Professor Samuel Adu-Gyamfi has revisited Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia’s past electoral analysis on ethnic voting, describing it as an unresolved contradiction that now demands explanation.
In his analytical series, the KNUST professor referenced Dr. Bawumia’s public remarks during the 2023 presidential primaries and the 2024 general elections, when he questioned whether Ghanaians were ready to vote for another northern presidential candidate after John Mahama.
“That statement was not made in abstraction,” Prof. Adu-Gyamfi wrote. “It was presented as a realistic assessment of voter psychology and electoral fatigue.”
For that reason, he argued, Dr. Bawumia’s decision to contest again creates an analytical puzzle rather than a routine political choice.
“If he genuinely believed voter appetite for another northern candidate was limited,” he asked, “what has changed in the electorate since that assessment was made?”
Prof. Adu-Gyamfi outlined the absence of publicly presented data to justify a shift in that position, noting that political science interprets contradictory electoral logic as either the result of new evidence or new incentives.
“Where no new data is offered,” he wrote, “observers are entitled to question whether the motivation is strategic clarity or personal ambition.”
He concluded that rejecting one’s own electoral analysis without explanation weakens the intellectual coherence of a campaign.
