New ideas can be exciting; they fuel enthusiasm especially when there is a need for change. But change always meets resistance leading to the emergence of factions. When the initial enthusiasm dies down and the real work of marching towards that change begins, the challenges reveal themselves.
Not unlike more advanced democracies like the US where mainstream democrats have to contend with the liberal wing of the party or the traditional conservative republicans being pushed to the curb with the rise of Trump’s MAGA movement that labels traditional conservatives as RINOs (Republicans In Name Only). Needless to say MAGA emerged out of the conservative base. Even within the MAGA movement, there is the Freedom Caucus that is seen as a rebel faction of the movement.
The upcoming New York mayoral election bears another example. Zohran Mamdani is facing opposition not only from the Republican side, some Democrats are not only openly challenging him, but he is also being labeled as a radical socialist much like Bernie Sanders was.
Mainstream Democrats fear that embracing people like Bernie Sanders in prior primaries, and now AOC, and Mamdani will give ammunition to the right in their campaign of labeling Democrats as a whole as “far left radicals/lunatics/socialist/communists” or whatever other labels the Republicans use to discredit their opponents. To these mainstream Democrats, the base is not really the issue, winning over the middle is their focus, so they tread cautiously around policy positions they think could hurt their chances with such voters.
The same principles play out within the conservative movement. That sort of disagreement is not bad in and of itself, the problem stems from how the disagreement is addressed. This is where institutional structures come into play.
Once those gears kick into motion, compromise must be struck. Let’s go back to Mamdani’s case again. Although the Democrat’s nomination process differs from how we do things in The Gambia, this example will suffice as far as driving the point home.
With the overwhelming majority of democrats being in favor of Mamdani, both the current mayor, Eric Adams and the former governor, Andrew Cuomo, also Democrats, broke away from the Democrat party to run as independents. With that decision, it was clear to them that they had lost the majority of the Democratic base. Adams has since dropped out of the race, no doubt with that calculation factoring into his decision. Cuomo’s messaging says as much. His appeal is mainly directed towards swing voters, Independents and middle of the road Republicans.
New York is heavily liberal leaning and would likely vote a Democrat into office. Cuomo’s pitch is that a mainstream Democrat like himself should be the choice by portraying Mamdani as representing the most liberal of the liberal ideals that Republicans and some independents fear.
That fear factor of “radical socialist” ideas is what he is tapping into. Is that the best approach? Well, it may not be, but it is the only play he has left.
The point is, factionalism is not new in politics, it stems from disagreement on strategy, messaging, or the direction the party should take. Almost always, the underlying motivation is fear of losing your appeal to independent or middle of the road voters. But just like political party bases, Independent minded voters are not a big enough bloc by themselves to hand anyone the win. They are more of a counter weight that tips the balance in favor of the side they leaned towards.
Now let’s turn our gaze back to The Gambia. In a previous article I made the argument that if The Gambian voter was an issue-focused voter, Jammeh would have been history in 2001 after he massacred school children who did nothing but march peacefully demanding justice for one of their peers murdered in police custody. Just a few months after that heinous crime, Jammeh presented himself and was returned to power. That was just one example of the many abuses of Jammeh we have already highlighted and contrasted his candidacy against his opponents. So, personalities, it can be argued, matter more than issues.
That clash of personalities versus issues is what we are witnessing within the UDP. In a previous article, I highlighted the genesis of that issue, and you can read it here.
Some within the party believe that the party’s long time leader Ousainou Darboe should step aside for a younger successor and Talib Ahmed Bensouda is the preferred choice for them. Not because of a difference in ideology or some radical shift thereof, but they argue in favor of electability and ergo personality.
As National Organizing Secretary of the UDP, his political activities extended beyond the municipality he leads to every region of the country, raising his national profile.
That national profile, his young age, coupled with two successful terms as administrator running the country’s second largest municipality enhances that appeal further.
It is worth noting that there has been a degree of persistent agitation on social media and among political commentators for change within the structures of political parties. The argument that party founders and leaders remain at the helm of their parties for too long thereby stifling any credible challenge to their hold on power led to what some within the UDP label as an internal revolt. A revolt that grew increasingly toxic and polarizing between some advocates from the opposing camps. This became a catalyst that led to the UDP initiating the flagbearer nomination process much earlier than it traditionally did.
The same could be credited for being the catalyst for Mr. Bensouda’s withdrawal from the race pursuant to his previous stated position that he would not challenge UDP’s leader for the position of flagbearer of the party.
As it stands, the UDP has nominated Mr. Darboe as the party’s flagbearer for the 2026 presidential elections, and Mr. Bensouda has launched his own bid under the banner of the Unite Movement for Change with the theme of unity being the message.
The question now remains; how can unity be achieved without the appearance of one side capitulating to the other?
Suffice to say some very vocal supporters on both sides continue trading jabs with labels and name calling, each inadvertently hurting their candidate’s chances.
My prayer is that all parties, but more especially the new movement as the latest entrant to the scene, seriously, and objectively assess their chances of unseating Barrow. If the numbers favor a win, then congratulations in advance, but if the opposite is found to be true, I hope they stick to their publicly stated position that Barrow must go and forge alliances with other parties including the UDP to achieve that aim. I hope too that all parties also make the same objective assessment and evaluate their next steps accordingly.
In the final analysis, The Gambia is better off without Barrow being at the helm, that much is agreed upon by all currently opposed to this administration. That is a good start.
Mankajang 