There are many in denial or unwilling to accept that reality, but in due time they will as time heals everything—well, nearly, everything. Ruto’s presidency is thus on and already under examination as to whether the president and Kenya Kwanza will deliver on their promises.
Other than the Saharawi diplomatic gaffe, in which the president created confusion as to Kenya’s policy on this age-old conflict, one must give it to Ruto that he is off to a good, well-thought out and carefully planned start.
It is nothing different from how Ruto ran his campaign, which was equally well thoughtout, carefully planned and executed.
How a campaign is run mirrors how those who win elections fare in holding their respective offices, especially the presidency. Which brings up a natural question, how would have a Raila presidency been had he been sworn as our next president?
The expression hamjui hamjui comes to mind, loosely translated to mean one doesn’t know what they don’t know, except in this context, many know.
As one who spent more than two months straight on the campaign trail, I know firsthand many things that went wrong, were done or not done and largely contributed to Ruto winning.
Some of these things have been articulated in the media and elsewhere by the likes of Rarieda MP Otiende Amolo. They have pointed out that instead of focusing exclusively on stolen elections, it is wiser to understand and appreciate what role the failure—intentional or otherwise — by those Raila trusted played in the outcome.
Everything considered, one can make a compelling case it is these failures that delivered this fatal blow to Raila’s fifth attempt to lead this country.
The day after the Ruto was declared winner, a close relative and strong Raila supporter invited me for lunch with a handful of his friends, who included Ruto supporters. The discussion was fascinating in many ways as both sides gave their best in what they believed happened, why the outcome and the best way forward.
Asked what I thought, I didn’t say much other than that I believed — and still do — that we had and have the outcome we do because of Raila campaign’s failures. I attributed this to incompetence, disorganisation and complacency.
One can write a book about each of this attributes as it manifested itself during the campaign but suffice to say encompassed in incompetence itself was the jostling, elbowing, and looking over shoulders by many in the campaign eying positions that did not exist, position closer to power that did not exist or denying others opportunity to be considered for the phantom positions and proximity to power.
These are the busybodies who cost Raila the election. You can see how that relates to complacency in that they were also counting the chickens before eggs hatched or putting the cart before the horse —take your pick, question being, why?
And the answer is simple: Insecurity, shortsightedness or being compromised.
A secure man or woman in a position of responsibility with a principal will act on information or advice from others without worry or concern how that will affect their relationship with the principal. An insecure individual would do the opposite — nothing to predictable detriment to the principal.
In other words, they are so insecure, they would rather kill an idea than bring it to fruition for fear it will make someone other than themselves shine.
It is stupidity of the highest order but one alive and well in this game we call politics—backward politics to be precise.
Now, to answer the question about what a Raila presidency would have portended, the same maladies in the campaign would have followed him to State House. The outcome would have been a government likely worse than we will have with Ruto.
Put another way, a Ruto government may just be what the doctor ordered.
May he now deliver and silence his critics.
