My Take on the Final Presidential Debate

The IEA presidential debates came to an end Wednesday night. Though the night was filled with humour, the four candidates – John Mahama, Nana Akuffo Addo, Abu Sakara and Hassan Ayariga – were largely uninspiring.

There were fiery rebuttals, loose remarks, jabs and some lacklustre ideas.

Rather than follow the efforts of pundits to pick a winner, I'd focus on the picture each candidate painted of himself – because there was no winner.

Now, here's my take:
President John Mahama wasn't convincing about how he intends to 'advance the better Ghana agenda' over the next four years. He sounded like the presidency was a burdensome duty he had no option but to pursue. His task for the evening, which his aides said included highlighting what had been done over the last four years and explaining what the next four would look like, was an arduous one.

Nonetheless, President Mahama showed good understanding of government business. His explanations of government programmes and the Castle's position on issues like decentralization and Ivorian dissidents using Ghana as a base to launch attacks in Cote d'Ivoire were some of his best moments.

Nana Akuffo Addo spoke with his characteristic forcefulness, sounding unclear on few occasions. His body language revealed a selfish zest for the job of president. He created the impression he had found the wonder pill that will solve every issue facing the Ghanaian people: free SHS! This exposed the free SHS promise as an idea that has yet to receive deep thought in terms of quality and how it will fit into the bigger picture of Ghana's development.

Nana, however, displayed confidence; swinging with issues on corruption, security and foreign policy; keeping the president on his toes.

Abu Sakara on this night lost the shine that tipped the first debate in his favour. He sounded theoretical and courted doubts about how his ideas will fare in the real world. Suggesting – in his answer to a question on marine resources – that he'd not mind misleading tourists didn't help either.

Abu remained articulate and intellectually relevant on this occasion.

Hassan Ayariga was in a world of his own. He threw jabs, coughed intermittently and spewed careless lines that sounded more like jokes. He came across as the clown-in-chief for the night.

His popularity has definitely soared after the debate, albeit for frolicsome reasons.

The debate ended with no big and bright picture of what Ghana will look like in 2016. A friend couldn't hide his feeling on Facebook: “Ghana is in trouble,” he wrote. The first comment on that status read: “For Ghana, we have been in trouble for all this while.”

Guys, maybe someday. Never lose hope.