Sat, 27 Apr 2024 Feature Article

The Political Rhetoric of NDC: A Closer Look at Their Election Strategies

The Political Rhetoric of NDC: A Closer Look at Their Election Strategies

As Ghana gears up for the 2024 elections, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) has resuscitated and amplified its 2020 election mantra, asserting that "Ghana is hard." This slogan, echoing through their campaigns, aims to resonate with the electorate's sentiments, reinforcing the notion of widespread hardship under the current administration.

The NDC's strategy hinges on making every Ghanaian internalise this feeling of adversity, suggesting that the way to alleviate their suffering is by voting out the ruling New Patriotic Party (NPP). However, a closer look shows that the NDC capitalises on public discontent without offering substantive solutions. At the unveiling of their vice-presidential candidate, the NDC declared their intention to "reset Ghana to factory settings," a metaphor that implies the country's problems are solely the fault of the NPP, thereby absolving themselves of any historical complicity.

This rhetoric raises concerns about the NDC's focus. Instead of instilling hope and presenting concrete policies to address Ghana's challenges, there appears to be an emphasis on exploiting voter frustration for electoral gain. The party's leadership, assuming victory is certain, is urging members to avoid jostling for positions and focus on the election, emphasising that let’s win power, then we ‘can argue’ about sharing of the meat. The public has noticed a paradox among the NDC leaders. They appear to lead affluent lifestyles while promoting the narrative that "Ghana is hard." This discrepancy suggests that their campaign might be more about regaining power than genuinely providing alternatives to alleviate the plight of the average Ghanaian.

The essence of the NDC's message indicates that Ghana faces severe challenges that require robust solutions. However, the absence of a clear alternative plan from the NDC raises questions about their suitability to govern. If their campaign focuses merely on identifying problems without proposing viable solutions, it may suggest that their priorities lie more in benefiting politically from the nation's difficulties rather than in addressing them effectively.

As Ghanaians contemplate their future, the critical question remains: will rhetoric alone suffice to bring about the change they need, or should they demand more substantive policies that address their real issues? The answer to this will likely shape the outcome of the forthcoming elections.