty of speeches about the problems but very little detail on HOW he would remove the same distortions, stabilise the naira, increase government revenue, attract investment and improve living standards without making difficult trade-offs.

A man who keeps shouting that the doctor is using the wrong treatment should be able to prescribe a better one. Simply repeating that "I would do it differently" is not an economic blueprint.

Nigeria's challenges will not disappear through slogans, emotional appeals or wishful thinking. They require difficult decisions, and anyone seeking the presidency should be prepared to explain not just WHAT they oppose, but WHAT they would do differently—and HOW they would pay for it.

fergie001:
OBJ x Gregory Obi

SOURCE

Obasanjo and Obi: What Happens If the Endorsement Does Not Come? by CharlesCNG.

Peter Obi’s latest meeting with former President Olusegun Obasanjo has revived speculation that the former president may endorse him again in 2027.

Obasanjo publicly supported Obi in 2023, describing him as the candidate with an edge over his opponents. Yet that endorsement delivered more prestige and publicity than votes.

Obi received 85,829 (14.6% ) votes in Ogun State, while Bola Tinubu polled 341,554. He even lost Obasanjo’s own polling unit in Abeokuta North, where Tinubu received 56 votes against Obi’s nine.

Obasanjo may still support Obi,but there are also reasons not to assume his position is settled.

During President Tinubu’s Ogun State visit on April 4, 2026, Obasanjo,for the first time, joined other prominent Ogun leaders in receiving the president publicly and cordially. Courtesy is not endorsement, but it shows that Obasanjo has not closed his political doors to Tinubu.

The truth is that in 2027 , Obasanjo could endorse Obi, sit on the fence or remain officially neutral.

Perhaps the most interesting question is not whether Olusegun Obasanjo will endorse Peter Obi again. The real question is what happens if he does not.

If he endorses Obi again, he will likely be celebrated as a courageous elder statesman. But if he remains neutral—or backs another candidate—will he suddenly become "tribal," "compromised," "bought over," or an "old man who has lost touch"?

Recent political history suggests that prominent figures who once stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Obi often become the subject of harsh criticism after they part ways with him.

Will the same Obidients who hailed Obasanjo as a visionary statesman in 2023 continue to respect his judgment if he declines to endorse Peter Obi in 2027?

Or will he suddenly become a "tribalist," a "compromised old man," an "establishment puppet," or someone who has "been bought"?

We have seen this pattern before.

Dr. Doyin Okupe, Peter Obi's first Campaign Director-General, was once celebrated as a brilliant strategist and loyal patriot. The moment he parted ways with Obi, many of the same voices that once applauded him turned on him with relentless insults and character assassination.

The same happened to Kenneth Okonkwo, who went from being one of Obi's most visible spokespersons to becoming the target of fierce online attacks after disagreeing with the movement.
He even have his tribal identity questioned in the process!!
Just to mention two examples out of many.

Will Obasanjo become the next casualty if he refuses to repeat his 2023 endorsement?

That would reinenforce uncomfortable truth about obidients: respect is often conditional.
Public figures are praised when they validate Peter Obi, but once they express a different political judgment, they risk being branded as compromised, tribalistic, corrupt or irrelevant.

Democracy does not require blind agreement. A mature political movement- should be able to accept that respected individuals may reach different conclusions without being subjected to abuse.

If Obasanjo endorses Obi, that is his democratic right. If he chooses another candidate—or remains neutral—that is equally his democratic right.

The real test will not be Obasanjo's decision. The real test will be the reaction of those who are today shouting "Hosanna!"

Will they continue to honour him as a respected elder statesman? Or will the cries of "Hosanna!" suddenly become cries of "Crucify him!"

Will he overnight become "compromised," "tribalistic," "bought over," or another member of the so-called establishment simply because he exercised an independent political judgment?

That moment, more than Obasanjo's eventual endorsement, will reveal whether the admiration was rooted in principle—or merely in political convenience.
YOUR GUESS IS AS GOOD AS MINE.

rapcy:
You can't use the percentage you wrote there because election in Nigeria is strictly who rig pass. Elrufai won the first time because people thought he would transform KD the way he did in some parts of Abj during Obj regime. The second time, he rigged it. Most Christians don't vote based on religion, if Christians where to begin voting by religion in Nigeria, there would hardly be a Muslim in power.

I actually did NOT rely on the 2019 election result alone, and I certainly did not assume that election outcomes perfectly reflect religious demographics.

My estimate was based on a combination of factors, including:

* Historical settlement patterns across Kaduna's 23 LGAs.
* Ethnic composition and the religious affiliations traditionally associated with those communities.
* Academic studies on Kaduna's demographic and conflict geography.
* Urban migration patterns, especially after the 2000–2002 crises.
* The distribution of Christian- and Muslim-majority LGAs documented by researchers.
* Traditional institutions and historical religious influence.
* Electoral trends from multiple election cycles, used only as one supporting indicator—not as the primary determinant.

Whether one believes the 2019 election was free, flawed, or heavily manipulated does not invalidate the broader demographic evidence. Election results were only one variable in a much larger analytical model.

In fact, I deliberately avoided presenting any exact percentage as an official fact because no Nigerian census has ever published religion-by-LGA statistics for Kaduna**. That is why I described the figures as an educated estimate, not a census result.

So if you disagrees with my estimate, that's perfectly legitimate. But the disagreement should be with the methodology or the underlying demographic assumptions—not by assuming my conclusion came from the 2019 election alone, because it did not.

yaroinside:
As Nigeria inches closer to the 2027 general election, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has reignited debate over the role of the judiciary in the country’s electoral process, insisting that political victories should be determined by voters at the ballot box rather than in courtrooms. His remarks followed a Court of Appeal judgment that removed legal obstacles affecting the African Democratic Congress (ADC) ahead of the next general election.

Atiku argued that democracy is strengthened when citizens, not judges, decide who governs them. According to him, while the courts remain essential for interpreting the law and resolving genuine disputes, they should not become the primary battleground for political contests that ought to be settled through elections.

His comments come after the Court of Appeal overturned an earlier Federal High Court judgment that sought to remove the ADC and other political parties from Nigeria’s democratic space. The appellate court ruled that the earlier decision was a nullity and reaffirmed the party’s legal standing, allowing it to focus on preparations for the 2027 election.

Why Atiku’s statement matters

Nigeria’s recent electoral history has seen major elections followed by lengthy legal battles. The 2019 and 2023 presidential elections both ended up before election tribunals and appellate courts after opposition parties challenged the declared results. While election petitions are recognised under Nigerian law, repeated post-election litigation has fuelled public debate about the credibility of the electoral process and confidence in democratic institutions.

Atiku’s latest comments therefore go beyond his own political ambitions. They touch on a broader issue: whether elections are increasingly being won in court instead of through votes cast by Nigerians.

The bigger challenge for 2027

Regardless of political affiliation, many observers believe the credibility of the 2027 election will depend on transparent voting, effective election management and public trust in the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). If Nigerians have confidence that every vote counts, there will likely be fewer disputes after results are announced.

Political parties also have a responsibility to campaign on policies rather than relying on legal manoeuvres before or after elections. At the same time, the judiciary must remain independent and impartial whenever genuine electoral disputes arise.

What it means

Atiku’s call reflects a principle that many democracies strive to uphold: elections should primarily be decided by citizens exercising their right to vote. Whether that aspiration becomes reality in 2027 will depend on the conduct of political parties, electoral authorities, security agencies, the courts and, ultimately, Nigerian voters themselves.

Source: https://yaroinsider.ng/2026/07/28/2027-election-must-be-decided-by-voters-not-courtrooms/

Atiku’s Convenient Democracy: The Court Is Good Only When It Favours Him by CharlesCNG.

Atiku Abubakar’s statement is politically attractive but logically dishonest.

The Court of Appeal case did not determine who should become President in 2027. No votes had been cast, counted or awarded to anyone. The court merely decided a legal dispute concerning whether the ADC and four other parties should remain registered and eligible to participate.

So who exactly was trying to “win an election in court”?

Ironically, Atiku made this declaration immediately after his own party obtained relief from that same courtroom. When the Federal High Court decision threatened the ADC, the party appealed. When the appeal succeeded, Atiku celebrated judicial intervention—then warned others against using the judiciary.

Apparently, the courtroom is democratic when it rescues Atiku but anti-democratic when it rejects his claims.

More importantly, Atiku himself challenged the outcomes of both the 2019 and 2023 presidential elections through the courts. In 2023, he proceeded from the election tribunal to the Supreme Court, asking the judiciary to overturn Tinubu’s victory.

Was he attempting to seize through judges what voters had denied him?

Of course, candidates have the constitutional right to challenge alleged violations. But that same principle must apply to everyone.

Elections are decided by voters, but elections must also be conducted according to law. Courts do not replace voters when they interpret eligibility requirements, protect political parties or resolve genuine electoral disputes. They safeguard the rules under which votes acquire legitimacy.

Atiku cannot climb into power through the courthouse whenever he loses, emerge from the courthouse celebrating whenever he wins, and then preach that everyone else should stay away from the courthouse.

That is not democratic principle.

It is judicial morality determined by personal convenience.

seunmsg:
By Ibrahim Hassan-Wuyo



https://www.vanguardngr.com/2026/07/2027-uba-sani-picks-jerry-adams-as-running-mate/amp/

pls @seunmsg , @fergie001 , @helinues.........
pls i need your help.
i have not being able to open a new thread topic for the past days. this happens to me all the time and am begin to be worried as this happens to me almost on a daily basis.
I hope am not offending anyone with my articles.

rapcy:
You people are very funny, where did you conduct that analysis to know Muslims are more than Christians in Kaduna. Sometimes una go just post rubbish and assume una dey make sense

The Truth About Kaduna's Religious Demography: Separating Facts From Political Fiction by CharlesCNG

One of the most abused subjects in Nigerian politics - INCLUDING AMONGST MY DIVERSE KADUNA STATE FRIENDS-is the religious composition of Kaduna State.
During every election cycle, this my circle of kaduna friends confidently throw around figures like "Kaduna is 70% Muslim," "Kaduna is evenly split," or "Christians are the majority."

The problem is that none of them can produce an official census to support those claims.

The simple truth is this: Nigeria has never published an official religion-by-religion population breakdown for Kaduna State or any of its 23 local government areas.
The 2006 National Population Census—the latest completed census—did not release religious statistics. That means no one can honestly claim to know the exact percentage of Muslims or Christians in Kaduna.

However, the absence of official figures does not mean we cannot make an informed assessment.

As a lone Yoruba man in this PATHETIC Kaduna lot, i decided to research Kaduna's settlement patterns, ethnic composition, migration history and election results. When these factors are examined together, a remarkably consistent picture emerges.

Northern Kaduna—including LGAs such as Zaria, Giwa, Ikara, Makarfi, Kudan, Soba, Kubau and Birnin Gwari—is overwhelmingly Muslim.

Southern Kaduna—including Jaba, Zangon Kataf, Kaura, Sanga and Jema'a—is overwhelmingly Christian.

The real complexity lies in the middle. LGAs such as Kaduna South, Chikun, Kajuru, Kagarko and Kachia have substantial populations of both religions and cannot honestly be described as belonging exclusively to either faith.

After reviewing historical demographic studies, ethnic settlement patterns, voting behaviour and urban migration, i came to a reasonable political estimate—not an official census result— that Kaduna today is likely composed of approximately 56–58% Muslims and 42–44% Christians.

Please o, am not presenting this estimate as official data. It is an analytical conclusion based on multiple indicators rather than population enumeration.

Interestingly, the 2019 governorship election provides indirect evidence of just how closely divided Kaduna really is.

Nasir El-Rufai, running on a Muslim-Muslim ticket, won with 1,045,427 votes (55.32%), while the PDP's Isa Ashiru secured 814,168 votes (43.08%).
2019 governorship election is the most religiously divisive election in kaduna state. Can you see the corrolary?

Kaduna remains one of Nigeria's most religiously diverse states. It has one of the largest Christian populations in Northern Nigeria and simultaneously contains some of the country's most overwhelmingly Muslim local governments.

That is precisely why simplistic slogans such as "Kaduna is a Muslim state" or "Christians are the majority" are both misleading.

The evidence points instead to a state with a Muslim plurality, a very large Christian minority, and several genuinely mixed local governments where elections are decided by coalition-building rather than religious arithmetic.

In other words, Kaduna is too politically sophisticated—and too demographically complex—to be reduced to propaganda.

AMINDA:
Muslim-muslim ticket was a political decision for Elrufai just as it was for Tinubu. Tinubu would never have won without it and still cannot win without it. Elrufai did it twice and won with over a million votes by choosing a female muslim from Southern Kaduna to shore up his base since Southern Kaduna was always going to vote against him. The same way Tinubu got his 5.6m Northern votes to become president as a result of his muslim-muslim ticket.

PLEASE DO NOT TURN POLITICAL SPECULATION INTO ELECTORAL FACT

First, El-Rufai did NOT run a Muslim-Muslim ticket twice.

Secondly, the facts simply do not support the claim that El-Rufai's Muslim-Muslim ticket produced a stronger electoral mandate.

In 2015, El-Rufai ran with Barnabas Bala Bantex, a Christian from Southern Kaduna, and recorded a landslide 1,117,635 votes (68.6%), defeating incumbent Mukhtar Yero by 631,802 votes—a commanding 38.78 percentage-point margin.
In 2019, after replacing Bantex with Hadiza Balarabe on a Muslim-Muslim ticket, his vote total fell to 1,045,427 votes (55.32%), while the PDP's Isa Ashiru surged to 814,168 votes (43.08%). El-Rufai still won, but his victory margin crashed to 231,259 votes, representing a 63.4% collapse from his 2015 margin, while his vote share declined by 13.28 percentage points.

In absolute terms, El-Rufai lost 72,208 votes between the two elections, whereas the PDP gained 328,335 additional votes. Those are not the statistics of a political strategy that expanded electoral support.

They show that although the Muslim-Muslim ticket did not prevent victory in 2019, it certainly did not produce a stronger mandate than the balanced APC ticket of 2015.

Uba Sani continued the same-faith ticket in 2023 because el-rufai imposed it on him- he did not have a choice, but that was Uba Sani’s election—not El-Rufai “doing it twice” as a governorship candidate.

Second, claiming that Hadiza Balarabe was selected to “shore up El-Rufai’s Southern Kaduna base” is questionable. She is a Muslim from Sanga, but Southern Kaduna remained largely hostile to El-Rufai’s APC. Her nomination was more plausibly designed to preserve Muslim consolidation while giving the ticket a geographical Southern Kaduna identity. Indeed, el-rufai former deputy,Bantex contested for the southern Kaduna senatorial ticket in 2019,under APC and lost. It was that Bad!!

More importantly, El-Rufai later explained in a (leaked video) the arrangement in explicitly exclusionary terms. In his controversial 2023 remarks, he linked political consideration to how communities voted and suggested that the same-faith arrangement could be sustained far into the future. That went beyond ordinary electoral arithmetic and reinforced perceptions of religious domination.

Your Tinubu claim is also exaggerated.

Tinubu indeed obtained roughly 5.6 million votes across the three northern zones and the FCT. But Atiku secured about 5.23 million, while Kwankwaso received roughly 1.45 million there.
Tinubu took only about 38% of valid northern votes—meaning most northern voters chose somebody else.

He also lost major Muslim-dominated states including Kaduna, Katsina, Kebbi and Sokoto to Atiku, while Kwankwaso won Kano. That is hardly evidence that Northern Muslims voted as one religious bloc for the Muslim-Muslim ticket.

So distinguish the two cases properly:

Tinubu made a controversial national[b] coalition calculation [/b].
El-Rufai converted his arrangement into a[b] triumphalist philosophy that deepened Kaduna’s religious mistrust.[/b]

Same ticket; not the same political message.

seunmsg:
Congratulations to the good people of southern Kaduna both Christian and Muslims. The era of state sponsored bigotry, religious extremism and targeted violence is over.

Governor Uba Sani has undone the last of the evil legacy of Mallam Nasir El-Rufai. Going forward, a peaceful, United and prosperous Kaduna is what we are going to see. God bless the good people of Kaduna State.

Brother, Pls tell them again.

To me this is far bigger than the choice of a running mate.

It is the symbolic burial of a politics that convinced many Kaduna citizens that religion should determine who belongs and who does not.

Governor Uba Sani has steadily dismantled that narrative—not merely with speeches, but with appointments, dialogue, development projects across the 23 local governments, reconciliation with communities that once felt alienated, and a style of leadership that seeks to unite rather than divide.

The evidence is visible.

Southern Kaduna is no longer politically isolated. Influential legislators, community leaders and political stakeholders have found enough confidence to work under the APC umbrella. The politics of permanent hostility is gradually giving way to the politics of participation.

Jerry Adams' emergence completes that journey.

It sends a simple but powerful message: competence has defeated bitterness, inclusion has defeated exclusion, and partnership has defeated suspicion.

Those who built their politics around keeping Kaduna permanently divided will naturally be uncomfortable. Division was their oxygen. Every misunderstanding became an opportunity to inflame passions. Every security challenge became another reason to reopen old wounds.

Kaduna deserves better.

This ticket tells every Christian, every Muslim, every indigene and every non-indigene that they all have a stake in the future of the state.

History will likely remember Uba Sani not simply as the governor who built roads or improved internally generated revenue, but as the governor who deliberately lowered the political temperature and proved that unity is not a slogan—it is a policy.

That is the Kaduna many people prayed for.

What is going on is amazing. Am Yoruba, but I have a lot of friends from Kaduna. Muslims and Christians.
What is amazing is that the narrative of ALL of my christian Kaduna friends have changed in the past two years.

May God continue to bless Uba Sanni and the good people of Kaduna State.

AMINDA:
Hypocrites. 30 people just got killed in Southern Kaduna yesterday while the governments at both federal and state levels do all they can to suppress the news.

Your comment actually proves how much Kaduna has changed.

During the El-Rufai years, every tragic attack in Southern Kaduna immediately became another chapter in the politics of mutual suspicion. Before security agencies even arrived, politicians had already divided the victims along religious and political lines. Trust had completely broken down.

Today, despite the heartbreaking loss of innocent lives—which every decent Nigerian condemns—the reaction is markedly different.

The good people of Southern Kaduna have NOT lost their voice. They have gained something more valuable: c[b]onfidence that they are no longer excluded from government.[/b]

They believe Governor Uba Sani when he says every community matters. They believe President Tinubu when he promises that security agencies will pursue those responsible. They also know that one of their own, the Minister of Defence, has both a constitutional responsibility and a personal stake in restoring peace to the region.

This is why the professional EL-RUFAI / ATIKU mourners are frustrated.

They mistake the absence of political hysteria for suppression.

No. It is evidence that Kaduna is gradually replacing suspicion with trust.

The attack was widely reported. Government officials acknowledged it. Security agencies have been deployed. The issue is not whether the tragedy exists; it does. The issue is whether politicians should once again exploit every tragedy to inflame religious passions.

That was the old Kaduna. That was hell-rufai , sorry el-rufai Kaduna ( pls forgive the typo error!!).

That Kaduna- Thank God Almighty- is gone to hell! with the wind.!!!

The new Kaduna mourns together, demands justice together, and expects government to act—not because of religion, but because every Kaduna life matters.

Ironically, hell-rufai, sorry el rufai sympathisers who keep insisting that nothing has changed are often those nostalgic for an era when every security incident was an opportunity to reopen religious wounds and harvest political capital.

That politics is dying in Hell!.

And that is exactly,precisely and absolutely what confuses the sympathisers of the old order.

seunmsg:
By Ibrahim Hassan-Wuyo



https://www.vanguardngr.com/2026/07/2027-uba-sani-picks-jerry-adams-as-running-mate/amp/

JERRY ADAMS: UBA SANI FINALLY CLOSES THE CHAPTER OF DIVISIVE KADUNA POLITICS. by CharlesCNG.

Governor Uba Sani’s choice of Jerry Adams, a Christian from Southern Kaduna, as his 2027 running mate is more than electoral calculation. It is the clearest declaration yet that Kaduna is abandoning the bitter, polarising politics associated with the El-Rufai era.

Under Nasir El-Rufai, the Muslim-Muslim arrangement was defended in language that many Christians considered deliberately exclusionary. His leaked 2023 remarks appeared to portray political representation as a reward reserved for communities that voted APC. That approach deepened suspicion between Northern and Southern Kaduna.

Uba Sani has chosen a different road: reconciliation instead of retaliation, inclusion instead of triumphalism, and development instead of religious provocation.

Jerry Adams’ nomination formally restores religious balance to the APC ticket. It also recognises competence. As KADIRS chairman, Adams helped strengthen Kaduna’s internally generated revenue, expanding the government’s capacity to fund roads, schools, healthcare and rural projects.

The political results are already visible. Senator Sunday Marshall Katung, federal legislator Daniel Amos and Southern Kaduna state lawmakers Ali Kalat and Yusuf Mugu joined APC. By November 2025, reports indicated that every elected legislator from Southern Kaduna belonged to the ruling party—a remarkable realignment in a region once regarded as an automatic opposition stronghold.

This migration is not occurring in a vacuum. Uba Sani’s administration has pursued dialogue with traditional rulers, Christian and Muslim leaders, community organisations and previously alienated constituencies. The Non-Indigenes Association praised his inclusive governance and peace initiatives, while the former Archbishop of Canterbury acknowledged Kaduna’s improved atmosphere of reconciliation and cohesion.

Kaduna still faces serious security challenges, and no responsible person should pretend otherwise. But politically and socially, the atmosphere has changed.

Jerry Adams’ nomination completes the message: Southern Kaduna is no longer treated as conquered territory, Christians are no longer political spectators, and APC is becoming a meeting place for Kaduna’s diverse communities.

El-Rufai built walls. Uba Sani is building bridges.

treesun:
Senator Adams Oshiomhole has criticised the 2027 presidential ambition of Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) candidate Peter Obi, describing his promise to transform Nigeria within a single four-year term as unrealistic and driven by desperation.

Oshiomhole made the remarks during an appearance on TVC’s Beyond the Headlines, following Obi’s recent interview in which he reaffirmed his commitment to serve only one term if elected president in 2027.

Questioning Obi’s credibility, the former Edo State governor argued that the former Anambra governor had not remained consistent in his political convictions, citing his exit from the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) after leaving office.

“Let’s face it. The Peter Obi that was governor of Anambra State is not the Peter Obi of today, because the Peter Obi of Anambra was one who said, as a matter of respect to the memory of Ojukwu, he will not ever abandon APGA.

“But before daybreak, once his tenure ended, Obi became a political wanderer,” Oshiomhole said.

The APC chieftain also argued that Obi’s background as a trader makes him unsuitable to undertake the long-term planning required to govern Nigeria.

According to him, traders are primarily focused on short-term returns, unlike manufacturers and investors who plan over several years.

“Obi is a trader. Traders have short-term calculation. They are not into long-term projections. They are not wired to think of what situation will be in the long run,” he said.

Oshiomhole further alleged that Obi’s business interests revolve around importation rather than domestic production.

“Obi’s business is to export jobs and import unemployment to the country. That is what he lives for. He’s a trader,” he said.

In contrast, Oshiomhole praised President Bola Tinubu’s economic reforms, saying the President inherited a country facing severe economic challenges but had taken difficult decisions to reposition it.

“Bola Ahmed Tinubu is someone who believes that for your tomorrow, we must do certain things today, painful as it may be,” he said.

He likened Tinubu’s reforms to a life-saving surgical operation, arguing that the country is beginning to experience the benefits despite criticism from the opposition.

Oshiomhole also referenced Obi’s past comments during xenophobic attacks in South Africa, claiming they reflected poor judgment for someone seeking Nigeria’s highest office.

“Do you really believe that anybody whose business is for real, who couldn’t fix a state in four years, he worked hard in eight years, he didn’t fix it… is telling you and me at our age that he just needs four years? That is the height of desperation,” he said.


He added that desperation affects sound judgment, arguing that Obi’s campaign promises lacked credibility.

“Once you are desperate, you become emotionally imbalanced,” Oshiomhole said, adding that Obi would be “the easiest person to engage in a debate.”


https://www.vanguardngr.com/2026/07/peter-obi-is-desperate-he-cant-fix-nigeria-in-four-years-oshiomhole/

FOUR YEARS TO FIX NIGERIA? Coalition Promise or Governance Plan?

One of the most revealing moments in Peter Obi's interview with Seun Okinbaloye came when he insisted that, if elected, he would serve only one four-year term.

But the obvious question is: Is this a governance plan or a political promise made to keep a coalition together?

When pressed on how four years would be enough to transform a country as complex as Nigeria, Obi simply argued that the country could be redirected quickly and that four years would be enough to show the way.

That answer raises more questions than it answers.

If insecurity, power, education, healthcare, constitutional reforms, industrialisation and poverty are Nigeria's biggest challenges, how does a president deliberately limit himself to one term without explaining how these reforms would survive after he leaves?

Major national reforms are marathons, not sprints.

Even countries Obi regularly cites—Bangladesh, Indonesia, Ethiopia and China—did not transform through a single four-year experiment. Their reforms required continuity, institutional discipline and successive governments committed to the same direction.

This is where Blueprintless Peter struggles again.

He tells Nigerians where he wants the country to go but never explains how it gets there.

A one-term presidency is not automatically a weakness. But when presented without a detailed transition plan, it begins to look less like a governance strategy and more like a coalition arrangement.

The biggest problem with Peter Obi's one-term promise is not constitutional.

It is credibility.

A promise is only as believable as the person making it.

After years of changing political platforms and political calculations, many Nigerians simply do not believe that if power, incumbency and the pressure of supporters converge, he would voluntarily walk away after one term.

That is why the debate is not about whether he can make the promise.

It is about whether Nigerians believe he would keep it.

Odisweet:
You still typed this much again? Haaaa oga don't you have work apart from commenting here? Please find work o, Mr Obi is forever a wealthy man whether he becomes president or not.

I don’t have a job ke?

Have you people removed me from the ₦3,000-a-day Obidient payroll you invented for me? Please, where is my termination letter? 😂

And yes, Peter Obi is wealthy. Nobody disputed that.

The issue is whether[i] he is prepared, detailed and qualified to govern Nigeria.[/i]

His bank balance is not a security blueprint.

His wealth is not an economic plan.

And asking about my job will not provide the answers he failed to give.

Jossyman0007:
Today's interview of Peter Obi in Sunday Politics with Seun Okinbaloye was explosive.

It was so tensed tat I felt the interview was aborted and I suspect the APC folks were responsible for that.
Share your view and let's hear your take on it.
It's obvious Obi is the favoured and chosen one.
Nigeria will be OK!!

QUESTION SUBSTITUTION: When Difficult Questions Became Different Answers

One of the defining features of Peter Obi's interview with Seun Okinbaloye was not that he refused to answer questions.

It was that he often answered a different question instead.

This is what I call Question-Substitution Peter.

Watch the pattern.

Seun asked for three concrete security measures.

Obi spoke about commitment, compassion and leadership.

Seun asked how businesses would obtain 5% loans.

Obi explained why businesses need cheaper credit.

Seun asked how Nigeria would move from consumption to production.

Obi took Nigerians on a tour of Bangladesh, Vietnam, the Netherlands and Morocco.

Seun asked about schools built.

Obi answered with computers, buses and educational equipment.

Seun asked for timelines.

Obi spoke about vision.

Do you see the pattern?

The difficult question quietly disappeared.

A safer question took its place.

That is the interview technique of BS Peter.

He seldom says, "I don't know."

Instead, he replaces the examiner's question with one he is more comfortable answering.

It is a clever communication strategy.

But it is not the same as accountability.

Imagine attending a job interview.

The panel asks whether you can prepare audited accounts.

You reply by explaining how hardworking you are.

They ask whether you have managed a budget.

You describe your passion for excellence.

Would you get the job?

Of course not.

Because good intentions are not substitutes for specific answers.

The purpose of a presidential interview is not to test eloquence.

It is to test preparedness.

And preparedness is measured by the ability to answer the question that was asked—not the one you wish had been asked.

By the end of the interview, a clear pattern had emerged.

Whenever the questions became precise, Question-Substitution Peter became remarkably active.

That may work at campaign rallies.

It becomes far more difficult when the interviewer insists on one simple word:

"How?"

arantess:
its not by writing long drivel sentences.

how is the living standard of the common man?

many businesses have closed, prices of goods and services skyrocketed because of your anti people policies that you claim is the best.

The living standard of ordinary Nigerians is a legitimate question. Prices remain painful, many businesses are struggling, and the government must do much more to ensure that improving economic indicators reach households.

But hardship alone does not prove that the reforms are “anti-people.” It proves that Nigeria is passing through a difficult structural adjustment after years of subsidising petrol, defending an artificial exchange rate and borrowing to maintain consumption.

The alternative was not free prosperity. It was continuing fiscal deterioration, foreign-exchange scarcity, subsidy fraud and mounting debt.

Tinubu’s programme has already produced measurable changes. The World Bank says reforms introduced since 2023 have helped stabilise the economy and made it more resilient. The IMF projects approximately 4.1% real GDP growth in 2026, while inflation, despite recent pressures, has declined significantly from its previous highs.

Revenue available to the three tiers has also increased. From February 2026 revenue alone, states received ₦651.525 billion, while local governments received ₦456.467 billion.
That creates greater capacity for roads, transport, healthcare, agriculture and local economic support—provided governors and council chairmen use the money responsibly.

The administration must now accelerate food production, improve security, lower transport and energy costs, support small businesses and ensure that macroeconomic stability translates into purchasing power.

But this is precisely why we need Blueprintless Peter Obi to explain his alternative.

How will he improve living standards?

Will he restore fuel subsidy?

Will he reverse exchange-rate reforms?

How will he reduce food prices, interest rates and business costs?

What will he do differently—and how will he fund it?

It is easy to describe suffering. Every Nigerian can do that.

The opposition’s responsibility is to present a superior, costed and workable programme.

So far, Peter Obi offers complaints about Tinubu’s reforms—but no convincing alternative to them.

abc115:
Obidients should better stop Peter Obi from going for interviews.

https://x.com/lollylarry1/status/2081696881348837413

I Cleared the Bushes of Odumegwu Ojukwu University Campus. I cut the grass — Peter Obi Responds to Claims He Never Built Schools as Anambra Governor

NDC presidential candidate Peter Obi has dismissed claims that he failed to build schools during his tenure as governor of Anambra State, insisting he did far more than construct classrooms.

Speaking during an interview on Channels Television’s One-on-One, Obi responded to questions about his record in office, saying critics often overlook the projects his administration executed.

“Seun, I built more than schools,” he replied

Pressed to name schools he built, Obi pointed to the Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University campus in Igbariam, saying the site was nothing but a bush before his administration transformed it into a functional institution.

“If you go to today, Odumegwu Ojukwu University… there’s a place called Igbariam campus. Seun, I cut the grass. What I mean, it was a bush. I leveled the bush.”

The former Anambra governor said the campus was developed from scratch under his watch, adding that his government invested heavily in education beyond merely erecting school buildings.

https://x.com/instablog9ja/status/2081756611119366610

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-ZS5dAycNo

"PETER OBI SHOULD STOP GRANTING INTERVIEWS" — HOW OBIDIENTS ARE NOW DRAGGING THEIR OWN CANDIDATE AFTER THE CHANNELS TV INTERVIEW. by CharlesCNG.

One of the greatest ironies of Peter Obi's recent Channels Television interview is that some of his harshest criticism is no longer coming from APC supporters.

It is now coming from his own supporters.

In a video titled **"Obidients are dragging Peter Obi for going to Channels TV and allowing Seun Okinbaloye insult him," pro-Obi commentator Lisar N.J. Kanu spends almost thirteen minutes lamenting that Peter Obi should stop granting interviews because journalists keep asking him difficult questions.

Think about that.

A presidential candidate is expected to submit himself to public scrutiny, yet one of his supporters believes the solution is to avoid interviews altogether.

That is perhaps the biggest indictment of the interview.

Throughout the video, Lisar repeatedly attacks Seun Okinbaloye, alleging—without presenting evidence—that he is "collecting money from APC," describing him as "an APC boy," and even referring to him as "that Yoruba boy" while suggesting his ethnicity influenced his questioning.

When political analysis descends into ethnic labelling and accusations of partisan sponsorship simply because a journalist asked probing questions, it ceases to be media criticism and becomes an attack on independent journalism.

Even more revealing is what Lisar says about Peter Obi himself.

She argues that he has already answered enough questions, that he has granted "countless interviews," and concludes that he should stop granting interviews because television stations and podcasters are simply using him for ratings and publicity.

Pause there.

If your own supporters believe the safest political strategy is to shield you from unscripted interviews, what does that say about your ability to withstand scrutiny?
Perhaps the most devastating takeaway from Lisar's video is not her attack on Seun Okinbaloye.

It is her admission—whether she intended it or not—that Peter Obi has reached the point where even some Obidients believe every serious interview is becoming politically dangerous.

That is a remarkable confession.

When your supporters begin arguing that you should stop facing journalists instead of arguing that you answered the questions convincingly, they have unintentionally conceded the very point they were trying to deny.

The problem was never Seun Okinbaloye.

The problem was that difficult questions were asked—and millions of Nigerians were left to judge whether they were convincingly answered.

abc115:
Obidients should better stop Peter Obi from going for interviews.

https://x.com/lollylarry1/status/2081696881348837413

I Cleared the Bushes of Odumegwu Ojukwu University Campus. I cut the grass — Peter Obi Responds to Claims He Never Built Schools as Anambra Governor

NDC presidential candidate Peter Obi has dismissed claims that he failed to build schools during his tenure as governor of Anambra State, insisting he did far more than construct classrooms.

Speaking during an interview on Channels Television’s One-on-One, Obi responded to questions about his record in office, saying critics often overlook the projects his administration executed.

“Seun, I built more than schools,” he replied

Pressed to name schools he built, Obi pointed to the Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University campus in Igbariam, saying the site was nothing but a bush before his administration transformed it into a functional institution.

“If you go to today, Odumegwu Ojukwu University… there’s a place called Igbariam campus. Seun, I cut the grass. What I mean, it was a bush. I leveled the bush.”

The former Anambra governor said the campus was developed from scratch under his watch, adding that his government invested heavily in education beyond merely erecting school buildings.

https://x.com/instablog9ja/status/2081756611119366610

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-ZS5dAycNo

"PETER OBI SHOULD STOP GRANTING INTERVIEWS" — HOW OBIDIENTS ARE NOW DRAGGING THEIR OWN CANDIDATE AFTER THE CHANNELS TV INTERVIEW. by CharlesCNG.

One of the greatest ironies of Peter Obi's recent Channels Television interview is that some of his harshest criticism is no longer coming from APC supporters.

It is now coming from his own supporters.

In a video titled **"Obidients are dragging Peter Obi for going to Channels TV and allowing Seun Okinbaloye insult him," pro-Obi commentator Lisar N.J. Kanu spends almost thirteen minutes lamenting that Peter Obi should stop granting interviews because journalists keep asking him difficult questions.

Think about that.

A presidential candidate is expected to submit himself to public scrutiny, yet one of his supporters believes the solution is to avoid interviews altogether.

That is perhaps the biggest indictment of the interview.

Throughout the video, Lisar repeatedly attacks Seun Okinbaloye, alleging—without presenting evidence—that he is "collecting money from APC," describing him as "an APC boy," and even referring to him as "that Yoruba boy" while suggesting his ethnicity influenced his questioning.

When political analysis descends into ethnic labelling and accusations of partisan sponsorship simply because a journalist asked probing questions, it ceases to be media criticism and becomes an attack on independent journalism.

Even more revealing is what Lisar says about Peter Obi himself.

She argues that he has already answered enough questions, that he has granted "countless interviews," and concludes that he should stop granting interviews because television stations and podcasters are simply using him for ratings and publicity.

Pause there.

If your own supporters believe the safest political strategy is to shield you from unscripted interviews, what does that say about your ability to withstand scrutiny?
Perhaps the most devastating takeaway from Lisar's video is not her attack on Seun Okinbaloye.

It is her admission—whether she intended it or not—that Peter Obi has reached the point where even some Obidients believe every serious interview is becoming politically dangerous.

That is a remarkable confession.

When your supporters begin arguing that you should stop facing journalists instead of arguing that you answered the questions convincingly, they have unintentionally conceded the very point they were trying to deny.

The problem was never Seun Okinbaloye.

The problem was that difficult questions were asked—and millions of Nigerians were left to judge whether they were convincingly answered.

Odisweet:
Wow 😲😲😲 you typed all this just to make Obi look less of who he is? Truly Mr Obi gives many people sleepless nights. Just don't die of heart failure because of Obi o

I am not trying to make Peter Obi less than who he is.

Peter Obi is doing that perfectly well by himself.

That interview did not manufacture his weaknesses. It merely gave Nigerians enough time to see them clearly.

The interview was a self-inflicted political injury. Seun asked the questions. Peter Obi supplied the answers.

Nigerians watched the gaps.

I am merely pointing at the wreckage.

So do not accuse critics of demarketing him.

Blueprintless Peter went into that studio and conducted his own demarketing campaign—live, uninterrupted and with his own mouth.

strictrept:
This is not an intelligent assertion.

so, because, he came to a Public Platform on the index of a Presidential Candidate, you want him to spill his blueprint of National Security on Live TV?

The Issue of Security delegated to Shetimma as promised, we can see how good it's going so far? Yeah?

Is this supposed to be an intelligent defence?

Peter Obi voluntarily appeared on a national television programme as a presidential candidate, yet Nigerians should not ask him how he intends to confront the country’s greatest security crisis?

Why did he attend the interview—just to announce miracles and collect applause?

That is like a contractor bidding to rebuild a collapsed bridge but declaring that the construction method, materials, cost and timetable are none of the client’s business.

Nobody asked Obi to disclose troop movements, intelligence sources, informants, classified equipment or operational coordinates. Those are protected details.

But voters are entitled to know his broad security architecture:

Will he support state police?

How will he restructure intelligence gathering?

How will agencies share information?

How will borders be secured?

What is his plan for terrorist financing, kidnapping networks and illegal arms?

How will recruitment, technology and funding change?

What results should Nigerians expect within four years?

Saying “I will end insecurity” without explaining the policy framework is not a blueprint. It is a campaign wish.

Besides, even if Tinubu’s security performance were criticised, how would that excuse Obi’s failure to explain his own alternative?

Tinubu’s shortcomings cannot become Peter Obi’s missing blueprint.

So let us return to the question:

If Obi does not want to tell voters broadly how he will govern, why is he asking them to elect him?


Peter Obi cannot ask Nigerians for the keys to the country while insisting that the route you intend to drive is classified.

derecho:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFNEs59QA78

DON AZA : AN OBIDIENT FACT-CHECKED THE WRONG QUESTION By CharlesCNG.

The presenter begins by portraying himself as a neutral defender of truth, but he is a known, self-confessed Obidient. That does not automatically make him wrong; it simply means viewers should recognise that this was advocacy, not an independent review.

His biggest trick was to fact-check the easiest question while avoiding the important one.

Nobody seriously argued that every sentence Peter Obi uttered was false.

The real criticism was that, when pressed for concrete policies, costs, timelines and implementation mechanisms, Obi repeatedly retreated into generalities.

Yet the presenter displayed an AI checklist saying some claims about schools, accreditation and savings were “true,” then announced that the entire interview had been vindicated. That is like confirming that a contractor once built a fence and concluding that his missing architectural drawings no longer matter.

Whether Obi constructed university facilities does not answer:

How would he finance 5% loans?

What three specific security measures would he implement?

What is the detailed roadmap from consumption to production?

What institutions, legislation and budget would deliver his promises?

The Don Aza- a famous Click-for-Obi Syndrome player on youtube, also confused clarification with exoneration. On the controversial “commissioners” statement, the fuller clip shows that Obi was referring to police commissioners, not his entire cabinet. That corrects one distorted clip, but it does not prove every criticism of the interview was misinformation.

Most revealingly, the presenter mocked critics for using AI—then relied heavily on screenshots of AI answers as his own supreme authority.

AI became unreliable whenever it challenged Obi, but suddenly became an unimpeachable witness when it praised him.

That is not fact-checking.

That is confirmation bias with screenshots.

The question was never whether Peter Obi could recount achievements, cite poverty figures or speak for two hours.

The question was whether he presented a concrete, costed and sequenced programme for governing Nigeria.

On that question, this video offered noise, diversion and selective defence—but no rebuttal.
As for Don Aza, he is well known for his Monetized Messiah Syndrome (MMS): A condition in which a content creator's editorial independence becomes increasingly shaped by audience incentives, leading to consistently favorable coverage of a political figure because positive narratives attract more views, engagement and advertising revenue than critical analysis.
That is why he deliberately and mischievously FACT-CHECKED THE DECORATIONS WHILE THE BLUEPRINT IS STILL MISSING.”