Quoting Busingye:Quoting ejakait engoraton:I hope what I am reading is not true because it is VERY VERY SAD news for UGANDA and it may be the end of the last hope we had of ever removing M7 and as my friend GWOK has insistently said it was better for both to stand independently.
Lets just pray for a miracle.
Man, the chances of removing M7 can only get better.
He's getting older. At the very least, nature will take care of the problem.
Dear all, I stand my earlier analysis that conculded that "the chances were better for removing M7" if JAM ran as an independent aspirant.
Please let me explain that in the context of thee current ageement between JAM and KB: First the assumption: The overall objective is to deny M7 the executive outcome.
If that is the objective that is shared by all on the opposite side to M7, then, there are only two viable alternative strategies to achieve that.
(a) The two-stage strategy to deny M7 the outright win of 50% TOTAL VOTES CAST + 1 vote in the first round of voting. (b) the Short-cut strategy of a two-man race in the first round of presidential elections.
It appears to me that JAM & KB have opted for this latter (b) option, by this agreement, but I am not quite sure about that yet.
As I indicated in my earlier analysis, option (b) is weaker that option (a), but both could succeed. Why? (i) in strategy option (a) situation, any vote for an aspirant in that aspirant's vote, but all go to the total tally of votes cast.
It means that the 50% winning hurdle becomes difficult to attain by any aspirant, M7 included.
So, no outright win for any of th many aspirants, incuding M7, can be expected. What becomes important in this in this staregy is WHO among the many presidential aspirants contesting atain the highest and second-highest tally of the total votes cast.
Those two go to the next round of presidential cotest. Additional assumption here: Voters who are inclined to vote for a particular aspirant will always do so, anyway.
So, JAM's supporters will dedicatedly vote for JAM, M7's for vote M7, etc in the first round. Howerver, when it comes to the second round, that assumption might not hold true.
Should JAM & KB sail through to the second round, the dedicated M7 voters would most likely not switch to either JAM or KB.
Instead, they are most likely sit at home and not vote at all. So both JAM & KB would most likely not benefit from that. Anyway, that would not matter much, because M7 would have been disposed off - overall objective achieved already, anyway.
Further, JAM is also unlikely to win additional votes from KB's side and vice versa. Strategic option (b) is actually the same as the second round of the presidential votes, except that it would be a two-man run with M7 in it.
This agreement means that it is either M7 Vs JAM or M7 Vs KB. It does not matter who of them would face M7. The Arithmetics would seem to favour M7.
I say so because the FDC voters are unlikely to switch their support to JAM, and vice versa while NRM-M7 voters would most likely stick with and vote for M7.
So, this strategic option would most likly see M7 back to power, especially if it would be JAM Vs M7. It is a very weak strategy.
{UAH} THE KILLER DICTATOR AND THE MUSICIAN: WHY AKON IS WRONG TO SUP WITH GEN. MUSEVENI
{UAH} TRUMP MUST BE A ROLE MODEL FOR OUR KIDS, NO ACTUALLY IT IS DMX AND GEORGE FLOYD THAT MUST BE THE MODEL OF BLACK KIDS YOU IDIOT
{UAH} Can't take the African-ness from an African
{UAH} THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN DAMAGE TRUMP WITH OUT DAMAGING UNITED STATES FOR THIS IS FIRKIN LOW
Dear all, I stand my earlier analysis that conculded that "the chances were better for removing M7" if JAM ran as an independent aspirant.
Please let me explain that in the context of thee current ageement between JAM and KB: First the assumption: The overall objective is to deny M7 the executive outcome.
If that is the objective that is shared by all on the opposite side to M7, then, there are only two viable alternative strategies to achieve that.
(a) The two-stage strategy to deny M7 the outright win of 50% TOTAL VOTES CAST + 1 vote in the first round of voting. (b) the Short-cut strategy of a two-man race in the first round of presidential elections.
It appears to me that JAM & KB have opted for this latter (b) option, by this agreement, but I am not quite sure about that yet.
As I indicated in my earlier analysis, option (b) is weaker that option (a), but both could succeed. Why? (i) in strategy option (a) situation, any vote for an aspirant in that aspirant's vote, but all go to the total tally of votes cast.
It means that the 50% winning hurdle becomes difficult to attain by any aspirant, M7 included.
So, no outright win for any of th many aspirants, incuding M7, can be expected. What becomes important in this in this staregy is WHO among the many presidential aspirants contesting atain the highest and second-highest tally of the total votes cast.
Those two go to the next round of presidential cotest. Additional assumption here: Voters who are inclined to vote for a particular aspirant will always do so, anyway.
So, JAM's supporters will dedicatedly vote for JAM, M7's for vote M7, etc in the first round. Howerver, when it comes to the second round, that assumption might not hold true.
Should JAM & KB sail through to the second round, the dedicated M7 voters would most likely not switch to either JAM or KB.
Instead, they are most likely sit at home and not vote at all. So both JAM & KB would most likely not benefit from that. Anyway, that would not matter much, because M7 would have been disposed off - overall objective achieved already, anyway.
Further, JAM is also unlikely to win additional votes from KB's side and vice versa. Strategic option (b) is actually the same as the second round of the presidential votes, except that it would be a two-man run with M7 in it.
This agreement means that it is either M7 Vs JAM or M7 Vs KB. It does not matter who of them would face M7. The Arithmetics would seem to favour M7.
I say so because the FDC voters are unlikely to switch their support to JAM, and vice versa while NRM-M7 voters would most likely stick with and vote for M7.
So, this strategic option would most likly see M7 back to power, especially if it would be JAM Vs M7. It is a very weak strategy.