Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia’s Electoral Performance in Zongo Communities: Setting the Record Straight
Kwadwo Poku’s recent analysis of Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia’s electoral performance in Zongo communities has been met with criticism for its selective reporting and factual inaccuracies. While Poku attempts to highlight Bawumia’s strength in Zongo constituencies, his methodology and data analysis have come under scrutiny for lacking integrity and context.
Poku’s claim that John Mahama received zero votes in the Abetifi Constituency has been debunked by official results from the Electoral Commission of Ghana, which show that no polling station in Abetifi recorded zero votes for Mahama. This misrepresentation of data raises questions about the credibility of Poku’s analysis.
Furthermore, Poku’s focus on a limited number of polling stations, out of over 3,000 located in Zongo communities nationwide, is deemed as cherry-picking data. A comprehensive analysis of electoral performance should be based on a broader dataset, rather than isolated anecdotes.
One of the most glaring examples of misinformation in Poku’s analysis is his claim about the Malam Adam Primary – New Zongo 1 polling station, where he falsely stated that Bawumia received 71 votes while Mahama received only 1. The official Electoral Commission results tell a different story, with Mahama actually receiving 241 votes at that polling station.
Additionally, Poku mischaracterizes the Aboabo community in Adansi Asokwa Constituency as a Zongo enclave, when in fact it is a typical Akan community. This lack of cultural understanding further undermines the credibility of Poku’s analysis.
In his attempt to classify every community with a mosque as a Zongo community, Poku’s analysis is factually inaccurate and misleading. It is important to differentiate between Zongo communities and areas with mosques, as they represent distinct demographics.
Dr. Bawumia’s commitment to delivering Zongo and Northern votes for the NPP is commendable, but it is essential to critically assess his electoral performance without bias or distortion. In constituencies like Bawku Central, where Bawumia recorded zero votes in several polling stations, a more honest reckoning with the facts is required.
Ultimately, transparency and accuracy in data analysis are crucial for upholding democratic discourse and building public trust. Any claims made about electoral performance should be supported by comprehensive and verifiable data, rather than selective reporting and misinformation.
In conclusion, it is imperative for analysts like Kwadwo Poku to present a complete and transparent picture of electoral data in Zongo communities to ensure a fair and accurate assessment of Dr. Bawumia’s performance. Anything less would be a disservice to the electorate and the democratic process.
