Alapinni Challenges The Economist’s 2027 Election Forecast, Says Outcome Not Predetermined

Human rights lawyer and United States Secretary of State Awardee on International Religious Freedom, Kola Alapinni, has challenged The Economist’s assessment of the 2027 presidential election, warning against treating current political conditions as evidence that the outcome has already been determined.

Alapinni made the argument in a Monday statement titled “A Forecast Is Not a Verdict: Why The Economist Misreads 2027.”

The Economist, in an October 1 report titled “Nigerians Dislike Their President, But May Re-elect Him Anyway,” identified incumbency, opposition fragmentation, religion, voter turnout and political cynicism as factors that could work in President Bola Tinubu’s favour despite dissatisfaction with his administration.

Alapinni, however, argued that the magazine had turned present political conditions into assumptions about the eventual result. He said the dynamics of the 2023 election should not automatically be projected onto the 2027 contest.

He particularly questioned the assessment that opposition fragmentation could give the ruling party a structural advantage. While acknowledging that the failure of major opposition figures to form a common platform could benefit the incumbent, he said the political situation remained fluid and alliances could still change before the election.

Alapinni also disputed the suggestion that religious identity would necessarily determine voting patterns across the North and Middle Belt. He cited polling referenced by The Economist from SBM Intelligence which, according to him, showed Tinubu trailing Peter Obi and Atiku Abubakar in Borno.

The lawyer argued that insecurity, economic hardship and displacement could have a significant impact on voter behaviour. He said developments in Plateau and Benue states required a broader assessment because insecurity could affect both voting decisions and access to polling units.

He further rejected the idea that political cynicism would automatically lead to voter apathy. Alapinni argued that anger over insecurity, economic hardship and poor public services could instead encourage citizens to use the ballot to express dissatisfaction with the government.

Electricity supply was another issue he identified as potentially important to voters. Alapinni questioned reported spending on solar infrastructure at the Presidential Villa while many households and businesses continue to face unreliable electricity and depend on generators.

Despite his criticism, Alapinni acknowledged some of The Economist’s arguments. He agreed that incumbents enjoy advantages through political machinery, financial resources and voter mobilisation, while fragmented opposition forces may face difficulties consolidating their support.

He also accepted that insecurity, vote-buying and alleged influence over election logistics could pose risks to the 2027 election. However, he cautioned that such risks should not be presented as proof that the result has already been decided.

Alapinni maintained that incumbency remains an advantage but should not be confused with public consent. He said the eventual outcome would depend significantly on whether Nigerians are able to participate in the election and freely exercise their franchise.

He concluded by urging both supporters and opponents of the government not to treat the current political landscape as settled, stressing that there is still considerable time for political alliances, voter sentiment and other factors to change before 2027.