₦airaland Forum

If there is any state that illustrates the urgency of state police, it is Plateau.

Plateau’s security crisis is not ordinary crime alone. It is a complex mix of farmer-herder conflict, land disputes, reprisal attacks, communal tension, rural banditry and identity politics.

A centralised police command sitting far away cannot fully understand the delicate terrain of Barkin Ladi, Bokkos, Mangu, Riyom or Bassa the way locally rooted security officers would.

State police would allow Plateau to build a force that understands local languages, village boundaries, grazing routes, flashpoints, family networks and early warning signals.

That matters.

Many attacks do not happen without warning. Communities often hear rumours, notice movement and sense danger before violence erupts. But intelligence is useless when response is slow or disconnected.

For Plateau, state police should not be about giving governors a political weapon. It should be about building a professional, locally informed security layer with clear safeguards, federal oversight and community accountability.

The Federal Police should still handle terrorism, arms trafficking and inter-state crimes. But Plateau needs officers who know the ground before the ground catches fire.

Insecurity is local before it becomes national.

And Plateau has paid too much in blood for Nigeria to continue pretending that one central police structure can understand every village, every route and every conflict.

State police is not a magic wand.

But for Plateau, it may be the missing first responder.

Ekpeitut:
This is selective outrage disguised as a defence of decency.

Yes, some Obidients abused Pastor Adeboye, and they were wrong. But let's not pretend abuse is unique to Obidients. Tinubu supporters and data boys have viciously attacked clerics, journalists, critics,ex president Jonathan/his dear wife and even Peter Obi.

Also, criticising Adeboye's comments is not the same as abusing him. You're deliberately conflating the two to shield his statement from scrutiny.

nobody said abuse is exclusive to Obidients. Political abuse exists across camps. Tinubu supporters do it. PDP supporters do it. Obi supporters do it. That is not the argument.

The argument is more specific: in this particular Adeboye episode, the loudest and most vicious attacks I have seen are coming from people using Obidient language, Obidient talking points and Obidient grievance templates.

I also never said all Obidients are abusive. That would be unfair.

But many of the people who turn every disagreement into abuse, call everyone paid, tribalist, fake, compromised or wicked simply because they refuse to echo Obi-aligned anger, are usually Obidients. That pattern is too consistent to ignore.

DatNiggaDaz:


Data boi, you are not gaslighting any one other than your own self. You are desperately looking for support for the failure you are defending and there is none that will come your way.

Adeboye who is a Christian Pastor has now become someone to help whitewash the incompetence and cluelessness of the faaake muslim muslim ticket kriminal.

Adeboye is lying and sane Nigerians know he is lying and he himself knows that he is lying. Nigerians are the culprits of insecurity in the hands mandate snatchers and grabbers and Adeboye telling lies because of tribalism and using the Jezebel in the house to whitewash a failed kriminal is DOA.

When you lie, that this Chicago faaake certttifficcate holder is not to be blamed, it is what it is, a lie, and who ever said it is a liar. There is no insult there, that it what it is it.

Your aim of using a Pastor to defend the incompetence of the faaake ocean tamer and divide the Christians is also DOA.

There is no epistle you write that you aim to demonize those against the failed kriminal that will succeed

You are a testimony to that fact yourself that you have to create many epistles of lies, propaganda and deciet against your nightmare which are failing woefully prompting you to create more meaningless desperate threads

No peace for wick"d creatures

Slogan boi, thank you for confirming the entire point of the thread.

You say nobody is attacking Adeboye, then proceed to call him a liar, tribalist, whitewasher, and drag his wife with “Jezebel” language. If this is your definition of non-attack, then your dictionary must have been printed by the Ministry of Obidient Outrage.

This is exactly the behaviour being discussed: once someone does not speak in your preferred anti-Tinubu tone, you people don’t argue — you combust.

Adeboye did not say Nigeria is secure. He did not say Tinubu has solved insecurity. He acknowledged the spread of insecurity, called for urgent action, and said security chiefs should be held to task. His only offence is that he did not reduce the matter to your usual slogan of “criminal, fake certificate, snatch and grab.”

That is why your response is full of noise but empty of substance.

You call me “data boi” because I bring context. Fair enough. I would rather be a data boy than an abuse boy whose entire argument is certificate chants, tribal accusations and emotional gymnastics.

If Adeboye lied, quote the exact lie and rebut it. If his reasoning is wrong, show why. If you believe the President must take fuller responsibility as Commander-in-Chief, make that argument cleanly. Many reasonable people can even agree with that.

But all this “fake Muslim-Muslim ticket criminal,” “Jezebel,” “wicked creatures,” and “no peace” only proves that[b] insult is not an occasional Obidient mistake; it is becoming your political operating system.[/b]

You people keep saying you want a new Nigeria, but you cannot even produce a new argument.

Same abuse. Same slogans. Same conspiracy. Same anger.

So please, Slogan Boi, leave the fumes and face the issue: did Adeboye deny insecurity, or did he call for action while making a point about the limits of personal battlefield command?

Answer that, not your imaginary certificate choir.

slivertongue:
INEC has a constitutional mandate. It does not do favours. Scale up your thought pattern, stop building arguments on failed logic.

“INEC has constitutional mandate” is not the brilliant answer you think it is.

Nobody said INEC is legally doing “favours.” The point is about your reaction , not INEC’s mandate.

When INEC’s constitutional action benefits your side, you call it professionalism. When INEC’s constitutional action goes against your side, you call it capture. That is the failed logic here.

So please, don’t hide selective outrage inside constitutional vocabulary.

The same INEC you praise today for portal access is the same INEC you abuse tomorrow if it obeys a court order you dislike. That is not “scaled-up thought pattern.” That is political gymnastics with a law textbook as costume.

A referee has a mandate too. But when you praise him only for awarding your penalty and insult him for calling your foul, the issue is not his mandate.

The issue is your hypocrisy.

Kanwulia:
INEC CANNOT IMPLEMENT SHYYYYTE TILL THE MATTER ENDS IN THE SUPREME COURT!

Jagabandit INEC! Try ya luck!😍

Yesssssoh!
If INEC respects itself, it will be respected instead acting like a useless entity without common sense.😂

Come and de-register NDC and smell your anoose!😂

See the contradiction in your own mouth.

When INEC grants NDC portal access, you celebrate INEC. When INEC obeys another court process that does not favour you, INEC becomes “Jagabandit INEC.”

So INEC is useful when it helps you, useless when it does not?

That is not democracy. That is selective madness.

If the matter must end at the Supreme Court before INEC can act, then why are you celebrating portal access now? Why not also wait for the Supreme Court before uploading candidates?

You cannot say INEC should not implement anything until final appeal, then celebrate when INEC implements the part that favours your side.

This is exactly the hypocrisy we are pointing out.

You don’t want independent INEC. You want INEC to behave like NDC upload department.
Bloody hypocrites.

Ofodirinwa:
Add Obi Kano to Obi's success in the north. Don't forget that Obi scored extremely well in the north in the last election. Kano is enough to sway the election.

The Obi Northern Myth: Middle Belt Protest Vote Is Not Northern Conquest

One of the biggest Obidient exaggerations is the claim that Peter Obi “did well in the North” in 2023. The figures tell a more precise story.

Obi’s real northern strength came mainly from the **North-Central/FCT**, especially Plateau, Nasarawa and Abuja. In the FCT, he scored 281,717 votes. In Nasarawa, he won with 191,361 votes. In Plateau, he won strongly with 466,272 votes. These results were significant, but they were largely driven by urban voters, Christian/Middle Belt sentiment, insecurity concerns, and protest against the APC Muslim-Muslim ticket.

That is not the same thing as conquering the North.

In the North-West, Obi was weak outside Kaduna. He got only **28,513 votes in Kano**, while Kwankwaso took **997,279**. In the North-East, Obi’s numbers were also limited, except for pockets like Taraba and Adamawa. He did not win Katsina, Sokoto, Zamfara, Jigawa, Borno, Yobe, Bauchi, Gombe, Niger, Kogi or Kwara.

So when Obidients say Obi has northern strength, they are stretching the truth.

Obi had a Middle Belt/FCT protest vote, not broad northern acceptance. Politics requires recognising that difference.

Since then, even some of those 2023 protest pockets have changed politically. In Taraba, Governor Agbu Kefas, who came from the PDP structure, has moved into the APC orbit with much of the state’s political machinery. That matters because Obi’s 2023 Taraba support was partly a Christian/Middle Belt protest vote, but state structure is now shifting toward the ruling party.

In Plateau, Obi’s 2023 presidential strength did not automatically become Labour Party control. PDP won the governorship, By 2027, the Muslim-Muslim ticket shock may also be softer, and voters may judge more by security, local alliances, party machinery and performance than by the protest mood of 2023.


A protest pocket is not regional conquest.

Ekpeitut:
That's a weak deflection.

Whether someone supports Peter Obi or not has nothing to do with the substance of the argument. The issue is whether Pastor Adeboye has applied the same level of public pressure to this administration as he did to previous ones.

If he has consistently asked every government to do better with the same urgency and intensity, then fine. But if his tone becomes noticeably softer when the government is led by someone he is perceived to be close to, people are entitled to question that.

Dragging Peter Obi into every criticism of Tinubu or Adeboye is simply a way of avoiding the real conversation.

As for calling Obi a "fraud runaway candidate," that's just political name-calling. It doesn't answer the criticism. If your defence of Adeboye depends on attacking another politician instead of addressing the point being raised, then you've already conceded the argument.

This sounds neat, but it still dodges the evidence.

You keep saying Adeboye applied “more pressure” to previous governments, especially Jonathan. Fine — bring the exact quote, date and context.
Because the most popular evidence people are using, the so-called Adeboye protest against Jonathan, has been fact-checked and found false. The photo was from a 2020 prayer walk under Buhari, not Jonathan.

In fact, the public record shows Adeboye did not treat Jonathan the way you people are claiming. Jonathan visited RCCG camp in 2015, knelt for prayers, and Adeboye prayed for peaceful elections and strength for him.

On Tinubu, Adeboye did not say Nigeria is secure. He admitted insecurity has worsened, urged the President to give security chiefs a strict deadline, and called for terrorists and their sponsors to be dealt with. The part people are angry about is his view that the President cannot personally go to the battlefield.


So the issue is not “consistency” until you prove the inconsistency with evidence.

Right now, what I see is this: when Adeboye prays for Jonathan, context matters. When he speaks under Buhari, people mislabel the photo. When he advises Tinubu, he suddenly becomes compromised.

That is not moral scrutiny. That is selective outrage looking for a witness.

BOOZELEE:
I am not obidient

I just hate church leaders who don't say the truth because of there selfish interest and Adeboye is one of them.

My brother, it depends on what you call “the truth.”

In 2023, when some church leaders openly leaned toward Peter Obi, was that “truth” or politics?

When Pastor Paul Enenche posted Peter Obi with Bishop Oyedepo and declared him “the way to go,” was that truth or political endorsement?

When Obi appeared at Dunamis and the church atmosphere turned into political excitement, was that truth or pulpit politics?

When the controversial “Yes Daddy” audio involving Obi and Bishop Oyedepo surfaced, and even Kenneth Okonkwo admitted the audio was authentic, was that truth or religious mobilisation?

When Pastor Chris Oyakhilome released his angelic-style election message that many interpreted politically, was that truth or spiritualised campaigning?

You see the problem?

If a pastor speaks in a way that favours Obi, he is a courageous voice of conscience. If another pastor speaks in a way that does not condemn Tinubu with the anger you prefer, he is selfish, fake, compromised and not telling the truth.

That is not principle. That is selective outrage.

The real issue is not whether church leaders should be questioned. They should be. The issue is whether your camp applies the same standard to all of them.

If pastors must stay away from partisan politics, then say so consistently. If pastors may speak on national issues, then accept that they will not always speak your preferred political language.

But do not call it “truth” when it favours Obi and “selfish interest” when it does not.

That is not Christianity. That is political convenience wearing choir robe.

oyichi:
That man's reputation has gone south, this administration revealed who he really is, an insincere, double standard in judgement, fake character who is just out there for his extreme flamboyant life style, to call this one a pastor is an insult to Christianity

Thank you for confirming the point: insult is not an accident in your camp; it is becoming a political inheritance.

You say no one is attacking Pastor Adeboye, then call him fake, insincere, double-standard, flamboyant, and “an insult to Christianity.” If that is not attack, then maybe abuse has now been renamed “constructive criticism” in Obidient dictionary.

Now let us be honest. In 2023, several pastors and Christian voices openly leaned toward Peter Obi or gave him visible platforms. Pastor Paul Enenche shared a photo with Peter Obi and Bishop David Oyedepo and described Obi as “the way to go.” Punch and Channels reported it as an endorsement.

Peter Obi also appeared at Dunamis in 2022, where he received massive attention from worshippers. The controversial Obi-Oyedepo “Yes Daddy” audio also showed how seriously Obi’s camp valued clerical influence; TheCable reported Kenneth Okonkwo accepted the audio as authentic, while Labour defended it against claims of religious bigotry. Pastor Chris Oyakhilome also made widely reported 2023 election comments involving the major candidates and what he said an angel told him.

So let us stop pretending pastors in politics became a problem only because Adeboye said something that did not serve your anger.

When clerics appeared favourable to Obi, they were “voices of conscience.” When Adeboye speaks in a way you dislike, he becomes fake, tribal and an insult to Christianity.

That is not principle. That is selective outrage.

You can disagree with Adeboye. You can question consistency. You can demand stronger language on insecurity. But once your response becomes personal abuse, you prove the very intolerance being discussed.

The issue is simple: are pastors allowed to speak politically only when they support your candidate?

Ekpeitut:
The issue is not that Pastor Adeboye expressed an opinion. The issue is that many Nigerians remember a time when he was far more vocal about the failures of previous governments. That is why his recent comments have attracted scrutiny.
You cannot build a reputation for speaking truth to power and then appear to lower the standard when your preferred leader is in office. Consistency is the foundation of moral authority.

When previous administrations struggled with insecurity, corruption, fuel scarcity, or economic hardship, Pastor Adeboye did not hesitate to call for urgent action and national repentance. Today, insecurity has become even more widespread, kidnappings have reached communities once considered safe, millions are battling unprecedented economic hardship, yet his public criticism appears noticeably restrained. Nigerians have every right to ask why.

Saying that the President only needs to give orders ignores the very essence of leadership. A Commander in Chief is not judged by the orders he gives but by the outcomes those orders produce. If insecurity continues to worsen, then leadership must be held accountable. That principle applied under previous governments and it must apply now.

It is ironic that some people who once applauded Adeboye for challenging those in power are now asking Nigerians not to question him. Respect for a pastor does not require silence in the face of apparent double standards. Public figures who comment on national issues should expect their past statements to be measured against their present ones.

Reducing every criticism to "Obidients are attacking him" is also misleading. Many of those questioning Pastor Adeboye are not doing so because of Peter Obi. They are doing so because they expect consistency from someone who has long been regarded as a moral voice in Nigeria.
This is not about tribe. It is not about religion. It is about credibility. If the standards used to judge former presidents are abandoned when the current president is involved, then people are justified in pointing out the inconsistency.

Nobody is above criticism, whether politician or pastor. The same courage required to speak against yesterday's government should exist today. Otherwise, people will inevitably conclude that the message changes depending on who occupies Aso Rock.
That is the real issue. Not ethnicity. Not political affiliation. Consistency.

Nobody is saying Pastor Adeboye is above criticism. He is not. If anyone disagrees with his statement on Tinubu and insecurity, they are free to disagree.

But let us not replace facts with vague memory.

You said Adeboye was “far more vocal” against previous governments. Fine. Bring the exact quote, date and context. The most popular claim being circulated — that Adeboye protested against Goodluck Jonathan — has been fact-checked repeatedly and found false. The viral protest photo was from a 2020 prayer walk under Buhari, not Jonathan.

In fact, public records show that Jonathan visited the RCCG camp in 2015, knelt for prayers, and Adeboye prayed for peaceful elections. Reports also showed Jonathan meeting Obasanjo in Abeokuta in the presence of Adeboye and Bishop Oyedepo. So where exactly is this story that Adeboye treated Jonathan with fire and Tinubu with perfume?

Even under Buhari, Adeboye’s 2020 walk was a prayer walk against killings and insecurity, not a partisan campaign rally. And even now under Tinubu, Adeboye did not say Nigeria is safe. He said insecurity has worsened, urged security chiefs to move fast, and called for terrorists and their sponsors to be dealt with. His controversial point was that the President is not expected to personally wear khaki and go to the battlefield.

You can disagree with that. I may even agree that a Commander-in-Chief must ultimately be judged by results, not instructions. But that is different from calling him a tribal hypocrite or pretending he never criticised insecurity under this government.

The real problem is that some people want Adeboye to use their exact political language. If he prays, they say he is silent. If he advises, they say he is soft. If he does not insult Tinubu, they say he is compromised.

Criticism is fair. Abuse is not.

So let us discuss consistency with evidence, not with rumours, recycled photos and emotional suspicion.

DatNiggaDaz:


It is people like you work and get paid by a faaaake certttifficcate hollldderr that has made the country be what it is. You are lying and no one is attacking the Pastor

Since you data boiz are desperately searching for acknowledgement where your messiah has failed in every spheres of life you jump all lies and support it.

Pastor Adeboye knows himself that he is lying. You know that Pastor Adeboye is lying just as you lie always fir your messiah the faaaake certttifficcate hollldderr. The money you get from your faaake guru str*tegist to push the lies further has exposed you as those who lie about every failures of the roasted electricity fraud

No öne is surprised that you are jumping on the lies of Christian to defend the incompetence and cluelessness of the fraud you snatched and grabbed for
No one is attacking Adeboye. He is being called for defending what he castigated under our son GEJ. That is hypocrisy Mr data.

Thank you for proving the article correct with your own mouth.

You say “no one is attacking Pastor Adeboye,” then in the same breath call him a liar, accuse him of hypocrisy, and drag everybody into “fake certificate,” “data boys,” “snatch and grab,” “fraud,” and other recycled mindless street slogans.

If this is not attack, then what exactly do you call it — praise and worship?

This is the Obidient style I was talking about: when argument is required, abuse arrives first.

Let us separate the issues.

Pastor Adeboye did not say Nigeria is secure. He admitted insecurity has worsened. He spoke about terrorism, kidnapping, and the spread of insecurity. He also said security chiefs should be given clear orders and that sponsors of terrorism should be dealt with. The part you people hate is that he said the President cannot personally wear khaki and go to the battlefield.

You can disagree with that. You can say Tinubu must take full responsibility because he is Commander-in-Chief. That is a valid argument.

But instead of making that argument cleanly, you people went into ethnic labelling, personal abuse and religious disrespect.

On your claim that Adeboye castigated Jonathan but now defends Tinubu, I challenge you: bring the exact quote, date and context.

Because the popular evidence people keep circulating is false. That viral photo claiming Adeboye protested against Jonathan has been fact-checked repeatedly. It was not from Jonathan’s era; it was from a 2020 peace walk under Buhari.

In fact, what the public record shows is almost the opposite. Jonathan visited the RCCG camp in 2015 and knelt for prayers. Adeboye prayed for peaceful elections. Around the same period, Jonathan also met Obasanjo in Abeokuta in the presence of Adeboye and Bishop Oyedepo, a meeting widely reported as part of efforts to calm political tensions before the election.

So where exactly is this story that Adeboye “castigated” Jonathan?

This is the usual pattern: invent history, circulate it emotionally, then use it to justify abuse today.

You can disagree with Adeboye’s latest position. That is your right. You can say Tinubu must take more responsibility for insecurity. That is a valid argument. But do not rewrite history to excuse your movement’s standard behaviour of insulting anyone who refuses to echo your anger.

If Adeboye supported or prayed for Jonathan, he was a man of God. If he says something that does not condemn Tinubu in your preferred language, he suddenly becomes a tribal hypocrite.

That is not principle.

That is Obidient intolerance looking for a Bible verse.

Even if he criticised Jonathan before, that does not automatically mean every present statement must be anti-Tinubu to prove consistency. Circumstances, wording and context matter.

And please, enough of this “paid” nonsense. If my argument is false, rebut it. If I lied about Adeboye’s statement, show the lie. If Tinubu’s certificate is your issue, open that thread. Do not run from the topic and hide inside your usual insult basket.

The issue here is simple: can you disagree with a respected religious leader without abusing him?

So far, your answer is no.

Obidients and the Politics of Noise: Damned If You Reply, Damned If You Don’t

One funny thing about some Obidients is that they do not really want debate. They want performance.

When you do not respond to their noise, they say you have run away. They declare victory, beat imaginary drums, and announce that silence means defeat.

When you respond to their noise, they say you are obsessed with Obi. They ask why you keep mentioning him. They accuse you of being paid, jobless, bitter or threatened.

So what exactly do they want?

If you ignore them, you are afraid. If you answer them, you are obsessed. If you quote data, you are a “data boy.” If you write long, you used AI. If you write short, you have no substance. If you criticise Obi, you are APC. If you criticise Tinubu but still reject Obi, you are confused.

This is not debate. This is political gymnastics by people allergic to scrutiny.

The truth is simple: they want the freedom to attack everybody, but they do not want anybody to examine their own candidate, movement, contradictions or strategy.

But politics does not work that way. If you bring Obi into the national conversation as a messiah, others have the right to examine him like a candidate. If you shout structure is useless, others have the right to ask how you intend to win. If you claim moral superiority, others have the right to test your conduct.

So no, I will not be bullied into silence by noise merchants.

When necessary, I will respond. When unnecessary, I will ignore.

Either way, their noise is not my compass.

genkins:
Leave matter.. How can u wake up and carry Obi on your head if u aren't paid... As u no get job that's why u can post this long.. Who does that for fun? If u aren't paid, then u must be v S**pid.. Lol

Thank you for proving my point better than I could have done.

The thread asked for evidence. Your response is: “you are paid,” “you have no job,” and “you must be stupid.” That is not a rebuttal; that is Obidient heritage in full display — insult first, logic later, evidence never.

This is why many people no longer take your movement seriously. Once you cannot answer the argument, you manufacture a paymaster. If someone criticises Obi, he is paid. If someone fact-checks Obi, he is sponsored. If someone asks for structure, he is APC. If someone refuses to kneel before your political idol, he must be collecting dollars.

Poverty of argument is not cured by abundance of insult.

If the post is wrong, show where. If Obi has evidence that anyone is trying to stop him from running, present it. If the point about weak structure is false, rebut it. But if all you have is “you are paid,” then you have already lost the debate.

And for your information, some people write because they can think. I know that may sound strange in a camp where abuse is often mistaken for intelligence.

So please, leave my imaginary salary and face the issue. Who is stopping Obi from running, and where is the evidence?

Ofunaofu:
You're missing the point.

Can you remind us how many off-cycle governorship elections the opposition won before the 2015 presidential election, when the APC went on to defeat the PDP? Or are we pretending those elections made a change of government impossible?

The real issue isn't Ekiti or Enugu North. It's that Nigerians are now up against an incumbent whose administration has inflicted unprecedented levels of hardship, hunger, and insecurity. That's what voters will ultimately judge.

Interestingly, you Tinubu supporters spend more time talking about isolated off-cycle elections than campaigning on his record over the past three years. If that record were as convincing as you suggest, surely it would be the centerpiece of the campaign rather than a list of by-election or off-cycle victories.

The facts staring Nigerians in the face aren't just election results, they're the cost of living, fuel pump prices, gas prices, food prices, jobs, and security. Nigerians know that they have been worst off and will be unwilling to walk this path for another four years. Those are the realities that will shape the next presidential election.

Your 2015 comparison actually strengthens my point.

Before 2015, the opposition did not win every off-cycle governorship election. PDP won Ekiti in 2014, APC retained Osun in 2014, APGA retained Anambra in 2013, LP retained Ondo in 2012, and ACN retained Edo in 2012. So nobody is saying off-cycle elections alone decide presidential elections.

But 2015 was not “anger alone.” APC came with a serious structure: ACN, CPC, ANPP and others merged; governors aligned; defectors moved; the North consolidated; the South-West delivered; and the opposition presented a united national machine. That is why Buhari defeated Jonathan. It was not a Twitter revolution.

That is the difference.

Today, the opposition is fragmented. Labour is divided. ADC is struggling for clarity. NNPP is bleeding structure in Kano. PDP has lost governors and direction. Yet some people think hardship alone will automatically become Obi votes. That is not politics; that is wishful thinking.

Yes, Nigerians are suffering. Food prices, fuel prices, jobs and security will matter in 2027. Nobody is denying that. But elections are not decided only by pain. They are decided by who converts public pain into organised votes.

That is why off-cycle elections, bye-elections and defections matter. They show direction of structure on ground. APC winning 12 of 16 seats in the 2025 bye-elections is not everything, but it is not nothing. It shows organisation. It shows mobilisation. It shows where politicians with local machinery are moving.

You say Tinubu supporters should campaign on his record. Fine. The record includes painful reforms: subsidy removal, FX reform, tax reform, local government autonomy, student loans, infrastructure push and state police movement. Imperfect? Yes. Painful? Yes. But it is a record.

The opposition also has a record: quarrels, defections, weak structure, coalition confusion and slogans.

So the real question is not whether Nigerians are angry. Many are.

The question is: who has the structure to harvest that anger?

In 2015, APC had it.

In 2027, does Obi?

oyichi:
Tinubu knows that if he allows Peter obi to run in this election, he will lose, the kind of vote that he and kwankwaso will get is going to be too overwhelming to the extent that it will be impossible to rig

This is Obidient delusion of grandeur at industrial scale.

Peter Obi ran in 2023. Nobody stopped him. He came third. Kwankwaso also ran. He came fourth. Together, they still did not win.

Now you are assuming that because two candidates who lost separately may stand near each other politically, northern voters, South-West voters, South-South voters and Middle Belt voters will suddenly line up in one miraculous electoral convoy. That is not analysis; that is political daydreaming with confidence.

Kwankwaso’s 2023 vote was overwhelmingly Kano-based. Outside Kano, his northern pull was limited. So the idea that he will magically deliver the North to an Obi-led ticket ignores both history and arithmetic.

Tinubu is not afraid of Obi running. What APC fears, like any serious party, is a disciplined opposition with structure, unity, funding, polling-unit agents, national spread and a credible path to 25% across states.

What Obidients are offering so far is noise, entitlement and prophecy.

Election is not won by saying “it will be too overwhelming to rig.” It is won by numbers, structure and coalition.

In 2023, the same people said Obi would win by a landslide.

After the election, landslide became lawsuit.

Please, let us respect arithmetic.

Ofunaofu:
Which is more potent: a protest vote against an outgoing destroyer, or a far more furious and fierce protest, indeed, a revolution at the ballot box, against the current destroyer, who has inflicted a level of hardship, hunger, and insecurity never before witnessed in this country's history?

This “furious revolution at the ballot box” sounds sweet until you test it against real political movement on ground.

In Kano, the people who actually control structure have not been behaving like they believe Tinubu is a “destroyer.” Governor Abba Yusuf left NNPP in January 2026, and reports say he moved with 21 Kano Assembly members, 8 House of Representatives members and all 44 local government chairmen. That is not a small cough. That is the political engine room changing address.

Even before that, the 2025 bye-elections showed that Kano was not locked in one direction. APC won Ghari/Tsanyawa with 31,472 votes against NNPP’s 27,931, while NNPP won Bagwai/Shanono with 16,198 against APC’s 5,347. In other words, Kano voters are competitive and practical, not trapped inside your “destroyer” fantasy.

So where is this revolution? On Nairaland? On X? In WhatsApp groups?

If Kano people truly bought the “Tinubu the destroyer” narrative the way Obidients preach it, why is the sitting governor moving toward APC? Why are lawmakers moving? Why are federal representatives moving? Why are local government chairmen moving? Why is the structure shifting?

You can call hardship. That is fair. Nigerians are feeling pain. But hardship does not automatically translate into an Obi revolution. Politics is not anger alone; it is structure, trust, local interest, ethnic arithmetic, coalition, and candidate acceptability.

The same people who said Kwankwaso will deliver the North now ignore that Kwankwaso’s own Kano structure is bleeding into APC.

So please, let us leave poetry. Show us the northern structure for this Obi revolution.

Because from what we are seeing, the revolution is loud online, but the politicians with polling-unit machinery are quietly entering another bus.

CodeTemplar:
Just like Lagos was not the SW in 2023.

This is deflection, not rebuttal.

“Lagos was not the South-West in 2023” does not answer the argument that Kano is not the North.

In fact, you have simply repeated my point in another form: one state is not the same thing as an entire region.

The discussion is not about whether Lagos represents the South-West. It does not. The discussion is about the claim that Kwankwaso will “deliver the North” for Obi.

That claim collapses under arithmetic.

Kwankwaso got almost one million votes in Kano, but outside Kano his northern numbers were very thin. So the burden is on you to explain how a man who could not deliver most of the North for himself as presidential candidate will suddenly deliver the same North for Peter Obi as running mate.

Bringing Lagos into it is like being asked why your roof is leaking and replying that your neighbour’s fence is short.

If your point is that Obi won Lagos in 2023 ( by less than 10,000 votes) but did not win the South-West, then thank you — you have just strengthened my argument. A big performance in one strategic state does not mean control of a whole geopolitical zone.

Exactly.

Kano is important. Lagos is important. But Kano is not the North, just as Lagos is not the South-West.

So please, address the actual point: where are the northern votes Kwankwaso delivered outside Kano?

The recent attacks on Pastor Enoch Adeboye over his comments on insecurity and President Tinubu reveal something troubling about the Obidient movement: many of them do not merely disagree; they desecrate.

Pastor Adeboye’s point was not that Nigeria is secure. In fact, he admitted that insecurity has worsened and that terrorism and kidnapping have spread from the North into parts of the South. He also urged that security chiefs be given strict marching orders and that sponsors of terrorism should be dealt with. His only offence was saying that once a Commander-in-Chief gives instructions to security agencies, he should not be expected to personally wear khaki and go to the battlefield.

Reasonable people can debate that position. They can say the President must do more. They can argue that command responsibility must be measured by results, not merely by instructions. That is fair.

But what did some Obidients do? As usual, they entered abuse mode. Suddenly, Adeboye became the enemy. A man they once quoted when it suited them became useless because he did not echo their preferred political anger.

Worse still, some now accuse him of ethnic bias, suggesting that he is defending Tinubu simply because Tinubu is Yoruba. This is one of the oldest tricks in Nigerian politics: when you cannot answer a man’s argument, explain his ancestry.

Curiously, this accusation is never applied evenly. If a Yoruba criticises Tinubu, he is praised as courageous and objective. If another Yoruba supports Tinubu, he is dismissed as tribalistic. If a Yoruba elder supports Peter Obi, he is celebrated as detribalised and enlightened. But if a Yoruba pastor says something that does not condemn Tinubu in the language Obidients prefer, he is suddenly an ethnic apologist.

That is intellectual dishonesty.

People support or defend political positions for many reasons: conviction, ideology, policy preference, institutional understanding, personal experience, or yes, sometimes ethnicity. But it is lazy and dishonest to assume tribal motive only when the opinion favours the candidate you oppose.

The real question is not whether Tinubu is Yoruba. The real question is whether Adeboye’s argument is right or wrong. If you disagree, answer the argument. Do not hide behind ethnicity because the facts are inconvenient.

This is the deeper problem. To many Obidients, every institution must bow to their politics: church leaders, traditional rulers, courts, media houses, INEC, security agencies, intellectuals, activists — everybody must either worship at the altar of Obi or be insulted.

That is not democratic engagement. That is political intolerance wearing activism as perfume.

No society grows when every disagreement becomes a licence for abuse. You can disagree with Adeboye without insulting his age, his faith, his office, his ethnicity, or millions who respect him. But restraint is difficult for people who treat politics like a crusade.

The tragedy is that this behaviour keeps pushing decent people away from their cause. They claim to want a new Nigeria, but they attack every voice that refuses to sing from their hymn book.

If Pastor Adeboye must be corrected, correct him with argument.

But if your first response is abuse and ethnic labelling, then the problem is no longer Adeboye’s statement.

The problem is your intolerance.

For when a man cannot answer your argument, he often settles for explaining your tribe. And when facts become inconvenient, ethnicity becomes the emergency exit.

In response to thread, Where are the obidients megaphones of 2023,a n Obidient recently made the familiar claim that “all those you mentioned won’t bring 10 percent of the votes Kwankwaso would bring in the North.”

It sounds powerful until you place it beside the 2023 election results. Then the myth begins to collapse.

So let us leave emotion and enter arithmetic.

Is Kwankwaso a northern giant, or is he mainly a Kano colossus being mistaken for the whole North?

This begs the question: which North are we talking about — Kano North or Northern Nigeria?

In the 2023 presidential election, Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso scored 1,496,687 votes nationally. But here is the uncomfortable truth: 997,279 of those votes came from Kano alone. That means roughly two-thirds of his total national vote came from one state. Kwankwaso won Kano with almost one million votes.

Now look beyond Kano.

Across the entire North-West, Kwankwaso scored 1,268,250 votes. Remove Kano’s 997,279, and he got only about 270,971 votes from the remaining six North-West states combined: Kaduna, Katsina, Jigawa, Kebbi, Sokoto and Zamfara.

In the North-East, he scored only 126,343 votes. In the North-Central, including FCT, he scored only 60,056 votes.

So where exactly is this mythical “Kwankwaso will deliver the North” coming from?

Kwankwaso has value, no doubt. He has a strong Kano base. He has name recognition. He has Kwankwasiyya structure. But Kano strength is not the same thing as Northern conquest.

And here is the harder political question: if Kwankwaso, a Hausa/Fulani northern Muslim, could not win serious votes across most of the North while heading his own presidential ticket, how will he suddenly convince those same northern voters to troop out massively for a ticket headed by Peter Obi, a South-East Christian politician?

That is not ethnic hatred. That is electoral realism.

Historically, South-East presidential candidates have struggled to gain broad northern acceptance at presidential level. You may dislike that reality. You may call it unfair. You may blame civil-war memory, religious suspicion, elite propaganda, political mistrust or weak coalition-building. But serious politics begins by recognising voting patterns, not romanticising them.

Kwankwaso could not deliver Katsina. He could not deliver Kaduna. He could not deliver Sokoto. He could not deliver Zamfara. He could not deliver the North-East. He could not deliver the North-Central. But suddenly, as Obi’s number two, he will unlock the North like an ATM card?

Politics is not abracadabra.

A serious coalition counts votes. A fantasy coalition counts vibes.

So yes, Kwankwaso may help Obi in Kano. But anyone saying he will “deliver the North” is selling political suya without meat.

Kano is important. Kano is powerful. But Kano is not the North.

HIGHESTPOPORI:
All those you mentioned won't bring 10percent of the votes kwankwanso would bring in the North

My brother, when people say “Kwankwaso will bring the North,” I always ask: which North exactly — Kano North or Northern Nigeria?

Let us check the 2023 numbers.

Kwankwaso scored1,496,687 votes nationally. Out of that, 997,279 votes came from Kano alone. That means roughly two-thirds of his entire national vote came from one state. Premium Times reported that he won Kano with almost one million votes.

Across the entire North-West, Kwankwaso got 1,268,250 votes. Remove Kano’s 997,279, and he got only about 270,971 votes from the remaining six North-West states combined: Kaduna, Katsina, Jigawa, Kebbi, Sokoto and Zamfara. Across the North-East, he got only 126,343 votes. Across the North-Central, including FCT, he got only 60,056 votes.

So let us stop this myth that Kwankwaso controls the North. The data says he controls a powerful Kano base, not the entire North.

And that is where the political logic becomes brutal: if Kwankwaso, a major northern Muslim politician, heading his own presidential ticket, could not win serious votes across most of the North outside Kano, how exactly will he convince those same northern voters to massively support a ticket headed by Peter Obi?

That is not insult. That is arithmetic.

Kwankwaso could not deliver Katsina. He could not deliver Kaduna. He could not deliver Sokoto. He could not deliver Zamfara. He could not deliver the North-East. He could not deliver the North-Central. But suddenly, when he becomes number two to Obi, he will magically unlock the North?

Politics is not abracadabra.

If Kwankwaso is on the ballot as presidential candidate and most of the North still rejects him outside Kano, his value as a vice-presidential vote magnet must be examined, not worshipped.

So yes, Kwankwaso has value. He has Kano structure. He has name recognition. He has a movement. But please do not inflate Kano strength into Northern conquest.

Finally , Kwankwaso could not deliver the wider North for himself as a northern Muslim presidential candidate. So the idea that he will suddenly deliver the wider North for an Obi-led ticket ignores both arithmetic and history.

Northern voters have historically been reluctant to back South-East presidential candidates at scale. You may dislike that reality, but serious politics begins by recognising reality, not romanticising it.

ogwuche4u:
Are you that daft or your sense of reasoning has been hijacked?
How is NELFUND an achievement? In trying to sound wise, you ended up making an outright fool of yourself.
I hate you honestly. You disgust me.

Your “I hate you, you disgust me” line is not the devastating argument you think it is. It only shows that the discussion has left economics and entered emotional biology.

Now to NELFUND.

You may dislike Tinubu, but pretending NELFUND is not an achievement is dishonest. A student loan system that gives many young Nigerians access to tertiary education funding is a policy achievement. You can question implementation. You can ask whether disbursement is fast enough. You can ask whether repayment terms are sustainable. You can even argue that grants would be better than loans. Those are valid criticisms.

But to say it is not an achievement at all is unserious.

For decades, many Nigerians have been unable to enter or remain in school because their parents could not pay fees. If a government creates a structured national education-financing scheme to reduce that barrier, only political bitterness will make someone dismiss it completely.

The problem is that once Tinubu is attached to anything, some of you obidients lose the ability to judge it independently. If another politician introduced NELFUND, you would call it visionary. Because Tinubu did it, it suddenly becomes foolishness.

That is not reasoning. That is political allergy.

So please, keep your disgust. It is your constitutional right to be emotionally inconvenienced by facts.

But hatred is not a counterargument. If you believe NELFUND is useless, explain why access to education finance is bad policy. Until then, your anger is merely noise with saliva.

tpain121:
You do know you don’t need this long rubbish you wrote if these achievements are real ?

You go explain Taya . No evidence.

That is exactly where you miss the point.

I am not writing long explanations because I am trying to convince you Obidients.
You, obidients , are not the target audience of my write-ups on Nairaland. Many of you are already locked inside political certainty. Once a person has decided that everything Tinubu does is evil and everything Obi says is scripture, evidence becomes useless.

My write-ups are for the undecided, the curious, the silent readers, the independent-minded, and those who still have the patience to weigh facts, context and alternative perspectives without turning every disagreement into warfare.

You say “if the achievements are real, you don’t need to explain.” That is funny. Lies travel in slogans; truth often needs explanation. Propaganda survives by shortening everything into abuse: “fraud,” “failure,” “nothing is happening.” But serious issues like subsidy reform, FX policy, credit to government, inflation trend, infrastructure funding, tax reform and budget execution cannot be reduced to street insults.

That is why people like you fear explanation. Explanation exposes lazy narratives. Explanation separates data from drama. Explanation shows that the economy is not perfect, Nigerians are suffering, but reforms are also producing early stabilisation signs.

You want me to stop explaining so you obidients one-line propaganda can stand unchallenged. Sorry, that will not happen.

I will always challenge obidients falsehood, exaggeration and selective outrage.

So no, I am not explaining “taya.” I am documenting the other side for people who still want to think.

You can keep shouting “no evidence.” The evidence is for readers, not for closed minds.

SeizeTheMemes:
You wrote this with AI didn't you? You can't even defend the corrupt government with your own brain. Disgraceful

This is the weakest escape route in modern debate: when you cannot answer the argument, accuse the grammar of being AI.

That is not a rebuttal. That is intellectual surrender with attitude.

If the figures are wrong, correct them. If the CBN classification is wrong, show it. If Net Credit to Government means “Tinubu printed ₦40 trillion and shared it,” prove it. If base money did not decline, bring your data. If private-sector credit is not still larger than government credit, show the table.

But shouting “AI” because a response has paragraphs, punctuation and logic is not analysis. It only means you are offended that the reply did not come in the usual format of abuse, emojis and economic illiteracy.

And let us even assume AI helped arrange the argument — so what? A calculator helps with maths; it does not make the answer wrong. A dictionary helps with spelling; it does not make the sentence false. The question is not whether a tool helped express the point. The question is whether the point is correct.

This is the fallacy: attacking the source instead of addressing the substance.

You called it “defending corrupt government,” but you still have not answered the core issue: your argument took one CBN figure and built a panic cathedral around it.

So please, leave my brain and face the data. My brain has done its part. I am still waiting for yours to report for duty.

The latest NDC statement has exposed one of the biggest contradictions in our opposition politics today.

When INEC takes a decision that favours them, they suddenly remember that INEC is professional.
When the judiciary gives them an order that benefits their political ambition, they suddenly remember that the courts are protectors of democracy.
When INEC registers NDC and other parties as directed by the court, they praise Professor Joash Amupitan for “professionalism.”

When INEC takes a position they like on ADC leadership, they call it institutional neutrality.

But let the same INEC take a decision they dislike, or let the same judiciary deliver a ruling that goes against them, and the music changes immediately.

Suddenly, it is Tinubu.

Suddenly, it is APC.

Suddenly, democracy is dying.

Suddenly, INEC is captured.

Suddenly, the judiciary has been compromised.

This is not democratic consistency. This is selective institutional respect.

A serious democrat does not praise institutions only when the outcome is favourable and insult them when the outcome is unfavourable.

If INEC is professional when it registers NDC, then you cannot automatically call INEC criminal when it obeys another court process that does not favour you
. If the judiciary is credible when it gives you relief, then you cannot automatically call the judiciary captured when another judge asks that all relevant parties be heard.

You cannot be clapping for the referee when he awards you a penalty and then accuse him of being bribed when he gives a foul against you.

That is not democracy. That is political entitlement.

Nobody is saying Nigerian institutions are perfect. INEC has its weaknesses. The judiciary has its problems. Security agencies have their imperfections. But if you truly believe in institutions, then your respect for them must not depend only on whether they are serving your immediate political interest.

The same people who say the courts are compromised still run to the courts for registration, recognition, injunctions, appeals and stay of execution.
. The same people who say INEC is captured still celebrate when INEC updates its portal in their favour.
The same people who accuse the system of being dead still expect the same system to validate their political existence.

So what exactly do they want?

Independent institutions, or institutions that behave like their campaign secretariat?

The NDC statement says all leaders must preserve the neutrality of institutions. Very good. But neutrality does not mean institutions must always rule in your favour. Neutrality means you accept process, challenge unfavourable decisions through lawful means, and stop poisoning the minds of your supporters with conspiracy every time the outcome does not massage your ego.

This is the childish formula we must reject:

If they win in court, democracy has survived.
If they lose in court, Tinubu did it.
If INEC favours them, INEC is professional.
If INEC does not favour them, INEC is compromised.

This is nothing but reckless emotional blackmail.

Ofunaofu:
The Independent National Electoral Commission has uploaded the name of Peter Obi onto its portal as the presidential candidate for the Nigeria Democratic Congress, despite a recent court ruling that deregistered the political party.

The development follows a judgment by Justice Isa H. Dashen of the Federal High Court in Lokoja, which set aside a previous order compelling the commission to register the party.

POLITICS NIGERIA reports that the court nullified the registration after the Peace Movement Party claimed exclusive ownership of the logo used by the organization, arguing it was unlawfully excluded from the original lawsuit.

In an update posted on Monday night on his social media handles, the National Leader of the party, Seriake Dickson, announced that an appeal and an application for a stay of execution have already been filed and served to the electoral body. Dickson maintained that the political platform remains validly registered and has successfully concluded its primary elections, which were monitored by the commission.

He explained that both his name and that of Obi—who was recently ratified alongside Rabiu Kwankwaso as the party’s flagbearers for the 2027 general elections—are already on the portal, while the vice-presidential candidate’s documentation will be finalized shortly.
The party leader urged members and aspirants not to panic, emphasizing that there is still ample time under the electoral timetable to upload the names of National Assembly, governorship, and state assembly candidates.

He also commended the commission, led by Professor Joash Amupitan, for its professionalism and adherence to court directives in past administrative matters, urging the institution to maintain its neutrality.

“Today, the NDC has filed an appeal against the ruling as well as a stay of execution/injunction, which has been served with a covering letter to the INEC chairman and his team to do what is right according to law and what is legally sensible,” Dickson said.

He further assured supporters of the party’s resilience.

“The Nigeria Democratic Congress has come to stay and remains a duly registered party in Nigeria which has participated in all the political processes so far. My name and that of the Presidential Candidate have been uploaded to the INEC portal, while that of the Vice Presidential Candidate will be done tomorrow upon completion of the deposition.”

The full statement reads:Nigeria travel guides

Today, the NDC has filed an appeal against the ruling as well as a stay of execution/injunction, which has been served with a covering letter to the INEC chairman and his team to do what is right according to law and what is legally sensible.

The Nigeria Democratic Congress has come to stay and remains a duly registered party in Nigeria which has participated in all the political processes so far, and, as I said yesterday, nomination processes have already been concluded and, in the eyes of the law, candidates have already emerged from the party for all offices across the country in primaries observed, monitored and recorded by INEC.

What is left is the administrative process of submitting the names to INEC, and we have been granted access to the portal to upload our qualified candidates.

My name and that of the Presidential Candidate have been uploaded to the INEC portal, while that of the Vice Presidential Candidate will be done tomorrow upon completion of the deposition. The process is also ongoing for other candidates.

In accordance with the INEC timetable, which we have religiously abided by, we have between now and the 11th of next month to upload all National Assembly candidates, while those of governors and State Houses of Assembly will end on the 17th of July. So there is enough time for all candidates’ names to be submitted to INEC and there is no reason for anyone to panic.

As National Leader, I must also thank all aspirants and those who indicated interest for various offices. As they know, only one person can emerge victorious in primaries, no matter how well conducted. The processes were not perfect, but we have tried to resolve these differences within this short period, for a new party dealing with such a high volume of aspirants in a direct primary situation managed by stakeholders in every state and by party leaders.

The reconciliation processes have started and we expect them to reach everyone, to complement what I and the leadership have continued to do. And we assure them that all those who expressed interest will be carried along in the party’s campaigns, committees and structures, because they constitute the grassroots strength and the backbone of our party.

Congratulations to all NDC candidates, members and all Nigerians and lovers of democracy.

Our multi-party democracy must not die. We will not allow desperados and mercenaries parading as political leaders to destroy our hard-earned democracy.

We thank Nigerians for their solidarity, support and prayers.

We also thank INEC, led by Professor Joash Amupitan, for their professionalism so far, and we expect them to continue on this path, and they will have the understanding of us all.

While we are thanking him for his actions in registering the NDC and two other parties as directed by the court, I also note his stance in filing an affidavit in opposition to the suit to deregister some opposition parties, and in reversing the non-recognition of the chairmanship of David Mark of the ADC as directed by the court.

Despite the imperfections of our institutions, INEC, the judiciary and security agencies, all leaders must be united to preserve the neutrality of the institutions that protect our democracy and our nation’s integrity.

Having filed and served our appeal and the accompanying applications, the ball is now in the court of the judiciary, and we expect the judiciary to do what is right under the law.

Long live the NDC.
Long live Nigerian democracy.
HSD

https://politicsnigeria.com/2026/06/30/breaking-peter-obis-name-uploaded-as-inec-grants-ndc-access-to-portal/

When INEC takes a decision that favours them, INEC is suddenly “professional.” When INEC obeys a court order that benefits them, democracy is alive. When the judiciary gives them relief, the court is doing what is right under the law.

But the moment INEC or the court takes a decision that does not favour them, the story changes immediately: “Tinubu is behind it.” “APC is afraid.” “Democracy is under attack.” “Institutions have been captured.”

So which one is it?

Is INEC professional only when it registers NDC?

Is the judiciary independent only when it gives them a favourable order?

from what we are seeing, their definition of democracy is simple:

Democracy is when they get what they want.
Dictatorship is when the law goes against them.

In 2023, the Obidient movement had megaphones everywhere. They were loud, dramatic, sanctimonious and absolutely certain that Peter Obi was the last bus stop of Nigerian redemption.

Every studio had one apostle. Every timeline had one evangelist. Every criticism of Obi was treated like blasphemy against a political messiah.

But where are many of those megaphones today?

Kenneth Okonkwo, once one of Obi’s loudest defenders, has since dumped Labour, parted ways with Obi, joined the ADC orbit, and now warns that a vote for Obi may favour Tinubu. Yesterday’s gospel singer has become today’s fact-checker of the choir.

Valentine Ozigbo, once paraded as a major Obi ally, has moved from Labour to APC. Doyin Okupe, the original campaign DG, left Labour and later said Obi never really believed in Labour’s principles. Akin Osuntokun, who replaced Okupe as campaign DG, also left Labour for ADC, citing internal saboteurs. Even Datti Baba-Ahmed, Obi’s own 2023 running mate, has criticised Obi’s exit from Labour and refused to follow him like political hand luggage.

Then there is[b] Babachir Lawal,[/b] one of the northern voices who helped market Obi in 2023, now saying Obi’s heart was never truly in ADC.

So what happened?

The answer is simple: some of them have seen the counterfeit up close and quietly moved on. The wrapper looked fine from a distance, but the seams began to tear under pressure. The movement that claimed to be a revolution could not manage its own party. The candidate who was sold as structure began migrating from platform to platform. The choir that sang “Go and Verify” started verifying with their legs.

This is the tragedy of personality politics. It burns bright, trends loudly, insults generously, but struggles to survive contact with reality.

In 2023, Obi had megaphones. By 2027, many of them have become missing microphones, broken speakers or rented amplifiers now playing for another band.

Gone with the wind? No. Gone with the illusion.

genkins:
They are not idiots. They know what they are doing. They are well paid,some of them in dollars. The poster is also well paid. Take note.

This is the usual escape route when argument fails.

Instead of answering the issues raised, you have now moved to “they are paid,” “some are paid in dollars,” and “the poster is also well paid.”

This just the normal Obidient habit of inventing imaginary paymasters whenever someone refuses to join the choir?

This is exactly the poverty of debate I keep talking about. You people do not engage arguments; you assign motives. If someone asks for evidence, he is paid. If someone questions Obi, he is sponsored. If someone exposes weak strategy, he is working for APC. If someone refuses to treat Obi as a political saint, he must be collecting dollars.

The thread raised a simple point: if Peter Obi believes forces are trying to keep him off the ballot, let him present evidence and pursue the matter properly. Instead of addressing that, you have brought payment conspiracy.

Answer the argument, not the imaginary salary of the poster.

chidiokay:
You can spine the narrative with all manners of gaskighting or rhetorics buh yorubas adage o jor g té ko jor gan té o fii ese meji tiroro

1,2,3,4 is tew much to be branded as " coincidence" ..no matter the english in dictionary you wan use explain

Since OBi began is journey to LP ... we saw how lamidi apapa fought to distabilize that party in 2022, thank god Buhari refrain in it
OBi left LP .. since LP as bring peaceful with no directon, they have now become endorsement group is that a promotion or demotion

OBi ran to ADC, a party that clearly have leader ...All hell went loose, eberyday one legal battle or another infact ADC had over 10 cases aginst them plus deregister the party
Apc sycophant argued obi atiku dem stole the ADC, paid the wrong person, Nafiu gombe is legitimate heir .. why will they sideline the heir apparent

OBi jump out agin, ran to a fresh party , All fact indicated no pending law suit or grievance no fraud buying .... Suddenly suddenly no one saw it PMP thst does not exist anywhere in paper got a Judgement to deregister NDC for something as a LOGO just the peace sign pere
A court deregister political party that as done convention, have incumbent aspirants for a Logo

Now this is the biggiest joke of All ... PMP have no evidence to registration or trademark of any logo in Nigera system

How in the world can you claim intellectual theft. .... with no trademark, copyright or patent on it , are we kids

Should we talk about Justice lifu that deregister all the formidable party in 2026 .. that one is still hanging

Then some sit like a professor from harvard, tell us they are All natural incidents, just coincidence

Do you know how many court cases that is pending against ADC alone, then NDC have two cases to terminate them 6 month to election, even if you defect inec window have close to anything

Then someone is telling me i am delusional .. it is natural that we are going into an election nd the only party that is sure to be on the ballot is APC except endorse group calin themselves party

As it stand Now only APC can win an election and court can't dash their win, as at when ADC did there convention inec deregister them ... these are all bobby traps post election outcome, APc will surely use incase they lose ..we are not children naw

You wrote plenty emotion, but emotion cannot replace evidence.

Let us take your points one after the other.

1. “Since Obi joined LP, Lamidi Apapa fought to destabilise the party.”

That is not proof that “they” are after Obi. That is proof that Labour Party had weak internal structure, factional leadership crisis and poor conflict management. A party that wants to rule Nigeria must first prove it can organise itself. You cannot convert every internal party quarrel into federal persecution.

2. “Obi left LP and LP became an endorsement group.”

Exactly. That even proves my point more than yours. If a political movement collapses into confusion once one man leaves, then what you built was not a party structure. It was a personality fan club. Serious parties outlive personalities. Weak movements orbit around one man.

3. “Obi went to ADC and legal battles started.”

ADC already had its own internal contradictions, leadership contestations and coalition mistrust. Obi did not enter a clean laboratory; he entered Nigerian opposition politics, where factions, ambition and legal disputes are normal. If you enter a troubled house and the roof starts leaking, you cannot automatically say your enemies sent the rain.

4. “ADC had many cases against them.”

Court cases are not proof of APC conspiracy. They may be genuine, frivolous, politically motivated, or opportunistic. That is why we have appeals. The question is simple: what is the evidence linking APC directly to all these cases? Not suspicion. Not vibes. Not “1,2,3,4 is too much.” Evidence.

5. “Obi moved to NDC and suddenly NDC was attacked.”

Again, that is correlation, not proof. The NDC matter is a legal dispute over the process that led to its recognition/registration. If the court says relevant parties were not heard before an earlier judgment, the proper answer is appeal and legal argument, not shouting “they are afraid of Obi.”

6. “PMP has no trademark, copyright or patent.”

That may be a valid legal argument for NDC to raise in court. But Nairaland outrage is not a court process. If PMP has no legal basis, NDC should crush them on appeal with documents. That is how serious politics works. You don’t win registration disputes with emotional grammar; you win with filings, evidence and superior legal argument.

7. “Justice Lifu deregistered formidable parties.”

If the judgment is wrong, appeal it. If the law was misapplied, challenge it. If INEC acted wrongly, sue INEC. But you cannot claim to believe in democracy only when the court favours your candidate and then dismiss the entire judiciary when the ruling is inconvenient.

8. “Only APC is sure to be on the ballot.”

That is exaggeration. Other parties exist. The real problem is that many opposition politicians are moving from platform to platform like tenants running away from leaking roofs without asking why every house they enter has no foundation. APC is not winning merely because of magic. APC has structure, incumbency, spread, discipline and legal preparedness. The opposition keeps confusing noise for organisation.

9. “These are booby traps in case APC loses.”

Then let Obi and his team stop walking into every trap barefooted. A man who wants to lead Nigeria should understand political risk, legal risk, party risk and institutional risk. If your entire presidential ambition depends on unstable platforms, factional parties and emergency coalitions, then maybe the problem is not only your enemy. Maybe the problem is your strategy.

10. The main issue

Nobody is saying Nigerian politics is innocent. Nobody is saying politicians do not use courts, factions and technicalities. But a serious candidate does not build his campaign on perpetual victimhood. He builds structure, secures a stable platform, prepares legally, negotiates politically and gives Nigerians confidence that he is ready for power.

The question remains simple:

Where is the hard evidence that APC is behind every crisis in LP, ADC and NDC?

Until that evidence is produced, what you have is not analysis. It is political superstition dressed in big emotion.

Obi’s supporters must decide whether they are building a serious national alternative or a travelling persecution ministry where every setback becomes “they are afraid of us.”

Nigeria needs a candidate who can survive the field, not one whose supporters explain every failure with invisible enemies.

izombie:
They went for ADC while he was there. He left and joined NDC which was a party going nowhere and suddenly they're going after NDC because of PO. They have searched for what to use to discredit PO with but found nothing.
The 2 mofos above me na id11otss

This is exactly the problem with the politics of emotional conspiracy.

You said “they went for ADC while he was there.” He left ADC/NDC coalition politics amid internal conflicts, mistrust and factional struggles. That is not proof of persecution; that is proof that opposition politics in Nigeria is still suffering from indiscipline, ego, weak structure and poor coalition management.

You said “they are going after NDC because of PO.” Again, where is the evidence? The latest issue around NDC is a court matter involving the registration status of the party. If a court reverses an earlier order concerning party registration, the correct response is appeal, legal argument and documentary proof — not shouting “they are afraid of Obi.” Courts do not become democratic only when they favour your candidate.

And this line that “they searched for what to use to discredit Obi but found nothing” is just fan-club poetry. Politics is not sainthood certification. Every serious candidate must submit himself to scrutiny: his records, his party choices, his coalition decisions, his policy consistency, his electoral mathematics and his temperament.

The issue is simple: if Obi believes there is a legal plot to remove him from the ballot, let him produce evidence and challenge it properly. But if every internal party crisis, every court ruling, every coalition failure and every political disagreement becomes “they are after Obi,” then we are no longer doing politics. We are doing religion.

A serious presidential candidate should build structure, secure a stable platform, win broad alliances and prepare for election. He should not keep feeding his base with permanent victimhood.

Nigeria needs a candidate with a roadmap, not a movement that converts every setback into persecution.

1vandragon:
O

A lot of the dingbat's vuvuzelas play around issues. They throw out figures and polices as if those are an end in themselves.

Ask them how the loans have made life better for the average Nigerian they can't.

Road projects are awarded to cronies without due process. Roads that are less than 10% completed are being presented as if they are 100% complete.

They keep shouting how crude oil has been mortgaged for loans, but are silent to say exactly how much crude is being used to repay loans.

They want Nigerians to embrace suffering and hardship, but splurge on themselves.

More Nigerians have been pushed into multidimensional poverty within 3 years than in the last 12 years combined. And someone says things are getting better. Better for who?

Any reform that does not better the lot of the common man cannot be a positive reform.

Any reform that the 'reformists' are not actively participating in and also feeling cannot be a good reform.

The problem is that you cannot see what you have already decided not to see.

Nobody is saying Nigerians are not suffering. Nobody is saying poverty is not high. Even the World Bank says poverty remains high and that macro gains must translate faster to households. But the same World Bank also acknowledges that the reforms since 2023 have helped stabilise the economy. You cannot quote only the pain and pretend the stabilisation does not exist.

You say roads are less than 10% completed-absolutely not true.
Over 2,700km of roads are under development. That is not “nothing”; it is work in progress.

On poverty, yes, the figures are painful. The World Bank estimated poverty rose to about 63% in 2025. But serious people ask why: inflation shock, weak productivity, inherited structural failure, subsidy distortion, low revenue, insecurity and poor social protection delivery.
Partisan people simply shout “Tinubu destroyed everything.”

You also keep asking about crude-backed repayment. Fine. Ask for repayment schedule and transparency. But that does not cancel the fact that the Afreximbank facility was publicly documented as a $3.3bn NNPC crude-prepayment facility, with initial disbursement disclosed.

The honest position is simple: Nigerians are still hurting, but there are signs of stabilisation — inflation easing, reserves rising, investor confidence improving, roads ongoing, and fiscal reforms taking shape.

Your position is also simple: if it is Tinubu, it must be fraud.

But any candidate who can do better than Tinubu must show me exactly how he will do better, not just shout that Tinubu has failed.

What will he do differently?

Will he reverse subsidy removal? If yes, where will he get the money to fund it?

Will he re-peg the naira artificially? If yes, how will he stop another FX backlog?

Will he reduce borrowing? Good. What spending will he cut? Salaries? Capital projects? Security? Debt service?

Will he fight insecurity? Fine. What is his position on state police, intelligence reform, border control, technology, local recruitment and forest policing?

Will he grow the economy? Excellent. What is his plan for power, manufacturing, exports, agriculture, mining, tax reform and investor confidence?

That is the alternative I am looking for — not anger, not insults, not “anybody but Tinubu.”

For now, I see Tinubu attempting painful structural reforms: subsidy removal, FX reform, tax reform, local government autonomy, student loans, infrastructure push, and now state police. Are they perfect? No. Are Nigerians still suffering? Yes. Must government do more? Absolutely.

But I will not abandon a difficult reform path simply because someone offers sweeter slogans without a costed plan.

So bring me a candidate with better structure, better courage, better policy, better coalition and better implementation capacity. I will listen.

Until then, my position remains this: Nigeria needs alternatives, but the alternative must be viable — not emotional packaging with no engine.

Kukutente23:
Get over the BS
You can't provide answers to any of the posers
You're only dancing round it.
While you may be correct about the loan amount from Afreximbank, it does not negate the fact that the crude backed payment plan which is actually illegal is unaccounted for
Same goes for the syndicated loans from WB
The dollar value of the Japanese loans is $308m. Explain how it has positively affected the economy.
We're not even talking of the Eurobonds that were oversubscribed.
What about T-bills and other monetary instruments? Where did all the funds go with massive devaluation and subsidy removal. How come capital performance for budgets in the last 3 cycles still hover around 30%?
Even Abacha wasn't this tardy with national income
Your god is a fiscal fraud and disaster

It is clear you have made up your mind about Tinubu. Any figure will be bent into “fraud,” any reform will be called “disaster,” and any explanation will be dismissed as “BS.” So I will not prolong this merry-go-round.

Your position is simple: every loan is stolen, every budget is fake, every reform has failed, and Tinubu is guilty before facts are examined.

My position is also simple: scrutinise Tinubu, yes — but use accurate figures, proper context, and fair comparison. The Afreximbank facility is documented as a $3.3bn crude-backed NNPC facility, with about $3.175bn disbursed, not the loose figures being thrown around. The Japan component in the approved borrowing plan was ¥15bn, not a random $308m unless you can provide the exact separate facility. Eurobond proceeds were officially stated by DMO to fund the **2025 fiscal deficit and other financing needs**. Budget rollovers are a real problem, but Tinubu has proposed a reset to end overlapping budget cycles and return discipline to capital execution.

So yes, ask how much of the crude-backed loan has been repaid. Ask for budget implementation reports. Ask for project tracking. That is accountability.

But do not mix suspicion, insults and elastic figures, then call it economics.

We may never convince each other, and that is fine. My purpose here is not to convert a mind already sealed with anger. It is to present the other side for readers who still have an open mind.

Because between “Tinubu is perfect” and “Tinubu is the devil,” there is a serious conversation. That is the conversation some of us are trying to have.
Finally ,Let me be clear: Obidients are not the real target audience of my write-ups on Nairaland.

My write-ups are for the undecided, the curious, the independent-minded, the silent readers, and those who still have enough intellectual honesty to examine another side of the argument.

That is why I do not intend to[b] enter endless back-and-forth[/b] with people whose minds are already sealed.

It is usually as futile as a Pentecostal Christian trying to convince a Jehovah’s Witness at the gate. Both will quote, both will argue, both will insist, but neither is really listening.

So no, I am not writing to convert the politically possessed. I am writing for those who can still think.

So let us stop wasting each other’s time. You have clearly made up your mind, and I have made my point for those still willing to examine both sides.

We can agree to disagree and move on.

AMINDA:
Snake oil merchants at it again. I thought that was supposed to be tax law? It ended up becoming a heist. Before then, it was meant to be local government autonomy, governors are still confiscating allocations while Adeleke's LG funds are being withheld for refusing to bend the knee. And right before that, it was meant to be subsidy removal, it turned out to aggravate the economic situation throwing more people into further penury. The new snake oil is state police. It will likely turn into an opportunity for Tinubu to hands off responsibility on security while his lackeys parrot "hold your governors accountable". State police can't confront bandits and terrorists. At best, it's meant to solve petty crimes.

My brother, this your “snake oil” line sounds nice, but it is not analysis. It is just insult doing press-up.

Let us take the issues one by one.

First, tax reform did not “end up as a heist.” Tinubu signed four major tax reform laws in 2025, consolidating and modernising Nigeria’s fragmented tax system. You may disagree with parts of the law, but calling every reform a heist is lazy. A country with weak revenue, multiple taxation and poor compliance cannot keep pretending tax reform is optional.

Second, local government autonomy is not snake oil. The Supreme Court judgment of July 2024 affirmed financial autonomy for Nigeria’s 774 local governments. That case was pushed by the Federal Government against the control of governors. If some governors are still trying to manipulate council funds, that proves why reform was necessary, not that the reform was useless. Implementation battles do not erase the significance of the judgment.

Third, subsidy removal did not “create” Nigeria’s economic crisis. It exposed it. The old subsidy regime was bleeding public finances, feeding smuggling, distorting consumption and rewarding a racket. Yes, the pain has been severe, and government should have cushioned it better. But pretending subsidy was sustainable is economic comedy.

Now to state police.

Nobody serious says state police will solve all insecurity overnight. I said that clearly. But to reduce it to “petty crime” is unserious. Most kidnapping, bandit movement, communal violence, rural intelligence failures and local criminal networks start from communities. Local policing improves intelligence, speed of response, familiarity with terrain, language, culture and community accountability.

Will state police alone defeat terrorists? No. But will federal police alone secure every forest, village, farm route, school, highway and border community in a country of over 200 million people? Experience has already answered that question.

The bill also attempts to answer the fear of governors abusing police powers. Appointment of state commissioners will require confirmation, and unlawful directives can be escalated to the National Police Council. Are the safeguards perfect? No. But that is why serious people should debate safeguards, funding, standards, recruitment, oversight and federal-state coordination — not dismiss the entire idea as “snake oil.”

What you are doing is predictable: tax reform is snake oil, LG autonomy is snake oil, subsidy reform is snake oil, now state police is snake oil. At this rate, even oxygen will become snake oil once Tinubu breathes it.

A serious opposition should say: “We support state police but demand strong safeguards against abuse.” That is intelligent.

But shouting “Tinubu wants to hands off security” misses the point. State police does not remove federal responsibility; it adds another layer of responsibility. Federal police, military, DSS and NSCDC will still exist. The difference is that states will finally have constitutionally recognised police structures closer to the people.

Nigeria’s insecurity is too local in origin to be managed only from Abuja.

So yes, ask hard questions. Who funds state police? How do we stop governors from abusing it? What recruitment standards apply? What is the role of the National Police Council? How do we coordinate with federal agencies?

Those are real questions.

But dismissing a long-overdue federalism reform because you dislike Tinubu is not wisdom. It is partisanship wearing security uniform.