In recent political discourse, some commentators and campaigners have attempted to draw parallels between former Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari and Ghana’s Vice President Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia, largely on the basis of the similarity in the sound of their first names and their shared Islamic faith.
While such comparisons may appear convenient for political messaging, a closer and more factual examination reveals that the analogy is deeply flawed, historically inaccurate, and politically misleading.
At best, the Buhari example oversimplifies complex electoral realities; at worst, it distorts the very lessons history is meant to teach.
Buhari’s Long Road to Power
Muhammadu Buhari’s eventual ascent to the Nigerian presidency in 2015 was not sudden nor inevitable.
It was the result of four presidential attempts spanning 16 years—from 1999 to 2015. This prolonged struggle unfolded in a Nigeria where the Muslim–Christian population was nearly balanced between 2003 and 2015, creating an electoral environment very different from Ghana’s demographic and political realities.
Before his democratic victory, Buhari had already ruled Nigeria as a military head of state from 1983 to 1985, a background that gave him national name recognition and a distinct political identity—an experience Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia has never had.
Repeated Electoral Defeats Before Victory.
Buhari’s persistence was marked by repeated losses:
2003: Contested on the ticket of the All Nigeria People’s Party (ANPP) and lost to President Olusegun Obasanjo (PDP).
2007: Again contested under the ANPP and lost to Umaru Musa Yar’Adua (PDP).
2011: Ran on the platform of the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and lost to Goodluck Jonathan (PDP).
It was not until 2015, after the formation of the All Progressives Congress (APC)—a grand coalition of opposition parties and PDP breakaway factions—that Buhari finally defeated the incumbent Goodluck Jonathan.
Even then, the victory came in the context of widespread national insecurity, economic frustration, and a united opposition front. Some analysts and commentators have controversially argued that extremist violence and public anger against the ruling party indirectly shaped voter sentiment during that period.
The key takeaway is simple: it took Buhari 16 years and an unprecedented opposition alliance to dislodge the PDP. This raises a critical question for Ghanaian politics—is the New Patriotic Party (NPP) prepared to spend a similar length of time in opposition in the hope of replicating Buhari’s trajectory?
Religion, Running Mates, and Electoral Balancing
Another often-overlooked factor is Buhari’s 2015 running mate, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, a respected law professor and Pastor of the Redeemed Christian Church of God, one of the largest Pentecostal denominations in Nigeria under the leadership of Pastor Enoch Adeboye. This Muslim–Christian ticket was a deliberate attempt to balance religious sensitivities in a deeply plural society.
If Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia were to lead an NPP ticket in the future, a critical question arises: would the party be willing to reconsider its running-mate choices—possibly even dropping Dr. Matthew Opoku Prempeh—in favor of a prominent Christian leader from major denominations such as the Church of Pentecost, the Methodist Church, the Catholic Church, or leading charismatic movements—to address perceived religious imbalances?
Ethnicity: Another Major Difference
Ethnicity further weakens the Buhari–Bawumia comparison. Buhari hails from the Hausa–Fulani ethnic group, Nigeria’s largest, accounting for approximately 21–30% of the population, with about 95% identifying as Muslims. This demographic advantage cannot be ignored.
Ghana’s ethnic and religious composition is markedly different. Any attempt to transpose Nigeria’s identity politics wholesale onto Ghana’s political landscape ignores these structural realities.
Why the Tinubu Comparison Also Fails
Some proponents have also pointed to Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s 2023 victory on a Muslim–Muslim ticket as justification for similar strategies elsewhere. This comparison is equally problematic.
Nigeria’s population today is estimated to be 56% Muslim and 43% Christian, a demographic context that differs significantly from Ghana’s. Beyond that, Tinubu is not merely a candidate; he is a political institution. He co-founded the APC, served as one of its most influential power brokers, and has been a dominant force across multiple political parties since the early 1990s.
Tinubu also belongs to the Yoruba ethnic group, Nigeria’s second-largest, which is religiously balanced between Islam and Christianity. Notably, his wife, Senator Remi Tinubu, is a Christian of mixed Yoruba and Itsekiri heritage—another subtle but important balancing factor.
Competence Over Identity Politics
Ultimately, this analysis is not an endorsement of religious or ethnic politics. On the contrary, it is a caution against them. Leadership should be about competence, credibility, and the ability to deliver, not the manipulation of identity narratives drawn from foreign political contexts.
Using Muhammadu Buhari as a template to justify Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia’s presidential ambitions does more harm than good. The political histories, demographic realities, and institutional strengths that propelled Buhari—and later Tinubu—to power in Nigeria simply do not align with Ghana’s circumstances.
If Ghana’s democracy is to continue maturing, its political actors must resist lazy analogies and instead engage voters with ideas, performance, and vision, not borrowed stories that crumble under scrutiny.
