Like Romney, like Buhari? on January 20, 2015 / in Dispatches from America (VANGUARD COLUMNIST) By Uche Oyebadi MITT Romney has become a spectacle in U.S. politics. Twice he has made a bid for the coveted position of presidency, and twice have voters blocked his route to the White House. After the last attempt, Romney and his wife swore that running for the presidency was no longer on their political agenda. But of late, Romney has been crisscrossing the United States, waving the banner that indicates that he is once more serious about getting into the presidential race. Generally, American presidential elections do not bestow favours on previous losers in the same race. One of the exceptions was Richard Nixon who lost to J.F. Kennedy in the 1960 presidential polls, but bounced back to become the 37th president of the United States from 1969 to 1974. He had to bow out in shame over the infamous Watergate scandal which showed that he had subverted the integrity of the presidency. Romney is yet to formally declare his intention to run for the third time. But, he is not getting the necessary support from institutions that traditionally back Republican presidential candidates. Take the influential Wall Street Journal for instance. Last week, the newspaper cynically posed this question in one of its editorials: “If Mitt Romney is the answer, what is the question?” Devastating upper cut Then, the newspaper delivered a devastating upper-cut punch by saying that: “The question the former Massachusetts Governor will have to answer is why he would be a better candidate than he was in 2012…It’s hard to see what advantages Mr. Romney brings that the many potential first-time candidates who have succeeded as governors do not.” Indeed you can delete “Mitt Romney” from the Wall Street Journal’s apprehension and still legitimately ask: “If Buhari is the answer, what is the question?” Is the question the simplistic notion that once Jonathan is out of the scene Nigeria would become an African el dorado? Is it that Buhari has what it really takes to transform Nigeria? Is it that Jonathan has been tried and found wanting, so another person needs to be given the opportunity to try his luck where Goodluck was unlucky? Voters need more cogent and convincing reasons than what is implied in these questions. Mitt Romney ran on the promise that he was a better manager of the U.S. economy, citing his vast experience in the business sector as evidence of what he can do in the presidency. But, voters remained skeptical. Being a good CEO does not necessarily translate to a robust presidency. But, Romney stubbornly believed in his good-businessman-good-president credo. During the 2012 elections, he presented himself as Socrates and Aristotle combined, with a monopoly of wisdom on how to resuscitate the wobbling U.S. economy. He dismissed Barack Obama as someone who did not understand the fundamentals of good economic management, and characterized him as a person of whom history will record as having dug the grave for America’s inevitable corporate burial. Today, Romney is alive to see that his doomsday prophecy has not materialized. America’s economic growth rate hit 5 percent in the third quarter of 2014. Job creation has surprised everyone as unemployment figure has come down to 5.6 percent. So, what narrative does Romney plan to express this time around? As the Nigerian campaign reaches its zenith, we appear to see a “Romnization” of Buhari in the philosophical poise that he, Buhari, has the only key to unlock the chains that have been holding Nigeria from attaining Olympian heights in all facets of life. Romney’s other face During the 2012 U.S. presidential election, it emerged that Romney wore a public face of a potential leader who would be there for all. But for the smart young man who got a video of him telling his rich friends that he did not care for the 47 percent of Americans he spoke about in very disparaging manner, we might not have known Romney’s other face. Romney ran his campaign on his experience as a profit-making businessman. In his various campaign stops, he never got tired of almost talking down on his potential supporters; telling them what was good for them and letting everyone know he was the only person to deliver such goods. Having the mindset of a Chief Executive Officer who was outlining company goals and methods of their attainment to his staff, Romney was so sure of victory that on election night he reportedly armed himself with just one speech: his acceptance speech. His cronies and so-called political analysts and commentators on friendly Fox News television reinforced his assumed political invincibility and jubilantly assured Romney of victory when in fact the man was losing at the polls. So, when the results were in and showed that Obama had swept the polls, it took several minutes for Romney and his aides to hurriedly put together a face-saving concession speech. Romney had the good sense to make that speech. Like him, Buhari also waits for electoral outcomes with just one speech to proclaim victory. But, unlike Romney, Buhari is not a man for concessions, when he loses. The military blood in him does not allow concessions to the enemy. Unfortunately, this is about democracy and expectations are quite different. Whoever loses, Jonathan or Buhari, should spare Nigerians the perennial spectacle of an illusion of victory.
Posted on: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 09:05:44 +0000