₦airaland Forum

Elsanchez:
You keep mentionng P Obi and I wonder why?

Why he keeps you and your fellow drug peddler up all night

To be clear, I don't believe elections can be fair in Nigeria.

All I am saying is pastors should be able to tell Tinubu that the only success he has recorded is in making Nigerians poorer and eliminating the middle class in Nigeria.

Tell him to pacck and go. .... not sitting on the fence asking Nigerians to pray for God's intervention.

I hope I have made my message clearer.

Your message is clear.

My answer is equally clear.

No, I will not deliver that message because I do not believe President Tinubu is the cause of Nigeria's economic illness. I believe he inherited an economy weakened by years of fuel subsidy, multiple exchange rates, mounting fiscal pressures and structural distortions, and chose to begin difficult reforms instead of postponing them again.

The reforms have been painful. Nobody denies that.

But pain alone is not proof that the treatment is wrong.

I support the continuation of these reforms because I can already see signs of progress: stronger government revenues, higher allocations to states, improved foreign reserves, increased oil production, expansion of CNG, renewed investor confidence, ongoing infrastructure investment and a more transparent foreign exchange regime.

Most importantly, I have yet to hear a credible alternative.

Peter Obi says he will "do things differently," but differently how?

Will he restore fuel subsidy?

Will he return to multiple exchange rates?

Will he reverse the tax reforms?

Will he stop the CNG transition?

Will he abandon the current infrastructure programme?

Those are the questions that matter.

I don't support Tinubu because I think everything is perfect.

I support him because I believe the reforms should be allowed to mature, and because I have not yet seen an opposition blueprint that offers a more credible path forward.

That is promotion based on conviction—not blind defence.

Streetinvestor2:
That is why the SE is now in coalition with the north. Which is the best thing for SE
So if obi or Atiku wins it is a goal for igbos
So the drug baron aka Yoruba president is never an option to SE..lol
The SE has no reason on earth to vote for the drug baron even if obi steps down. The next option will only be Atiku

I think you misunderstood who the article was written for.

It was not written for Obidients.

It was written for APC supporters in the South-East who voted for Peter Obi in the 2023 presidential election but remained with APC in other contests, including elections held the same day. We saw this split-ticket pattern in states such as Ebonyi and Imo.

It is similar to the old American phenomenon of Reagan Democrats—Democrats who voted for Ronald Reagan for president but still supported Democratic candidates in other elections.

I readily admit there was an error in my headline. Instead of "Peter Obi Supporters," it should have read "APC Obi Voters of 2023."

That was the audience I was addressing—those APC-leaning voters in the South-East who backed Peter Obi in the 2023 presidential election but supported APC in other contests.

The article was an appeal to that specific group, not to Obidients like you.

Quite frankly, I don't write for Obidients. Your positions are already firmly made up.

My target audience is the independent reader and those willing to weigh political arguments on their merits rather than through partisan loyalty.

Now, on your supposed “alliance with the North,” please stop deceiving yourself.

An arrangement with Kwankwaso is not automatically an alliance with the North.

In 2023, Kwankwaso failed to secure 25% in any northern state outside Kano. A man who could barely deliver himself beyond one state cannot suddenly be presented as the magician who will deliver the entire North to Peter Obi in 2027.

That is not coalition arithmetic.

That is wishful thinking wearing a northern cap.

Winning Nigeria requires broad regional structures, governors, lawmakers, local organisers and electoral spread—not one politician standing beside another at a press conference.

As usual, Obidients mistake a photograph for a coalition and excitement for arithmetic.

gidgiddy:
People like this make me laugh. APC has left Nigeria far worse than when they took over from PDP 10 years ago

But the only thing this obe cares about is helping APC remain in power so they can continue their bad governance

My friend, what I care about is not APC remaining in power.

I care about Nigeria finally confronting the problems we kept postponing for decades.

Tinubu did not inherit a healthy economy. He inherited one in the ICU—kept alive by fuel subsidy, multiple exchange rates, heavy borrowing and unsustainable fiscal distortions.

Those policies looked comfortable, but they were slowly bankrupting the country.

The painful reforms were overdue.

Are Nigerians feeling the pain? Absolutely.

But I have also seen signs of progress: higher government revenues, improved state allocations, rising foreign reserves, stronger oil production, greater investor confidence, a more market-based FX system, reduced fuel-smuggling incentives, expansion of CNG, and renewed infrastructure investment.

Most importantly, I am still waiting for a credible alternative.

Which reform should be reversed?

Fuel subsidy?

FX unification?

Tax reforms?

CNG transition?

Nobody seems willing to say.

So yes, as a Nigerian, I would rather allow these reforms to mature than abandon them halfway and return to the very policies that created the crisis in the first place.

Criticism is easy.

A viable alternative is much harder.

I am still waiting for one.

hegelian:
You don't create another thread on obi.. You go create tire and eventually lose that your 30k stipend

Yes ooo... and I will create another one whenever I want to.

Is there now a Nairaland law against opening threads about Peter Obi?

Or is it simply that contrary opinions disturb the Obidient comfort zone?

You had no problem when there were dozens of threads attacking Tinubu every day.

Suddenly, scrutiny of Peter Obi has become an emergency.

Sorry, my brother.

That is not how democracy works.

I have the same right to examine Peter Obi's record as you have to criticise Tinubu.

If my threads irritate you so much, Nairaland has a very useful feature.

Scroll past.

As I have repeatedly said, Obidients are not even my intended audience.

I write for independent readers who are willing to compare arguments and make up their own minds.

So yes... get used to it.

Peter Obi says, "Go and Verify."

That is exactly what I intend to keep doing.

hegelian:
After this thread, we dey expect another one by 2pm

So what exactly is your problem?

That I opened a thread?

Or that I opened a thread you cannot comfortably answer or just ignore?

Nairaland gives every member the same privilege—to create threads and express opinions.

Yet whenever someone presents a contrary view on Peter Obi, the Obidient Narrative Police suddenly emerge:

"Why another thread?" "Data boi!" "You're paid!"
"Stop posting!"

Why does my exercising the same freedom you enjoy offend you so much?

Or is the real issue that you want to control the narrative, decide what others should write about, and bully dissenting voices into silence?

Sorry to disappoint you.

As long as Peter Obi seeks the presidency, his record, his claims and his blueprint will remain legitimate subjects of public scrutiny.

So yes... if another issue arises by 2 p.m., I may very well open another thread.

That's how free debate works.

You are equally free to open yours.

The readers—not the Obidient Narrative Police—will decide.

hegelian:
all your threads since you resurfaced are about abusing obidient and obi.. Data boi you are and data boi you will be forever
you go cry tire

😂 Thank you.

You have just confirmed another Obidient trait:

When you cannot answer the questions, complain about the questions.

Yes, I am scrutinising Peter Obi.

Why does that frighten you?

Was it not Peter Obi who told Nigerians, "Go and Verify"?

That is exactly what I am doing—as a citizen.

I am verifying his record, his claims, his party, his blueprint and his capacity to govern.

You people wanted scrutiny for Tinubu.

Why is scrutiny suddenly offensive when it is Peter Obi's turn?

So get used to it.

As long as Peter Obi presents himself as an alternative President, I will continue to examine his record and ask one simple question:

What exactly will he do differently?

So far, I have heard plenty of insults, "data boi," and "you will cry."

I am still waiting for the alternative blueprint.

That—not abuse—is the conversation Nigerians deserve.

One of the easiest ways to understand Obidient politics is this: they do not analyse Tinubu; they hunt for Tinubu.

They begin with a conclusion, dress it in outrage, then start searching for anything that can confirm their prejudice. If Tinubu breathes, it is corruption. If his government investigates, it is persecution. If an APC official is accused, accusation becomes conviction. If Peter Obi is accused, suddenly they remember due process, context, evidence and court process.

And whether they like it or not, he is going to have another four years.

In 2027, Tinubu will win fair and square, and Obidients will do what they usually do after every loss: scream rigging, abuse voters, insult INEC, threaten courts, accuse judges, attack journalists, blame pastors, call citizens hungry, and then return to social media to declare another imaginary victory.

That is their cycle.

Before election: “We are taking over.”
During election: “The people are with us.”
After election: “They stole our mandate.”
After court: “The judiciary is captured.”
Before the next election: “This time we will shock them.”

Tinubu has structure, incumbency, governors, party machinery, reform narrative, regional alliances, and enough room to expand his 2023 votes. Obi has noise, grievance, unstable platform, shrinking novelty, and supporters who think insulting voters is mobilisation.

By 2027, the “new messiah” packaging will be old newspaper.

That is why their Tinubu hatred keeps failing politically. It is loud, but it is not strategic. It is emotional, but it is not electoral. It can trend, but it cannot organise. It can insult, but it cannot persuade.

Obidients don’t need binoculars to see Tinubu.

This is not activism. It is political bitterness with data bundle.

After years of insults, health mockery, ethnic baiting, religious blackmail and propaganda, Tinubu still became President. Instead of learning that abuse is not strategy, they have doubled down on the same arrogance.

In 2027, they will again mistake social-media noise for national structure. And if they lose, they will do what they always do: accuse INEC, abuse voters, attack judges and manufacture another conspiracy.

Obidients don’t need binoculars to see Tinubu.
Their hatred for Tinubu is so strong that even when facts stand beside them, they still look for conspiracy across the street.

There is a powerful lesson for igbo hidden in the politics of 1982.

Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu led Biafra through war, went into exile after the civil war, and returned to Nigeria after President Shehu Shagari’s NPN government granted him pardon. But what did Ojukwu do on return?

He did not join the emotional comfort zone of the East.

He joined the NPN — the ruling national party.

That decision shocked many people because Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe’s NPP was then the leading Igbo political home. The NPP controlled old Anambra under Jim Nwobodo and old Imo under Sam Mbakwe. In other words, if Ojukwu merely wanted applause from home, the NPP was available.

But Ojukwu understood something deeper: the Igbo question could not be solved by regional applause alone. The Igbo needed access to the mainstream of Nigerian power.

That is the lesson for 2027.

Peter Obi running from a fringe platform may excite emotions in the South-East, but it does not automatically translate to national power. Worse still, if Obi simply harvests South-East votes while losing nationally, he weakens the bargaining power of South-East politicians already positioned inside the ruling structure.

That is the trap.

A region cannot keep voting emotionally for a candidate who cannot win nationally, then complain that it is excluded from the table where power is shared.

The Yoruba learned a similar lesson in the Second Republic. Between 1979 and 1983, Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s UPN was dominant in much of the Yoruba West, but the federal centre belonged to Shehu Shagari’s NPN.
The lesson was painful but clear: regional dominance is not the same as national power.

The UPN could win the Yoruba heartland, but it could not capture the federal centre. By 1993, the Yoruba political imagination had reset.

MKO Abiola did not run as a narrow Yoruba regional candidate. He ran on the SDP, a broad national platform created in the Third Republic, and built a cross-regional, cross-religious coalition. The June 12 election is widely remembered as one of Nigeria’s freest and fairest elections, with Abiola defeating Bashir Tofa across many parts of the country, including even Tofa’s Kano base.

Politics is not only about proving loyalty to your son. It is also about negotiating advantage for your people.

Ojukwu, of all people, understood that symbolism without access can become self-isolation. He had led Biafra, suffered exile, returned home, and still chose mainstream politics.

So the question for 2027 is simple: will the South-East repeat emotional isolation, or will it negotiate from inside the national centre?

Peter Obi may give the region pride.

But Tinubu’s APC gives it a seat at the table.

Speaking Truth To Power Is Biblical; Turning The Altar Into Campaign Furniture Is Carnality Wearing A Clerical Collar.

Nobody said pastors should not speak truth to power. No serious Christian can say that, because Scripture demands it. Proverbs 31:8-9 says we should speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves and defend the rights of the poor and needy. Isaiah 1:17 says, “Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed.”

The problem begins when a pastor moves from biblical justice to partisan endorsement, then dresses his personal political preference in prophetic clothing. That is pure carnality.

Nobody denies that pastors have a duty to speak truth to power. Scripture commands it. The church must defend the poor, rebuke wickedness, challenge injustice and speak for righteousness.

But there is a wide difference between preaching justice and turning the pulpit into a campaign platform for any politician.

The altar is not APC property. It is not PDP property. It is not Labour Party property. It is not ADC, NDC, APGA or NNPP property. The altar belongs to Christ.

That is why pastors must be careful. Every congregation contains people with different political convictions. Some members support APC. Some support PDP. Some support NDC. Some support APGA. Some may support no party at all.

So when a pastor stands on the pulpit and presents one candidate as “the way to go,” what is he saying to members who, in good conscience, support another candidate?

Is he suggesting they are less spiritual? Less wise? Less obedient to God? Less concerned about Nigeria?

That is the danger.

A church is not a political ward meeting. It is a house of prayer, worship, repentance, discipleship and truth.
The moment a pastor uses spiritual authority to push partisan preference, he risks dividing the flock along political lines and burdening people’s conscience with what God has not commanded.

If a pastor wants to campaign, let him campaign as a citizen. Let him attend rallies, write articles, join town halls and endorse openly from a political platform.

But the pulpit is different.

From the pulpit, a man of God must say what God has sent him to say, not what his political emotions are begging him to say.

When people say some pastors are “standing on the fence” because they refuse to endorse their preferred candidate, they are making one arrogant assumption: that God has personally revealed to them who the clean politician is and who the corrupt one is.

But if a pastor is merely drawing conclusions from his own political analysis, he should say so as a citizen. He should not smuggle it into the pulpit as if heaven has endorsed his candidate.

Even the Pharisees accused Jesus of associating with publicans and sinners. They thought they knew who was clean and who was unclean. They judged by religious bias and called it righteousness.

That same danger exists today.

A man of God can stand on the pulpit and boldly say, “Thus saith the Lord.” But when he says, “This candidate is the way to go,” without divine instruction, that is not prophecy.It is carnality with microphone.

Let pastors preach justice, mercy, honesty, compassion and accountability. But let them stop pretending that their preferred candidate is God’s candidate simply because their political emotions are loud.

The altar belongs to Christ, not the pastor — and definitely not the pastor or bishop’s preferred candidate.

A congregation is not a political ward meeting. Members come to church as believers, not as party delegates waiting for endorsement from the pulpit.

So when any pastor turns spiritual authority into partisan direction, he is not helping democracy and he is not honouring the altar. He is placing his political preference where Christ alone should be central.

Governor Seyi Makinde’s call for the United Nations to investigate the Oyo schoolchildren abduction is not statesmanship. It is political theatre dressed in humanitarian language.

The abduction of pupils and teachers in Oriire was tragic, wicked and traumatic. Reports say the victims were kidnapped on May 15, 2026, spent 56 days in captivity, and were rescued on July 10 through a joint security operation involving the military, police, DSS, Amotekun, hunters and local vigilantes. Eight suspects were reportedly arrested, while others were neutralised.

That should have been a solemn moment: gratitude to security personnel, comfort for the children, support for their recovery, and clear assurance to worried parents.

Instead, Makinde chose to internationalise the matter by calling on the UN and international human-rights bodies to examine the abduction. That is dangerous and unnecessary. Nigeria is a sovereign country with police, DSS, military intelligence, courts, state assemblies, National Assembly committees and human-rights institutions. If Makinde has evidence of collusion, negligence or sabotage, let him present it to Nigerian authorities.

Worse still, Makinde had earlier linked the abduction to his presidential ambition, saying he declared for president at 4 p.m. and the children were abducted the next morning.

What exactly was he insinuating — that kidnappers were monitoring his presidential timetable?

That is not leadership. That is self-importance on steroids.

Children suffered. Parents panicked. Security operatives worked for weeks. Yet Makinde’s framing began to sound like the tragedy revolved around his ambition.

No one says the abduction should not be investigated. It must be. Nigerians deserve answers.

But investigation is different from international grandstanding.

Compassion is different from campaign positioning.

Makinde should stop using kidnapped children as political mirrors for his 2027 ambition.

Nigeria’s sovereignty is not a campaign prop.

And children’s trauma is not anybody’s billboard.

Watch it here:

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

12 Holes in the ₦54 Billion Allegation Against Gbajabiamila | Why I Deleted The Video by Donaza.



One hallmark of the Obidient online ecosystem is that an allegation is often treated as a conviction long before investigators complete their work. Once a sensational headline appears, it is copied across YouTube, Nairaland and social media until repetition is mistaken for proof.

The ₦54 billion allegation against Femi Gbajabiamila is a good example.

After taking a closer look at the evidence,DonAza—whose platform is widely followed by opposition supporters—deleted his earlier video and published another explaining the weaknesses he found in the story.



That is how responsible commentary should work. When new facts emerge or earlier conclusions become doubtful, you correct the record.

Unfortunately, many Obidient influencers and social-media supporters have refused to do the same. Instead, they continue recycling the original allegation as though it were already an established fact, attaching Tinubu's name to every headline in pursuit of the familiar political objective: "Get Gbaja, get Tinubu."

This is what I call allegation laundering—an allegation is amplified through sympathetic platforms until it acquires the appearance of truth.

Investigate every allegation. Prosecute anyone found guilty. But in a democracy, evidence—not viral headlines or partisan repetition—must always determine guilt.

HIGHESTPOPORI:
So any states apc lost in 2023,the gov did not campaign,you think people care about the gov,2023 showed us that Govs don't really matter,Obi had no Gov and won 12 States,2027,the people would even do better to defend their votes

This is why I said some people don’t understand scientific election projection.

Nobody serious is saying governors alone vote for a candidate. People vote. But in Nigerian elections, governors, local structures, commissioners, chairmen, appointees, candidates, ward leaders and party agents help mobilise, persuade, fund, coordinate and protect votes.

So saying “Obi had no governor and won 12 states” is not proof that structure does not matter. It is proof that 2023 produced a rare political wave.

And waves are not permanent structures.

Obi’s 2023 wave came from several special factors: protest mood, EndSARS energy, youth anger, religious anxiety, ethnic solidarity, anti-PDP/APC fatigue, and a carefully packaged “new candidate” brand.

But many of those underlying factors are no longer fresh in 2027. The novelty has faded. The brand has been tested. The movement has become more abusive. The party platform has become unstable. The coalition question is unsettled.

Political waves rarely repeat exactly in consecutive election cycles. A wave is like floodwater after heavy rain: it can sweep through streets once, but you cannot build your house assuming that same flood will come back on schedule.

My projection is not emotional. It compares 2023 results, voting patterns, incumbency, party structure, regional shifts, elite alignment, turnout behaviour and changing political incentives.

In the South-East, Tinubu does not even need South-East votes to win overwhelmingly in 2027. In 2023, he won the presidency while scoring only about 127,370 votes in the entire South-East, just 5.72% of the zone’s valid votes, while Obi got about 1,952,998 votes, around 87.78%.
So any serious improvement for Tinubu there is a bonus, not his foundation.

The real point is this: in 2027, every South-East governor and major power bloc will have stronger incentive to avoid another embarrassing APC collapse in the zone. .
It will seriously affect their post-2027 future political Permutations.The target is not necessarily to win the South-East. The target is to push Tinubu toward 25% and improve margins.

Obi, on the other hand, has the harder task: he must reproduce an emotional 2023 wave after the emotion has cooled, the novelty has faded, and the political terrain has shifted.

That is why “we will defend our votes” is not a projection.

It is a slogan.

Scientific projection asks: will the same conditions that produced 2023 still exist in 2027?

My answer is no.

HIGHESTPOPORI:
You are angry because pastors support Obi,but it's normal when tinubu run the Muslim Muslim ticket and imams are telling their people to vote for religion

First, I am a Christian.

I cannot speak for what imams preach in mosques. They answer to their own convictions before God.

But as a Christian, I know the standard the Bible sets for those who stand behind the pulpit.

Scripture says, "Be not conformed to this world" (Romans 12:2), and "My house shall be called the house of prayer" (Matthew 21:13). Paul also instructed Timothy to "Preach the word" (2 Timothy 4:2), not campaign for politicians.

My concern is not whether a pastor votes for Tinubu, Obi or anyone else. Every pastor is a citizen and has that right.

My concern begins when the authority of the pulpit is used to advance partisan politics.

And please, don't use the logic that because an imam allegedly did something, a pastor should do the same.

That is moral regression.

Christians are not called to copy the world's lowest standard. We are called to set a higher one.

"You are the light of the world" (Matthew 5:14).

If something is wrong, it does not become right because someone else also did it.

So my position is consistent:

If an imam turns the mosque into a campaign ground, I disagree.

If a pastor turns the pulpit into a campaign stage, I also disagree.

The altar belongs to Christ—not to APC, NDC, ADC, PDP or any political party.

That is the standard I am defending.

SeeWahala:
This data B0i should rest na

Why is he spamming the entire thread and section with irrelevant propaganda Bible passages?

Just because of the words VOTE WISELY he's having heartattack 😔

Every time I post, one Obidient suddenly develops an allergy to free speech. 😂

You call it "spamming." I call it exercising the same freedom on Nairaland that you enjoy.

If my threads are irrelevant, why do you keep opening them, reading them and replying to them?

Nobody is forcing you to click.

On "Vote Wisely," let's be honest.

That statement was made in 2023.

The election has come and gone.

Nigerians voted.

A winner was declared.

The courts heard the petitions up to the Supreme Court.

So why are some people still trying to convert a three-word sermon into an eternal campaign slogan?

My point has never been that "Vote Wisely" meant Tinubu or Obi.

My point is that the pulpit should not become a campaign platform for any politician, and no congregation should be left guessing whether a pastor is preaching Scripture or signalling a preferred candidate.

Finally, you say my posts are disturbing you.

The solution is wonderfully simple.

Ignore them.

The fact that you cannot ignore them tells me they are having far more impact than you would like to admit.

As our elders say, "The stone that misses its target rarely provokes a cry." 😄

Streetinvestor2:
You can equally say since we have apc as governors in SE. The SE will now vote the drug baron who won't get 10k votes in SE in 2027.
Don't forget Imo state and Ebonyi had apc governors in 2023 and APGA in Anambra.
It is the people thr that vote and not the governors. Why is it still giving the drug baron sleepless night with forced governors to apc with 250 billion given. You will see how we defend our votes in 2027.You think it was 2023 we voted and went home then 4 am as we sleep inec happened.Obi or Atiku is OK for us
If it requires using star links to deliver every results at all polling units in 2027.We will do it.The opposition will surprise u in 2027 as the world watches

This is pure fantasy with Starlink subscription.

First, Peter Obi did not win the 2023 election. He came third. That is not abuse; that is arithmetic. In fact, at the tribunal, Obi’s main legal strategy was not even “I won and should be declared winner.” It was largely “Tinubu was not qualified and should be disqualified.” So let us stop rewriting history like INEC result sheet is a Nollywood script.

Second, saying “Obi or Atiku is OK for us” exposes the whole confusion. So which election did Obi win? The same election Atiku also allegedly won? Opposition arithmetic has become: Obi won, Atiku won, Tinubu lost, but somehow everyone is president in imagination.

Third, my point was not even about South-East governors magically carrying all votes in their pockets. My argument was about **structure**. Governors, legislators, appointees, local chairmen, commissioners, ward leaders and party machinery matter in Nigerian elections. The people vote, yes, but structures mobilise, persuade, protect and deliver.

Tinubu won in 2023 without needing South-East votes. So if he improves from poor South-East numbers in 2027, that is a bonus, not his foundation.

And let us be honest: the APC governors in Imo and Ebonyi did not campaign for Tinubu in 2023 with the full survival pressure they will face in 2027. This time, their political careers, federal relevance and local influence will be judged partly by whether they can deliver at least 25%.

Lastly, can Obidients ever contribute without dragging insults into every sentence? Insult is not analysis. Abuse is not structure. Starlink is not polling-unit agent.

You can upload results with satellite internet from heaven; if the votes are not there, bandwidth will not manufacture them.

AMINDA:
We are back to this talks about governors again. Governors that were all practically threatened to decamp to the APC after destroying the PDP before our very eyes. The few ones who showed dissent and refused to decamp like the governors of Rivers, Bauchi, Osun and Oyo continue to be hounded and victimised with no respite. The governors decamped but did the electorates decamp? Same snake oil merchants who tell us that governors will deliver their states to Tinubu will still tell you that Seyi Makinde is paperweight and cannot deliver Oyo for himself. At least stand one place. Atiku won more APC governed states in 2023 than he won PDP states.

My friend, your argument is fighting itself.

Yes, governors do not carry voters inside briefcases. The electorate can reject them.

But if governors, party machinery and grassroots structures have no political value, why is every opposition coalition desperately searching for governors, senators, lawmakers and former officeholders?

Why did these supposedly “threatened” governors not run to ADC or NDC, where freedom and democracy were allegedly waiting for them?

Fubara is now in APC. Fintiri aligned with APC. Adeleke chose Accord. Bala Mohammed reportedly chose APM. Why are they avoiding the coalition that claims to represent the national alternative?

That question cannot be answered with “governors do not matter.”

A governor provides local organisation, agents, funding networks, party officers, mobilisation capacity and knowledge of the terrain. He cannot manufacture votes, but he can influence how effectively votes are pursued, protected and delivered.

You cannot call governors irrelevant today and celebrate their defection tomorrow.

That is not analysis.

It is political arithmetic where the value of a governor changes according to whose column he enters.

mactoni91:
Lol...

I listened to their sermon today for the first time.

All he and his son were just preaching was Tithe Tithe Tithe.

These guys are crooks.

As for me, I just envy these prosperity pastors.

Imagine someone gives you five cheques of ₦50 million each — a whole quarter of a billion naira — and you “forgot.”

Forgot?

My brother, I forget where I kept my charger. I forget passwords. I can even forget why I entered a room.

But ₦250 million?

That one is not forgetfulness; that is financial rapture.

And please, when he says “he forgot,” does it mean he forgot to cash the cheques, or he cashed them and forgot that he cashed them? Because those are two different levels of Financial anointing.

In this Nigeria, some people check their bank app after buying ₦20,000 fuel, but somebody allegedly kept ₦250 million in cheque leaves like old church bulletin and moved on with life.

Kai.

That kind of grace needs its own CBN circular.

At this point, I don’t need prosperity preaching again. I need the spiritual gift of forgetting quarter of a billion naira without my blood pressure asking questions.

Elsanchez:
To answer your question; Pastors and other religious leaders should stay far from political campaigns

They have a moral duty to speak truth to power and advocate for justice

however, most of them cannot do that because they have soiled their hands with donations and money from from corrupt politicians

so what they do is stand on the fence in other not to offend their benefactor.

You are still missing the point.

Nobody said pastors should not speak truth to power.
I could not have said that, because the Bible itself demands it. Proverbs 31:8-9 says, “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves… defend the rights of the poor and needy.” Isaiah 1:17 says, “Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed.”

So yes, pastors must speak for justice. They must rebuke wickedness. They must defend the poor. They must challenge oppression.

But that is not the same thing as turning the pulpit into a campaign rostrum for Peter Obi.

The problem begins when a pastor moves from biblical justice to partisan endorsement , then tries to dress his political preference in prophetic clothing.

When you say some pastors are “standing on the fence” because they don’t want to offend benefactors, you are assuming that God has explicitly revealed to Enenche and his fellow travellers who the clean politician is and who the corrupt one is. That is a dangerous assumption.

If a pastor is drawing that conclusion from his own political analysis, then he should say so as a citizen. He should not smuggle it into the pulpit as if heaven has endorsed his candidate.

After all, the Pharisees also accused our Lord Jesus of associating with publicans and sinners. They thought they knew who was clean and who was unclean. They judged by their own religious bias and called it righteousness.

That is exactly the danger here.

A man of God on the pulpit can boldly say: thus saith the Lord.

But when he says, “this candidate is the way to go,” without divine instruction, that is not prophecy.

That is carnality with microphone.

So let pastors preach justice, righteousness, mercy, honesty, compassion and accountability.

But let them stop pretending that their preferred candidate is God’s candidate simply because their political emotions are loud.