Reconsidering Political Resilience: The Fallacy of Dismissing Party Comebacks


Believing that a political party with the largest support base in the nation cannot stage a comeback following a narrow electoral defeat indicates not just biased enthusiasm but also a disregard for the populace’s varying political sentiments and actions.

This line of thinking can not be applied in a nation where the electorate’s preferences are not static, particularly in pivotal regions such as Montserrado, where citizens often fault the President and legislators for their children’s lack of schooling, even if the parents are the one misusing their children school funds.

Throughout history, political parties’ resilience, capacity to evolve, and aptitude for rekindling voter confidence have been well-documented. Political tides can shift dramatically; challenges that may seem too great to be overcome can serve as a substance for a party’s resurgence like the Unity Party.

Therefore, believing that a political party cannot mount a comeback after a narrow election loss suggests not just a sentimental bias in one’s reasoning, but perhaps also a degree of folly.

Perhaps, your reliance may be rigging elections or using the top alley to sanction your opponent with the thought that they will be unpopular. However, have individuals not faced sanctions and still managed to secure electoral victories? Have perpetrators of heinous acts not been elected? Have those accused of corruption not managed to get elected?

Again, maybe your reliance may be rigging elections but that can not happen in this present era because such behavior could provoke a nation into conflict and nobody is willing to go to war. You will accept the outcome from the public just as others have done, even if you appoint your sons, brothers, cousins, and nephews as election commissioners.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *