Ruto's Mt Kenya political allies are his biggest political baggage

President William Ruto and Governor Mutahi Kahiga during a meeting with UDA grassroots leaders from Nyeri County at Sagana State Lodge on January 17, 2026. [PCS]

President William Ruto does not need political enemies in Mt Kenya, not when some of his most vocal allies in the region appear determined to do the damage for him. Politics is a team sport. When a president wins, his allies are expected to help consolidate goodwill, amplify development gains, and sell a coherent message to the public.

Yet in the Mountain, it is the opposite. Instead of operating as a disciplined political team, some leaders have chosen to rock the boat from within, replacing coordination with confrontation and collective responsibility with personal grandstanding.

The result is a brand of chest-thumping politics that shifts attention away from the presidency and, in the process, steadily erodes the very goodwill the President needs in a region that has historically valued both development and political respect.

From recent happenings, figures such as the Leader of Majority in the National Assembly Kimani Ichung’wah, Mathira MP Eric Wamumbi, Murang’a Woman Rep Betty Maina, and Thika Town MP Alice Ng’ang’a appear to have worked very hard to obscure the President’s work.

Rather than strengthening the centre, they have invested their energy in fighting fellow leaders, provoking unnecessary political standoffs, and attempting to impose their boisterous style on everyone else. Their pronouncements are often abrasive, poorly thought out, and politically careless. In doing so, they are quietly but effectively robbing Ruto of political credit and goodwill.

Take the issue of roads and markets, for example, matters that resonate deeply with wananchi. When new roads are launched or ongoing projects are highlighted, the narrative should be clear: It is the government at work under the leadership of the President.

Instead, what do we hear from these MPs? Claims that “these are my projects,” that “I delivered this road,” that “I fought for this tarmac,” or “I am behind the construction of this market.” When an MP declares public infrastructure as a personal achievement without clearly linking it to the national government’s development agenda, the message to the public is simple: That government is secondary and individuals are the real drivers of progress.

Some people are even saying that, despite arrogance and pride, some MPs will be re-elected “because he has built roads in the constituency.” Why is the same not being said about the President, who is actually the driver and financier of these projects?

If people do not associate development with the President, then they will not associate their improved livelihoods with his leadership, even when his administration is the one financing and coordinating the work.

Worse still, some leaders who scramble for personal credit are also accused, publicly and privately, of orchestrating chaos in political forums.

If they are not organising fake women leaders and goons to heckle fellow leaders in public meetings, they are allegedly busy plotting the political downfall of colleagues who refuse to sing from their hymn sheet.

This culture of intimidation and internal warfare does not strengthen the President in Mt Kenya; it weakens him.

The tragedy is that some of the loudest voices claiming political victories in Mt Kenya are, ironically, the very ones who need Ruto the most for their own political survival.

Ruto needs to take a careful look at the so-called foot soldiers in Mt Kenya. Many of his loudest allies face serious political headwinds in their own constituencies and risk dimming his star in the region rather than strengthening it. They have become political baggage: Their grassroots appeal has thinned, their political capital is under strain, and their re-election prospects look uncertain at best.

This raises an uncomfortable question: How can leaders who are struggling to maintain their own political relevance be expected to sell the President’s agenda effectively?

Historically, the Mountain has rewarded leaders who combine influence with humility and development with results. It has little patience for political showmanship that delivers more headlines than solutions.