Tinubu and the politics of direction
In Nigerian politics, elections are often framed as contests of personality and popularity. But as the country gradually approaches the 2027 presidential election, a different reality is taking shape. The
- By Yomi Omoyele
In Nigerian politics, elections are often framed as contests of personality and popularity. But as the country gradually approaches the 2027 presidential election, a different reality is taking shape. The presidency of Bola Ahmed Tinubu is not just another variable in the political equation; it is the gravitational centre around which current political dynamics revolve. As an incumbent well versed in the mechanics of power and the advantages of incumbency, he presents as a man already halfway to victory and, for the opposition, the man to beat.
Every meaningful political engagement at this moment must begin with an honest assessment of prevailing realities: acknowledging strengths and weaknesses on all sides, and listening to differing perspectives on how to mount a credible contest.
To understand where Nigeria is heading, one must first examine how Tinubu governs, not merely where he falls short. This is especially true for those who see him as a deliberate and intensely focused political actor—one who pursues his objectives with clarity and resolve.
Central to this governing style is his capacity for elite management, which, in Nigerian politics, is not a peripheral skill but a core asset for any administration that hopes to endure.
Tinubu does not govern by mass sentiment. At times, he takes decisions that appear unpopular but are, in his judgment, necessary. He sets his objectives and pursues them methodically, deploying people and opportunities to maximum effect.
He is transactional and understands that elite alignment often outweighs social media approval. Accordingly, his choices are driven less by affection than by strategic necessity. His ambassadorial nominations, among other appointments, offer insight into this governing approach.
For those seeking a pragmatic leader, he fits the bill. When opposition figures cross political lines to engage with him, it is rarely incidental; it reflects a calculated realignment of interests.
Advertisement
300x250
From the outset, his administration signalled its approach: an honest but difficult beginning, followed by stabilisation. The decisive removal of fuel subsidy marked that initial shock, while recent tax reforms suggest a deliberate effort to recalibrate the system and lay the foundation for subsequent development.
These measures reflect a willingness to confront long-standing economic distortions and reposition the economy on a more sustainable footing. This is complemented by continued investment in critical infrastructure, the introduction of a student loan scheme to widen access to education, and efforts to improve security coordination in key economic corridors. Initiatives that support domestic production—such as the enabling environment around the Dangote Refinery—alongside moves to reinforce fiscal discipline and governance coherence, further signal an attempt to reset the economic architecture.
Building on this governing approach, the political consequences are beginning to crystallise. In effect, the country appears to be approaching a fork in the road.
If the ongoing reforms stabilise the economy before 2027, the administration will command a powerful vindication narrative. If, however, hardship persists without a clear and felt sense of direction, a counter-narrative of betrayal may take hold. There is, in reality, very little middle ground.
Read Also: Tinubu redesigning northern economy with Kano as hub — Yilwatda
The implication is straightforward: Tinubu’s re-election case is unlikely to be anchored on sympathy, but on a stark argument—that the worst is behind the country, and that reversing course would be far more costly than staying the path.
Beyond the economy, however, lies an even more fundamental test: security. For Tinubu, security is not merely a campaign slogan; it is existential. A state that cannot protect its trade routes, its farms, or the daily movement of its citizens cannot credibly ask for patience or sacrifice.
His administration appears to be pursuing sustained pressure rather than episodic or theatrical interventions. And here, even partial success can have an outsized political effect. Fear, in many instances, recedes faster than economic hardship, and a sense of stability, however imperfect, can reset public expectations.
The political implication is clear: so long as Nigerians feel incrementally safer than they did in the 2023–2024 period, incumbency gains quiet but meaningful ballast.
Advertisement
300x250
What emerges, then, is not merely a contest of policies, but a clash of styles. On one side is a presidency that is strategic, deliberate, and oriented toward long-term positioning. On the other is an opposition that often appears reactive, publicly forceful, and driven by short-cycle outrage.
This contrast matters more than it might initially seem. Nigerian swing voters—particularly older citizens, traders, and civil servants—have historically shown a preference for predictability over passion, and for stability over spectacle.
The implication is that an opposition which presents itself primarily as a vehicle for protest, rather than as government-in-waiting, risks reinforcing the very strengths it seeks to undermine.
Closely tied to this is the question of narrative control. Tinubu benefits from a subtle but potent positioning: that of the difficult leader undertaking difficult decisions in difficult times. It is a frame that does not require affection or widespread approval. It requires only that available alternatives appear less credible, or more risky.
None of this, however, suggests invincibility. The administration remains exposed along identifiable fault lines.
First is the perception of elite insularity. If reforms are seen to disproportionately protect the powerful while imposing heavier burdens on ordinary citizens, the moral legitimacy of those reforms may erode.
Advertisement
300x250
Second is a communication gap. Tinubu’s strengths lie in negotiation and elite consensus-building, but governance must also be felt at the grassroots. Where citizens do not feel carried along, discontent can deepen beneath the surface.
Third is the compression of time. Structural reforms require time to mature, but political cycles demand visible results. If tangible improvements are not felt early enough, even well-designed policies may struggle to secure public patience.
It is within these gaps that a disciplined and credible opposition could still find its opening.
Taken together, Tinubu’s presidency reframes the 2027 contest in one fundamental way: it shifts the election from a referendum on popularity to a referendum on direction. The question before Nigerians will not simply be whether they like the president. It will be whether the current trajectory, however difficult, is necessary or merely burdensome without purpose.
If the prevailing sentiment tilts toward necessity, then Tinubu—or a carefully structured succession—retains the advantage. If it tilts toward futility, the opposition gains long-awaited momentum.
The real question, then, is simple: where is that credible alternative?
•Omoyele, a lawyer based in Lagos, can be reached at yomiomoyele@gmail.com.
