Can Africa Learn to Vote Beyond Ethnicity, Religion and Party Loyalty?

There is something particularly instructive about the November 3, 2026 American midterm elections that deserves the attention of politicians, political parties and voters across Africa. Beyond the dramatic electoral outcomes and the political fortunes of the Democratic and Republican parties, there is a bigger story about the power of the electorate to express dissatisfaction, reconsider political loyalties and demand a different direction for their country.

The American voter has sent a message that should resonate far beyond the shores of the United States. Political loyalty is not necessarily permanent. Electoral support is not an inheritance. And no political party should assume that yesterday's victory guarantees tomorrow's support. The question that interests me most is whether African democracies can learn something from this development. Can we gradually move away from voting patterns dominated by ethnicity, religion, regional affiliation, gender and inherited political loyalties towards a political culture in which competence, integrity, accountability and performance matter more? It is a question worth examining, particularly in Ghana, where political discussions and electoral campaigns are frequently shaped by regional, ethnic and party considerations.

The American Election: More than a Contest between Two Parties

The November 2026 midterm elections were a significant political setback for President Donald Trump and the Republican Party. Democrats made substantial gains, regained control of Congress and registered victories in places that had traditionally been difficult territory for them. Reuters, in its November 4 analysis of the results, described the outcome as a sweeping Democratic victory, driven partly by strong turnout among Democratic supporters and independent voters, as well as widespread dissatisfaction with the administration. But the interesting story is not simply that Democrats won and Republicans lost. It is the changing behaviour of sections of the electorate.

The Associated Press Voter Poll, based on approximately 80,000 voters across all 50 states, revealed important shifts among different demographic groups. Young voters and Hispanic voters, among others, appeared less supportive of Republican candidates than they had been of Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election. Approximately 7 out of 10 voters under 30 supported Democratic candidates in their congressional districts. Among Hispanic voters, approximately 6 out of 10 supported Democrats. These figures are particularly interesting because Trump had made considerable electoral gains among young and Hispanic voters in 2024.

What happened to those loyalties? The answer cannot be reduced to one explanation. Economic dissatisfaction, concerns about governance, opposition to presidential policies and the desire for greater institutional accountability all featured prominently. The election demonstrated that voters who supported a political candidate or party in one election are capable of reassessing that support in another. That is democracy at work.

Race: Is the American Electorate Changing?

America has a long and complicated history of racial politics. Race has influenced voting patterns, political representation, public policy and the struggle for equal rights. For generations, the Democratic Party has enjoyed overwhelming support among Black voters, while Republicans have generally enjoyed stronger support among white evangelical and conservative voters. However, American voting behaviour has never been entirely uniform.

The 2024 presidential election demonstrated that Trump could attract greater support among Hispanic voters and make inroads among some other traditionally Democratic constituencies. The 2026 midterms showed that such electoral movements can be reversed.

The AP Voter Poll indicated that Hispanic support for Republican congressional candidates had declined compared with Trump's performance among Hispanic voters in 2024. Younger voters also moved substantially towards Democratic congressional candidates. This does not mean racial considerations have disappeared. Black voters continued to support Democrats overwhelmingly, and racial identity remains an important feature of American political life.

What it does demonstrate is that political support among demographic groups is not necessarily fixed. A voter may identify with a particular racial or cultural community and still make an electoral decision based on economic circumstances, public policy, leadership or dissatisfaction with the incumbent administration. That distinction is important. Identity may influence political choices, but it need not imprison the voter.

Gender: The Voter is not defined by Sex

Gender has also played an important role in American electoral politics. Women and men do not always share the same political priorities, and candidates' positions on reproductive rights, healthcare, employment, education, family policy and social issues can influence their voting preferences.

The 2026 CBS News exit polling indicated that women strongly supported Democratic congressional candidates. Interestingly, white women, who have historically leaned Republican, narrowly favoured Democrats in this election. Men, meanwhile, were more divided. These developments remind us that gender should not be treated as an automatic political allegiance.

In Africa, women continue to face barriers to political representation, economic opportunity and participation in decision-making. Yet women are also a powerful electoral constituency whose concerns deserve serious attention. The question should not be whether a candidate is male or female. It should be whether that candidate possesses the integrity, experience, vision and commitment required to serve the public. The same standard should apply to everyone.

Religion: Faith should not be a Political Blank Cheque

Religion is another important consideration. In the United States, religious affiliation remains closely associated with political preferences. White evangelical Protestants, for example, have traditionally leaned strongly Republican, while Black Protestants have tended to support Democrats. It would therefore be misleading to suggest that the 2026 election marked the disappearance of religious voting. Nevertheless, religious communities are not politically homogeneous. People who attend the same church or mosque can have different views on economic policy, education, healthcare, corruption, immigration and the responsibilities of government.

This is particularly relevant to Africa, where religion plays an important role in everyday life. In Ghana, Christians and Muslims live, work and participate in the same national economy. They experience the same increases in food prices, transportation costs, electricity tariffs and healthcare expenses. A Christian pensioner struggling to survive on a small monthly pension does not have a different economic problem from a Muslim pensioner facing similar circumstances. Why, then, should religious identity become a substitute for evaluating political leadership?

Our faith should inform our moral values. It should not prevent us from questioning political leaders, including those who profess the same faith. A politician does not become accountable merely because he or she worships in our church or mosque.

The Pocketbook: When Economic Realities Speak Louder

Perhaps the most important lesson from the American midterms concerns the economy. According to Reuters' November 4 report, nearly 9 out of 10 voters considered the cost of living a major or crucial factor in their electoral decisions.

The AP Voter Poll also found that approximately 4 in 10 voters identified the economy as the country's most important issue, while roughly 3 in 10 identified the state of democracy. About half considered the cost of living and government corruption as crucial factors in their congressional vote. These are revealing findings. People were concerned about the cost of groceries, fuel and other household necessities. They were also concerned about corruption and the state of democratic institutions.

The election became, in considerable measure, a judgment on the performance of the administration. This brings us to a fundamental principle of democratic governance: politicians must understand that economic conditions are not merely statistics in government reports. Inflation is not an academic exercise to the ordinary household. Unemployment is not simply a figure in a minister's presentation. Rising electricity bills are not an abstract economic concept. They are lived experiences. A government may produce impressive economic growth figures, but if ordinary citizens cannot afford basic necessities, the political leadership must expect questions. And those questions must be answered with results, not slogans.

The African Dilemma: Are we voting for People or for Political Identities?

Let us bring the discussion closer home. Across Africa, elections are frequently influenced by ethnicity, regional affiliations, religion, political party identification and personal loyalties. Ghana is no exception.

The Ashanti and Volta regions, for instance, have historically been associated with strong support for the NPP and NDC respectively. Such patterns have sometimes encouraged the simplistic assumption that voters in these regions are incapable of making independent electoral decisions. However, Ghanaian voting behaviour is more complicated than that.

A 2018 study by Ransford Edward Van Gyampo, Tom Lodge and Ricky Appah, published in the Journal of African Elections under the title “Is Voting in Ghana Ethnically Based?”, examined voting preferences in three constituencies. The researchers found that voters' decisions reflected a mixture of considerations and that bread-and-butter issues could be more influential than ethnic loyalty, even in areas commonly perceived to be politically shaped by ethnicity. This is an important observation. It suggests that we should not underestimate the intelligence and independence of African voters.

Indeed, Afrobarometer's October 2024 report on Ghana found that 90% of respondents identified a candidate's honesty as an important consideration in their voting choice, while 88% identified character, and 59% focused on campaign promises. These findings challenge the assumption that Ghanaian voters are concerned only with ethnic and regional considerations.

Yet another concern remains: the tendency of political parties to encourage voters to identify with party colours and personalities rather than subject policies and performance to rigorous examination. How many times have we heard political supporters defend a politician simply because that politician belongs to their party? How often do we excuse wrongdoing when it is committed by our preferred political party but become outraged when the same conduct is associated with the opposition? Is that democracy, or is it political hypocrisy?

Party Loyalty Should not be a Family Inheritance

One of the greatest dangers to democratic accountability is blind political loyalty. There is nothing wrong with belonging to a political party. Political parties are essential institutions in representative democracy. They provide platforms for competing ideas, policy proposals and leadership choices. The problem arises when party membership becomes more important than national interest. A citizen should be able to criticize the government supported by his or her political party without being branded a traitor. Similarly, a voter should be able to acknowledge a good policy introduced by an opposition administration without being accused of abandoning political allegiance.

Unfortunately, our political environment sometimes discourages this kind of independent thinking. We have created an atmosphere in which some party supporters consider criticism of their leaders as an act of betrayal. But political parties are not religious organizations, and political leaders are not infallible spiritual authorities. They are public servants seeking the mandate of citizens. That mandate must be earned and periodically renewed.

The American midterms remind us that electoral support can change. A voter who supported a party yesterday may reject it tomorrow if its performance does not meet expectations. There is nothing undemocratic about that.

The Winner-Takes-All Culture Must Change

Another lesson worth considering is the relationship between elections and political accountability. In many African countries, winning an election is treated almost as an opportunity to take complete control of the state and its resources. Political appointments become instruments for rewarding party loyalists. Public institutions become vulnerable to partisan interference. Opposition supporters are sometimes treated as though they are less entitled to national opportunities. This winner-takes-all mentality weakens democratic institutions.

Democracy should not mean that the victorious political party owns the country for the duration of its mandate. The country belongs to all its citizens. Those who voted for the winning party, those who voted for the opposition and those who did not vote at all are equally entitled to public services, justice, security and opportunities.

The American midterm elections also demonstrate the importance of institutional checks and balances. The AP Voter Poll found that approximately 7 out of 10 voters believed Congress was not doing enough to check presidential power. This is a reminder that democratic accountability does not end at the ballot box.

Parliament, the judiciary, independent oversight institutions, the media and civil society all have responsibilities in ensuring that those entrusted with public power remain answerable to the people. African countries must strengthen these institutions rather than allow them to become extensions of political parties.

What Should African Voters Demand?

If there is one lesson I would like African voters to take from the American experience, it is that the ballot paper should be treated as an instrument of accountability. Before voting, citizens should ask some fundamental questions.

1. Has the candidate demonstrated integrity?
2. What is the candidate's record in public office?
3. What policies are being proposed to address unemployment, education, healthcare, infrastructure and the cost of living?
4. How will public resources be managed?
5. What is the candidate's position on corruption and institutional independence?
6. Does the candidate respect opposing views and the rights of citizens who do not support his or her political party?
7. And perhaps most importantly, what happens when the candidate fails to deliver?

These questions should matter more than the candidate's ethnicity, religion, gender, regional origin or political colours. We should also stop treating political manifestoes as ceremonial documents produced only to win elections. Promises must be measurable. Governments must report on their delivery. Citizens must be able to compare what was promised with what was achieved. The electorate must become more demanding. Politicians should no longer assume that distributing campaign T-shirts, organizing rallies, invoking ethnic solidarity or making religious appeals will automatically secure votes. Citizens must demand substance.

My Thoughts: The Ballot Paper is not an Inheritance Document

The American midterm elections should not be interpreted as proof that racial, religious or gender considerations have disappeared from American politics. Neither should the Democratic victories be regarded as evidence that one political party has a permanent claim to the confidence of the American people. The more important lesson is that political alignments can change and that citizens have the power to express dissatisfaction through the ballot box.

The electorate is not permanently owned by any political party. This is a lesson African politicians must understand. It is also a lesson African voters must embrace. Our continent cannot continue to blame politicians for poor governance while refusing to hold them accountable at the polls. We cannot demand integrity from public officials while excusing corruption when it benefits our political camp. We cannot complain about unemployment, poverty, poor healthcare and inadequate infrastructure while allowing ethnic and partisan considerations to override our judgment. The responsibility is collective.

Let us judge candidates by their records, their character, their competence and their commitment to the public good. Let us reward good governance and reject poor performance, irrespective of the political party responsible. Let us understand that supporting a political party does not require surrendering our conscience. And let us remember that no politician, political party, ethnic group or religious organization owns our votes.

The ballot paper is not an inheritance document. It is a contract between the governed and those seeking the privilege of governing. A politician should not be entitled to our votes because he speaks our language, worships in our church or mosque, comes from our hometown or belongs to our favourite political party. He or she should earn our votes through integrity, competence, vision and a demonstrable commitment to the welfare of the people.

Who are our Members of Parliament? Are they not our servants, elected by us because we cannot all be present in Parliament to represent our interests and speak on our behalf? So why do we worship them? Why should they lord it over us? That mentality must change. Our MPs owe us a duty of accountability. They must regularly report to their constituents, communicate with us, listen to our concerns and be accessible to answer our questions. They must be willing to take our views, concerns and aspirations to Parliament in Accra. They should not become strangers in the very constituencies that elected them. They must not hide from the people they represent or make themselves visible only when elections are approaching and they need our votes. Representation is a continuous responsibility, not a seasonal political exercise. We must remind our MPs that they are elected to serve us, not to rule over us. If American voters can reassess their political preferences when their expectations are not met, why should African voters continue to treat political loyalty as a family inheritance? Perhaps the time has come for Africa to vote less with its emotions and more with its conscience. Our votes are our power. Let us use them wisely.

FUSEINI ABDULAI BRAIMAH
+233208282575 / +233550558008
[email protected]