Voting Rights in The Bahamas

VOTING IN THE BAHAMAS: THERE IS NO ENGLISH-LANGUAGE REQUIREMENT TO VOTE

By Craig Butler, Esq.

Nassau, N.P., The Bahamas

There appears to be continued public confusion, and in some quarters active political misstatement, concerning whether a person must be able to speak English in order to vote in The Bahamas.

Let this be stated plainly:

There is no provision in the Constitution of The Bahamas requiring a voter to speak English in order to vote.  Voting rights in this jurisdiction are tied to legal eligibility, not language proficiency.

Under the constitutional and statutory framework, the relevant qualifications concern citizenship, age, and proper registration on the electoral roll.  A qualified voter must be a citizen of The Bahamas, at least eighteen years of age, and duly registered in accordance with the electoral law.  There is no separate constitutional or statutory condition imposing English-language ability as a prerequisite to the franchise.

That distinction is important.

The right to vote is not made dependent upon eloquence, accent, literacy style, or spoken fluency in English.  Any suggestion to the contrary is not a statement of Bahamian law.  It is political rhetoric masquerading as legal rule.

The Constitution does not condition citizenship-based franchise rights on language ability.  Nor does the Parliamentary Elections framework create such a bar.  The legal question is eligibility.  It is not linguistic preference.

Accordingly, any public claim that a Bahamian citizen must speak English in order to vote should be recognized for what it is: misinformation, political spin, or constitutional illiteracy.

This matter should not be clouded by emotion or opportunistic nationalism.  If there is to be public debate about changing the law, let that debate be honest and explicit.  But until such a change is lawfully made, the law remains what it is.

And what it is, is this:

Voting in The Bahamas is not language-based.  It is citizenship-based, age-based, and registration-based.

That is the legal position.  That remains the constitutional position.  And the public deserves clarity, not confusion.

Key Points for the Public

 • There is no English-speaking requirement for voting in The Bahamas.

 • Voting rights are tied to citizenship, age, and voter registration.

 • Claims that English proficiency is legally required are false.

 • Political opinion is not constitutional law.

Tuesday, 7 April 2026

10:18 PM

Source / Comment

The political victimizer​s of my life...

By Dennis Dames:

We are indeed living in some seriously interesting times in The Bahamas - where chief political victimizers like Hubert Alexander Ingraham and his band of political yes men and women – now find themselves in the victims’ seat.

I am one of those Bahamians who has been politically, socially and unmercifully victimized all of my adult life in The Bahamas; starting from the days of the C.C. Sweeting students’ revolt of 1983.  I was scorned under the Pindling years to the point of being turned down for every opportunity in which I attempted to take advantage of in the public domain.  Thanks to God and the good Bahamian people who have rescued me along the way.

I was severely victimized and blacklisted under the Hubert Ingraham Free National Movement (FNM) – because of my unrelenting support of Floyd Watkins - the party’s Delaporte standard bearer (whom Ingraham hated for personal reasons) from 1989-2002.

Then, I am clearly too outspoken for a Hubert Ingraham; so he hates me double. 

His friends do not like Dennis Dames.  In fact, some of Ingraham’s pals abhor me so much, that they have boldly told many folks that yours truly will never be anything of value in the country of his birth.

It’s the FNM’s victimization that hurts the most to me, because it’s the party that I have dutifully supported all of my voting life and a number of years before it.

I have been employed with the Urban Renewal Program since October 2008 - after months of agonizing efforts to join the team; thanks to Tommy and Dion for having mercy on me.

My experience on the job with the FNM version of Urban Renewal was an unpleasant one, because of the wickedness and evil acts against me by my ungodly colleagues; most of whom are close friends and goons of King Hubert.  I know that the good reports in my personnel files are totally different from what was secretly written and spoken about me to those in high places. 

My Living God is not asleep - and He does not slumber!

The government has changed in May, and many of the wicked plotters are now on the streets; and yes – this Bahamian is still standing syrong - despite all the evil that was worked on me to date; especially by FNMs and the FNM Party.

So, if they denied dull-hearted Hubert the opportunity to say goodbye in the House of Assembly – I say that’s good for his evil soul!  Take that you wicked and victimizing spirit!  How does it feel - sir?

The current state of Bahamian politics and suggestions for what is required for the future political and socio-economic development of The Bahamas and the Bahamian people (Part-2)

Who’s looking in the mirror? Part II

By Raynard Rigby

This is the second and final part of a two-part series which examines the current state of Bahamian politics and makes suggestions for what is required for the future political and socio-economic development of The Bahamas and the Bahamian people.  In Part I, we examined the state of our current political leadership and the need for new dynamic visionary leadership.

A vision for the future

A compelling argument can be made that The Bahamas has not really had a progressive agenda since the 1980s.  We have been on a singular path to economic development: foreign intervention by an investor directed at the tourist sector and real estate sales.  This has led to a narrowed path to development.  Both the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) and the Free National Movement (FNM), under Christie and Ingraham, have not sought to craft a meaningful policy so as to lead to the Bahamianization of the economy.  Christie as prime minister often boasted about the billions of dollars that were attracted to the country during his single term.  This was the clearest sign that his ideology was grounded in a view of the country that the economy could only be expanded by the foreign ‘savior’.  His philosophy was identical to that of Ingraham, who is able to take credit for the rejuvenation of the tourism sector when Sol Kerzner came off the plane and transformed the Paradise Island plant.  No one can honestly criticize the brilliance of Kerzner and his long-term impact on the national tourism product.

In the midst of our economic successes (limitedly defined by the provision of meager paying jobs) there has been no public recognition for the gifts that are housed in the Bahamian soul; of industry, hard work, creativity and a unique spirit to withstand poverty and economic downturns.  Yet, there are those who wear red, gold and now green, who in their quiet moments, dream of a better Bahamas.  This dream is centered on a better life and a larger share of the economic pie.

In the recent PLP mini-convention on the economy, I was shocked that no substantive talk was centered on the expansion of the economy to allow for greater Bahamian participation.  No talk of economic diversification with the attendant specific plans.  No promise of a LNG industry with the introduction of stiff regulations.  Not a whisper of oil exploration and the introduction of the comprehensive regulatory laws.  No promise to establish a Ministry of National Development to ensure that within a specific targeted period that there will be a deliberate push to create an expanded entrepreneurial base.  Not even a whisper for the need, a national imperative, to craft a policy to guarantee the ownership by Bahamians of banks and hotels and major businesses.  So for me, there was a deep sense of disappointment and a confirmation that there still remains today a profound lack of vision in framing a progressive statement by the PLP, as many would expect.  The PLP is expected to be the premier champion of an agenda that has at its core the principles of shared-prosperity amongst the citizenry.  This event was for me a startling confirmation that the PLP today, some months from a general election, still lacks a vision for the future (perhaps other than Urban Renewal 2.0).

Our future – what about crime?

In my discussions with many young and middle-aged Bahamians I sense a growing frustration about what they perceive the future will bring.  Many have fears of crime and the increasing criminality, yet they know that both parties are guilty of playing politics with crime, blaming each other and demanding the then sitting minister to resign.  It was then Deputy Prime Minister Cynthia Pratt in 2002-2007;  and now Minister Tommy Turnquest has had to face the same silly and naive onslaught.  Sensible Bahamians know that no politician can fix the crime issue.  And those same Bahamians know that Urban Renewal (whether 1.0 or 2.0), the stellar PLP solution, is not the panacea for crime.  The truth is that the FNM’s and the PLP’s so-called solutions for crime are similar in that they are both predominantly focused on the aftermath of crime – that is, the steps to catch the criminal and keep him locked away for years.  No politician and no leader have addressed the question about the lack of assimilation by the majority of Bahamians of Haitian lineage; and they have been deathly silent on the effects and frustrations of those who are stateless.  And what about the fact that too many young Bahamians have no path and no interest in playing a meaningful role in the mainstay economy.

Too, we must recognize that we are reaping the effects of the drug culture, the get rich fast and easy culture.

No plan has addressed the systematic challenges that increased poverty has brought on for far too many families, some due to the fact that they are single parent homes, underpayment of salaries and a lack of educational opportunities for mobility.  On the latter, I have been so disappointed in the PLP by the fact that we kept in place a loan scholarship program which is a failure of the realities that there are still far too many Bahamians who cannot afford a tertiary or post graduate education.  I know that I would not have earned two degrees without the bonded scholarship scheme.  The PLP has betrayed its philosophy on this (and other) issue(s).

Many too have a deepening frustration about the state of the educational system and the high percentage of those who still graduate without being able to read, write or do basic arithmetic.  Perry Christie has promised to double the national budget’s contribution to education.  He has on two separate occasions failed to explain where he is going to increase the nation’s revenue stream to make this promise a reality.  He has also failed to explain to the public how the money will be spent and what will be the measurable and attainable goals.  He has not said that the school year and days will be extended.  He has not promised to increase the salaries of teachers to encourage an expansion in the local talent pool.  And he has not even suggested that there will be attempts to determine and thereby to introduce same-sex schools to foster improved performance amongst boys.  In this era of increased knowledge, our political leaders must talk sense and this means sharing details and not engaging in sheer rhetoric and bald empty promises.  The leader must have credibility of ideas and must recognize that there are intelligent Bahamians who will dissect ideas to ensure that they follow a pattern of logic and commonsense.

On the other hand, Hubert Ingraham boasts that he is a doer, and that Christie is a mere talker.  This descriptive analogy of the two was made during the recent debate on the rules to govern the multimillion dollar straw market.  Well, truth is that the PLP didn’t build the market in its term (2002 to 2007), notwithstanding the fact that the profile of a straw vendor is expected to be a PLP supporter or sympathizer.  For some voters, Ingraham’s characterization of Christie bears truth.  Ingraham though is no angel.  He has some challenges in his style of governance.  In this era of informed-participation, the Bahamian people expect a leader who can make decisions but who is also prepared to engage the electorate in national conversations and constructive dialogue.

Additionally, the Bahamian people expect a leader who has a vision for the country that is beyond a five-year cycle.  Both the PLP and the FNM have published limited manifestos or action agendas that only set out their promises for a single term in office.  Cassius Stuart, when he was leader of the Bahamas Democratic Movement (BDM) (I struggled to remember the party’s name), often spoke of a national development plan spanning beyond 10 years.  He was dead right and on point.  None of our current leaders understand this.  They are lazy dreamers.  They are not long-term planners and they have no sense that they are called upon to lead a people.  Sir Lynden Pindling was masterful at this.  He shared a vision and a plan.  You could close your eyes and see where you or your children could be in 10 or 20 years.  He campaigned on a message that gave goosebumps because it revealed a future that was far beyond one’s own imagination.  He forced people to think of themselves, of better, of the future as a success for them, and for our nation as having an untapped potential.  He was a visionary par excellence.  But, Christie and Ingraham have failed their teacher.  They have brought our local politics to a five-year plan – shortsighted, easy and small achievements, no large plan that transcends generations and that causes for a transformation in our thinking and our individual approaches.     And as a result, the country and her people are stagnated in a fixed circle of small and meaningless achievements and potential and we are being dragged down a road of a hopeless and less rewarding future.

What is now needed is leadership on ideas

The Bahamas is at the stage that we require a new league of leaders.  Where are the Lynden Pindlings, Arthur Hannas and men like Arthur Foulkes and Stafford Sands (yes I called his name) of this century and time?  Where are the men of vision who are prepared to try new things and prepared to think big?  Where are the thinkers, the dreamers?

I believe that there is an abundance of talented and visionary (should I say young) leaders in this country.  But they are shy of the profound silliness that occurs in the political process.  They do not propose to worship mediocre leaders who are frightened to recognize that their time has come and gone.  They too are not so naive to believe that the presence of one of them on the stage signals a dramatic change in our politics.  They are convinced that far too many Bahamians do not wish to be ‘saved’ from the idiosyncrasies of a political system that favors and graduates the corrupt and the fool.  So, they retreat to a solemn place of thinking, analysis and private conversations where their frustrations are felt in every word and their passion for a better future is unmatched and unsurpassed by anyone in elected office.

There should be a recognition that we need them now; that they must step forth and be the promoters of ideas and of sound thinking.  Our country’s current path mandates that they step forth with boldness and with a passion to serve the people, not a political party or an undeserving and ill-prepared leader, but the people.  But then they look in the mirror and see a face of discontent and of a hypocrisy that they once criticized.  And then they realize their presence whilst critical will not change the current dispensation because there are far too many ‘unbelievers’ on the stage who demand prominence and in whose hands lay the guided trust of the same undeserving leader, and so they smartly retreat.

So, the question remains where are our new visionary leaders?

I am sure that it is a matter of choice.  Do you step forth and be a part of the push towards a sensible solution for the national good even if it means that your voice will stand alone?  Or do you play a role outside of politics to compel those in office to recognize that they are not ‘gods’ but servants of the people who are subject to public criticism and scrutiny?  They must follow the path that will be true to the Bahamian people and that will lead to a more fair and just nation.  This means that there must be a willingness by all Bahamians to openly speak about our future and to chart a course that guarantees our collective and national development towards a future that is progressive and prosperous for the vast majority of Bahamians; not just the white Bay Street or the small black elite.

Our course must be to deepen our economic opportunities to ensure that there are no glass ceilings and an economic elevator that goes freely to all floors landing some on paths of surpassed economic expectations and that allows others to flow to the top based on their commitment to hard work, creativity, non-discriminatory access to capital and a nation that rewards its best and brightest.

These are not easy goals, yet they are all attainable if we work together to craft a national resolve to discipline, hard work and industry.  The standards of mediocrity must be buried and in its place must shine a national call to sacrifice, to ‘We-ism’ and a unified commitment to pursue a vision, and its clearly defined course, that provides a better future for our people.  This is hard work.  But we must pursue it to fulfill the hopes, vision and the expectations of our forefathers and foremothers.

Pindling, like Martin Luther King Jr. who dreamed of a better America, dreamed of a better Bahamas for all Bahamians.  In his lifetime, he achieved much for his people and he lived long enough to know that we still had much ‘land to possess’.  If he was alive I am sure that he would be demanding a return to national excellence and would be exhorting all of us to not rest on our laurels but to continue to uphold the old Bahamian traditions of sacrifice and hard work.  For me, Pindling remains an inspiration for what can be achieved with great and visionary leadership, called and inspired by God.

I remain hopeful that this present course that we are on will end when the two leaders of the FNM and the PLP will look in the mirror and say to themselves ‘I have done my part, time for me to leave this office and pass the baton to those who are ready to lead and to usher in a new era of great and visionary leadership’.  I often wonder if they ever look into the mirror and hear loud voices ringing in their heads, not cries of exhortations but of despair and a dying hope.  Perhaps we should stand in their paths with our individual mirrors so that they can hear our loud voices, so that they can do what honorable men are expected to do in such times of crisis and national yearning.

My mirror is always in my pocket waiting and hoping for that moment when I will see them so that the process can begin of bringing about a new era of our politics, one based on vision, a progressive agenda and leadership of substance over style, dance moves and empty rhetoric.  Where is your mirror?  Is it ready for a generational change in our nation’s leadership?  I hope so.  This boat is sinking.

Writer’s Note: It is a fact that in the PLP cabinet of 2002 to 2007, no minister was under the age of 40 years.  The same cannot be true of other administrations after Independence, including that of Ingraham.   There were three PLP cabinet ministers in the PLP government in 2002 who were under the age of 45 in 2002 at the time of their appointment.  This corrects an error that appeared in Part I.

Raynard Rigby is a practicing attorney-at-law and he is a former national chairman of the Progressive Liberal Party (Nov. 2002-Feb. 2008).  He is the author of “A Blueprint for the Future of The Bahamas” (July, 2008) and “The Urgency for Change in the PLP” (2009).  He remains an avid commentator on matters of national interest and importance.

Nov 21, 2011

The current state of Bahamian politics and suggestions for what is required for the future political and socio-economic development of The Bahamas and the Bahamian people (Part-1)

thenassauguardian

The Bahamas is establishing the wrong leadership tradition... Bahamian men have become as powerful as the political system they oversee

When will the general election loser depart?

thenassauguardian editorial



A general election looms.  The opposition Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) has selected about half of the candidates it will field for the contest.  The governing Free National Movement (FNM) is finishing its agenda in an effort to present to the people a case it hopes is convincing enough for re-election.

At this stage it is unclear who will lead the next government, especially considering that Branville McCartney’s Democratic National Alliance (DNA) has entered the contest.

Consideration of the fate of the party leaders after the contest is almost as interesting as consideration of which party will win the election.

Hubert Ingraham and Perry Christie entered the House of Assembly in 1977.  Since then, each has won his seat in every successive election.  In doing so, both men have amassed much political power.

The Bahamas is a democracy with a political party system that is not so democratic.  Once the post of party leader is secured, in The Bahamas it is up to the leader to determine when he will leave.

No FNM can defeat Ingraham and become party leader; no PLP can defeat Christie and become party leader.

Many assume the loser at the next general election will walk away from front-line politics soon after the votes are counted.  This assumption is largely based on the age of the men.  Christie will be 68 this year and Ingraham 64.

But with so much power, and the inability to be defeated in a party contest, should we assume that either man would leave right away?

Ingraham has said repeatedly that he will listen to the people.  If they want him to go, he says he will go graciously.  When the FNM lost in 2002, he left.  He did this before hearing that ‘voice of the people’ asking him to return.  If that voice calls him again, would he listen again at the age of almost 70?

Christie would be a two-time loser if the PLP is defeated again by the FNM.  In the Westminster tradition leaders say goodbye at this point.  Christie, though, does not like to be forced to decisions about his leadership of the PLP.  A scenario could emerge where he says he would stay on as leader for a year or so after a second consecutive defeat in order to allow for the election of another party leader.

A year or so could stretch into a long time.

Pondering this question about the futures of these men reveals the weakness of our political system.  If they want to stay, both could withstand for some time the voices in their parties who would want them to go.

Both men should be admired for being Machiavellian enough to have secured enough power to determine how it will end.  They are both extraordinary politicians.

The country, though, is establishing the wrong leadership tradition.  Men have become as powerful as the political system they oversee.

Sir Lynden Pindling was suffering from terminal cancer when he finally retired from politics.  His political sons will too say when they will go.  And with the ultimate power to decide, no one should assume when the loser will say goodbye.

We should not blame them for winning the political fights and securing this power.  Instead, Bahamians should become more involved with politics and the main political parties beyond merely expressing views at election time.

Bahamians have the power to shape the political culture of this country.

This must be done through active participation.  We can only get quality leadership if it is demanded.

More of the electorate needs to influence and guide the political party system on a more consistent basis.  Currently, too few people who think too similarly control and run the major political parties.

If a broader selection of Bahamians would become involved with this system, men will have less control over their political futures than they currently do.

Jul 09, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial

To Bahamians we say: Beware! This is silly season when the politicians seem to lose their mental balance...

tribune242 editorial



BAHAMAS Communications and Public Officers Union leader Bernard Evans might not have got his "little Egypt," or a last minute miracle to block the sale of BTC to Cable & Wireless, but he has a champion in Opposition Leader Perry Christie.

Mr Christie has put Cable and Wireless on notice that should his government be returned to power, he will deliver BTC back to the Bahamian people. He has promised that the "bad deal" entered into with the Ingraham government for the sale of the Bahamas' telecommunications system will be dismantled.

"Bad deal" -- these words are echoes from the past about another deal that the PLP also threatened to dismantle should its party become the government. But, when the PLP was returned to power in 2007 and had its opportunity for the dismantling operation, the bad deal had proven such a sweet deal for the Bahamas that grinning up and currying favour by the new leaders was the order of the day -- the promised dismantling and renegotiation of the deal was forgotten. The threats made 11 years before were quickly abandoned -- it was as though they were never spoken.

On the floor of the House in 1996 then St Michael's MP Paul Adderley had threatened Sol Kerzner that if the agreement that his Sun International had with the Bahamas government were not renegotiated, when the PLP became the government it would do it for him. "The terms of this deal, so far as the Bahamas is concerned, is a bad deal," shouted Mr Adderley.

History has proven that Kerzner's Paradise Island -- the country's largest private employer -- is what has saved the Bahamas' economic bacon for the past 15 years. The Kerzners arrived when the Bahamas was flat on its back -- failing tourist industry, empty Treasury, tarnished international reputation. Bahamians will remember that in those days we were an "island for sale" laid waste by a careless government and a greedy drug cartel. A disgusted electorate voted the PLP government of 25 years out of office and put the Ingraham government in.

The PLP government had secretly tried to sell the failed hotels on the international market. The Ingraham government came to power in 1992 and the following year entered into an agreement with the Kerzners for the development of Paradise Island. Atlantis became the catalyst that revitalised the country's tourist industry, and emboldened investors to take a second look at a country that was trying under a new government to clean up its act.

It was only then that the Bahamas started to move forward.

But the empty threats coming from the PLP benches in 1996 - are being repeated today against the sale of BTC to Cable and Wireless. So far it is the only bone that the PLP has found on which to chew for the 2012 election.

Fred Mitchell, a PLP senator in 1996, seemed on a mission at that time to cast doubt on the Atlantis operation - attacking everything from the Kerzners' South African roots, their hiring policies suggesting that Bahamians were being shut out of the project, to the belief that the Bahamianisation policy was being undermined. And, of course, Mr Mitchell even raised the alarm that the newly constructed bridge to Paradise was sinking. All wishful thoughts that had no base.

Dr Bernard Nottage complained at the time that the Ingraham government was giving Atlantis "improved infrastructure, roads, transportation and telecommunications facilities."

"But what are the Bahamian people getting?" he asked. The Bahamian people knew what they were getting, even though they were paying for it -- good jobs, improved infrastructure, good roads on which they travelled daily and much more. By now Dr Nottage should have the answers to his foolish questions of that era. Any improvement in infrastructure always benefits the whole country and everyone in it -- regardless of for whom it was intended.

The PLP poured scorn on the fact that Atlantis and its shareholders would earn good money. They forgot that when business flourishes so do the people. It is, therefore, good news for a country when it can report that its commercial establishments are strong. It is when they are weak that a country suffers high unemployment. To scoff at profits shows a lack of business sense, which is a serious failure in a country's leaders.

In our opinion Mr Christie's "buyer beware! cease and desist! do not proceed!" warning to Cable and Wireless is just so much political balderdash. What the future held for the Kerzner operation it also holds for the Cable & Wireless transaction. The main beneficiaries will be the Bahamas and its people.

It would be more than Mr Christie dare do with the Bahamas facing a $3.8 billion national debt to add to that debt by trying to dismantle the BTC/C&WC deal. If these are his plans it is up to the Bahamian people to make certain that his party is not returned to power.

Mr Christie, a procrastinator, who finds it difficult to make decisions at the best of times, would have nightmares over such an impossible exercise.

To Bahamians we say: Beware! This is silly season when the politicians seem to lose their mental balance -- so don't believe everything you hear in the marketplace.

April 04, 2011

tribune242 editorial

bahamas Blog International

2012 General Election Predictions - Bahamas

Election predictions - part 1
By ADRIAN GIBSON
ajbahama@hotmail.com



AS ELECTION draweth nigh, it is anticipated that drama will surely accompany the impending showdown.  Indeed, as ham/turkey/dryer/washer season rolls around once more, I'm hopeful that a more edified electorate will reject political paternalism and demand change--demand that the substantive societal/national issues are addressed.

Thus far, whilst the FNM party seems slow-footed in announcing its slate of candidates, the electioneering has clearly begun as is evident by Opposition Leader Perry Christie and his Deputy's (Philip Davis) flurry of Family Island trips conducting what they refer to as a listening tour.

Frankly, as the electoral clock ticks away, there are a few sitting Members of Parliament who have virtually fallen off a cliff and have literally disappeared in their constituencies whilst others are visionless and/or have adopted an attitude of entitlement and intolerance.  Undoubtedly, there will be fits of hysteria and much whimpering following this electoral cycle.  There are quite a number of politicians who are said to be on the endangered species list--marching onward toward the political gallows.

It is expected that the newly-constituted Boundaries Commission will redraw some constituency boundaries using recent census and voter registration data to determine population shifts and, frankly, the favourable cuts for electoral success.

Notably, the FNM must also be concerned about its weakening presence in Grand Bahama which continues to suffer immense economic woes.

That said, I've decided to don my monk's garb and attempt to read the political tea leaves, making preliminary electoral projections relative to the political odds of the purported candidates contesting seats in the upcoming elections.  One must be mindful that this preliminary tally--to be later followed up--comes as ratifications and candidate selection is ongoing and, moreover, boundaries have yet to be cut.

Mano-a-mano, for Dr Hubert Minnis (FNM) the electoral race against opponent Jerome Gomez (PLP) will be like running against a cupcake.  Depending on how far Dr Minnis outruns him at the polls--and it seems that the gap will be wide--Mr Gomez may need a powerful telescope to even see his opponent.

The doctor has been a stellar MP and a smooth political salesman who actually delivers.  His challenger is likely to be politically manhandled in a horrifying loss that will expose him--politically--as a paper tiger.

Annihilate

PLP MP Obie Wilchcombe will politically annihilate purported FNM candidate Jeff Butler. Wilchcombe, an oratorically-gifted Parliamentarian, has been a superb MP and is likely to jettison Mr Butler--a grocery store owner--to the political dustbin.

PLP candidate Dr Danny Johnson is likely to be shell-shocked and in denial after being KO'd by Desmond Bannister in the Carmichael constituency.  It is anticipated that Dr Johnson--son of the late MP Oscar Johnson, brother of former House Speaker Italia Johnson and son-in-law of the late former PM Sir Lynden Pindling--will mobilize the PLP's campaign machinery/resources in the area.  That said, Dr Johnson is likely to have recurring nightmares following this election episode.

Contrary to recent speculation, Mr Bannister is set to run in Carmichael again although reliable sources inform me that due to purported variations of the electoral map-- that would be an attempt to cut-out strong polling divisions to save the politically unpopular Charles Maynard's seat--he considered a run in his home town, North Andros.

The reality is that if Mr Bannister--a strong candidate--loses, for the FNM, the domino effect would probably afflict the entire Southwestern area.  Mr Bannister's electoral outcome could potentially coincide with the outcome of neighbouring seats.  That said, he's expected to at least win his seat.

Former MP Leslie "Potcake" Miller will politically clobber incumbent Sidney Collie in Blue Hills.

This race is set to be a carnivorous affair. Constituents assert that Mr Collie has been a resounding disappointment, malignantly neglecting his constituency and performing abysmally.

Any expectancy of Mr Collie winning his seat is comparable to waiting for VAT 19 (liquor) to turn 20!

Naturally, both parties concede certain seats--for e.g. Long Island (usually FNM) and Englerston (traditionally PLP)--offering second tier candidates who are considered to be sacrificial lambs who make up the party's frontline numbers.

That said, the race for the Long Island/Ragged Island yields an exploitable mismatch as incumbent Larry Cartwright faces off against PLP newcomer Alex Storr--son of businessman Henry F Storr. Unfortunately for him, in Long Island, Mr Storr will suffer a humiliating loss.

Branville McCartney, depending on his political decisions, could likely retain his Bamboo Town seat.

As an FNM, and perhaps even if Mr McCartney becomes an independent, he would be a strong and favoured contender.  However, if he joins a new party, he will suffer a political death.

Currently, Mr McCartney is in a very critical position politically, however he must rid himself of any notion that its normal to be "half-pregnant"--that is, either he's with the FNM or he's not.

Will Mr McCartney's move happen during the BTC debate?  Were his recent comments/actions a precursor to what his true intentions are, that is, to separate himself from the pack and portray himself as a man with the gumption to stand against Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham?  Is his decision predicated upon the position he takes with the BTC debate?  In the wake of the Prime Minister's recent remarks relative to a snap election if all FNM MPs do not support the BTC sale in Parliament, is the ground now loosening under Mr McCartney?

I've been informed that the Clifton constituency will no longer exist.  Moreover, as a result of this constituency being eliminated, I'm told that incumbent MP Kendal Wright will be offered a nomination to contest the Golden Gates seat.  I'm told that because Mr Wright was raised in the Sunshine Park area of the constituency, he should be a "natural fit" to challenge incumbent MP Shane Gibson.  Frankly, barring any other happenings, Wright--who is an uninspiring candidate--will lose to Shane Gibson, who is a political powerhouse in the area and has a diehard support base.

The MICAL constituency is being divided into the Inagua and Mayaguana constituency and Acklins, Crooked Island and Long Cay, respectively.

FNM Senator Dion "The Bruiser" Foulkes is set to triumph over his challenger in the new Inagua and Mayaguana constituency.

Nomination

I was told that the likely forerunner for the FNM nomination in Acklins, Crooked Island and Long Cay was Johnley Ferguson.  However, that appears to be a moot point now that Mr Ferguson has signed a two year contract as a consultant with the Department of Lands and Surveys.  Incumbent Alfred Gray is likely to put a shellacking on his opponent.

South Andros MP Picewell Forbes will be wielding a big, electoral tamarind switch for FNM challenger and COB lecturer Zendal Forbes.  Although Picewell Forbers may encounter some difficulties if former MP Whitney Bastian nominates as an independent candidate, he's expected to retain the seat with Mr Z Forbes coming a distant third as an "also-ran" candidate.

FNM insiders assert that Carl Bethel has worn-out his welcome in Sea Breeze.  However, his uncertain political fortune is dependent upon the candidate that the PLP settles on running against Mr Bethel.

Of late, Hope Strachan--Bethel's strongest challenger--has been mentioned as a possible replacement for Fort Charlotte MP Alfred Sears who has announced that he will not seek re-election.

However, if Ms Strachan remains in Sea Breeze, Carl Bethel will suffer a shellacking.

In 2007, Ms Strachan lost by 60-plus votes after campaigning in the constituency for a mere six weeks.

Mr Bethel appears out of touch with the electorate and, unfortunately, has a massive risk factor concerning his candidacy--that is, the perception that he's arrogant and egotistical.

Moreover, another scenario discussed is the possible nomination of lawyer Myles Laroda in Sea Breeze, apparently the PLP's compromise for snubbing him in South Beach. Frankly, Laroda would be defeated by Bethel.  The PLP's best chance of capturing that seat is to leave Hope Strachan as the nominee.  No doubt, the PLP would be smart to smack down any inkling to move Ms Strachan to the other side of town.

The Fort Charlotte district--no longer being contested by PLP MP Alfred Sears--should be a political duel.

Sources assert that the boundaries will extend further into Dr Minnis' Killarney constituency to facilitate a successful run by FNM candidate Vincent Vanderpool Wallace.

I'm also informed that the recently departed former NDP leader (now PLP) Dr Andre Rollins is also vying for the nod in Fort Charlotte.  There are those who argue that Dr Rollins--a political journeyman--lacks the political capital to win a contest.  The race for Fort Charlotte could go either way.

Brent Symonette will retain the St Annes seat. Mr Symonette, who won nearly 64 per cent of the votes cast in his constituency in the last general election, will handily dispatch any challengers (said to be Billy Nottage or another applicant).

Loretta Butler-Turner will banish her challenger to the political wilderness and roar down victory lane in the Montagu constituency.

Mrs Butler-Turner won by a margin of more than 68 per cent of the total votes cast in her constituency during the last general election--the largest margin that year.

FNM nominee for St Cecilia Karen Shepherd--the former president of the Women's Association--will be a victim of circumstance.  In a traditionally PLP stronghold, Ms Shepherd is a rookie politician whose candidacy reminds me of a wilting candle.

I'm informed that Ms Shepherd requested to run in St Cecilia since her father James Shepherd--a member of the Dissident Eight--once represented the area.

However, from the looks of things, Ms Shepherd could perhaps begin writing her biography, with it perhaps reading "I also ran in St Cecilia, etcetera" and being filled out during her lifetime.

Glenys Hanna-Martin has a strong political wind at her back in the Englerston constituency.  The constituency is also a traditional PLP stronghold.

March 18, 2011

2012 General Election Predictions (Part 2) - Bahamas

tribune242

A lot of what Mr. Errington Watkins had to say in defence of Mr. Branville McCartney makes sense

Mr. Errington Watkins on Mr. Branville McCartney


By Rick Lowe




A lot of what Mr. Errington Watkins had to say in this Letter to the Editor in defence of Mr. Branville McCartney makes sense.

For example, he rightly claims; (a) it's Mr. McCartney's Constitutional right to seek to be Prime Minister of The Bahamas, (b) a politicians generosity with other peoples money should concern us all, (c) Mr. Hubert Ingraham is an astute politician, and (d) every FNM has a right to attempt to become head of that party.

Where Mr. Watkins, a self described floater, gets it wrong is when he suggests that a member of a political party should take on his colleagues in the court of public opinion.

Mr. McCartney is no doubt intelligent, ambitious, likeable and more, but that does not matter when you might have publicly offended the very ones you hope will help you achieve your goal within the political organisation you're aligned with.

Many PLP's are no longer in its ranks, and many FNM's are no longer welcome there as a result of taking their colleagues on in the press rather than winning them over quietly within their ranks. There is also the obvious point that one needs to be aligned with a major political party to become the country's Prime Minister. But of course Mr. McCartney has the right to leave the FNM, join the PLP or another party or remain a legitimate independent (i.e. not an independent that relies on a major political party not fielding a candidate against them).

In the final, maybe Mr. McCartney has every right to berate his colleagues in public, but as P.J. O'Rourke once said; "There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences."

February 19, 2011

weblogbahamas

Bahamas Blog International