NPP campaign: Supporters take the blame - But who pays the price?
The New Patriotic Party’s (NPP) presidential campaign has degenerated into a theatre of unruliness — a noisy, chaotic spectacle growing louder by the day, fueled largely by the deafening silence of the two main contenders: former Vice President Dr Mahamudu Bawumia and former Assin Central MP, Kennedy Ohene Agyapong.
The race has descended into a contest of insults, where victory seems to depend on which of the two camps can unleash the most unsavoury words on the other. Both contenders appear to watch gleefully from the sidelines, showing no inclination to call their followers to order.
The three remaining aspirants, however, may see in the chaos a rare opportunity — a quiet opening to reorganise and possibly spring a surprise.
The disorder within the campaign has now taken on a symbolic twist. Supporters of both Bawumia and Agyapong have framed the conflict around what they call the “10 irreparable political sins” of each candidate — with fierce debates raging over which of these supposed “sins” is the more unforgivable.
‘Sins’ of Bawumia
Dr Bawumia’s critics argue that many of his flagship economic promises — such as stabilising the cedi and reducing inflation — were not fulfilled, accusing him of shifting blame when it suits his narrative— and often deflecting failures onto President Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo and others.
He is also accused of engaging in misleading rhetoric — making promises that critics describe as “economic fantasy.”
As head of the Economic Management Team, he is held responsible for Ghana’s mounting debt, currency depreciation, inflation and the nation’s repeated reliance on IMF support.
Some within the party believe he has misled the public about the reasons for the NPP’s electoral decline, arguing that his post-election narrative — blaming external factors, media bias and voter apathy — obscures deeper internal policy failures.
Others point to his decision-making style as overly centralised, often sidelining alternative voices.
Ironically, some accuse his own campaign of originating the “Ten Sins” narrative — a strategy allegedly crafted to undermine his rivals within the party.
‘Sins’ of Kennedy Agyapong
Kennedy Agyapong’s critics describe him as harsh, provocative and lacking presidential decorum.
They argue that his abrasive style is unbecoming of someone seeking national leadership, and that his fiery remarks often generate friction both within the NPP and in the wider public space.
Many Bawumia supporters contend that Agyapong’s defeat in his own constituency undermines his moral authority to critique the party’s leadership.
Others point out that his reliance on threats, speculation and unverified accusations has inflicted significant reputational harm on the party.
His penchant for incendiary comments toward journalists and media houses remains a major concern, with his repeated calls for retribution against journalists raising troubling questions about how press freedom would fare under his leadership.
Such conduct, critics say, reflects a troubling lack of restraint for a presidential hopeful.
He is also accused of political opportunism — frequently shifting from vocal critic to collaborator whenever it serves his personal or strategic interests.
Bawumia absolving himself?
When Dr Mahamudu Bawumia, the obvious frontrunner in the NPP presidential race, attempted to address the growing tension between his campaign and that of his main challenger, his comments only muddied the waters further.
“Don’t punish me for the actions of my campaign team or the grudges you have with them.
I am the one whose image appears on the ballot, not anyone else’s. So, don’t associate me with the insults that are being thrown around,” he told NPP delegates during a campaign tour.
In essence, Bawumia appears to believe he cannot be held responsible for the actions or utterances of his supporters.
By that logic, while their conduct may be problematic, it should not influence how delegates vote — despite the damage it causes to the party’s image.
As one political observer aptly put it, “Bawumia’s public refusal to reprimand his supporters appears to be a calculated effort to distance himself and project the image of a political angel surrounded by satanic forces.”
Who pays the price?
Bawumia’s reasoning, in particular, risks normalising political indecency within the NPP’s internal politics.
It also raises legitimate questions about the kind of leadership a future Bawumia presidency might offer — one that remains aloof in the face of misconduct by close allies or subordinates.
Leadership, after all, is not merely about maintaining personal calm; it is also about demonstrating moral courage — the will to rein in one’s supporters when their conduct undermines party unity and, by extension, national cohesion.
Regrettably, this same passive attitude, mirrored by the equally silent Kennedy Agyapong, suggests that both candidates share a quiet tolerance — if not approval — of their supporters’ unruly behaviour.
Indeed, the silence of the frontrunners may reflect a shared belief that the loudest and most aggressive support base will secure victory when the party holds its presidential primary on January 31, 2026.
Many pundits, however, view this as a grievous political miscalculation — one that risks arming the NDC with its most lethal campaign weapon heading into the 2028 elections.
By the time the NPP attempts to heal its self-inflicted wounds, the NDC may already have landed the decisive blow — virtually determining the outcome of the next general election before the NPP even reaches that sobering realisation.
As the campaign heat intensifies, one question lingers: Who ultimately pays the price for the politics of insults — the candidates, their supporters or the very image of the NPP itself?
