Poor Peter Kenneth! Was he even presidential material in the first place?

Only in Kenya! This is perhaps the only country where someone runs for President, fails miserably and further scandalizes himself by running for Governor in the next election and still believe there is nothing wrong with the move.

This is what happens to a country where citizens are under siege from a political class that has no morals, principals and is simply driven by politics of ethnicity, impunity and mediocrity. They stand for nothing and will change positions in the most unorthodox of ways and still try to justify themselves.

I found the reasons that Peter Kenneth gave for demoting himself, rather mediocre and reckless. The reasons are not only untrue, they are diversionary but also disrespectful and demeaning to the people of Kenya. First, he claimed Kenyans desire change, but seem not ready for it when it is offered to them. Absolute madness if you ask me!

He cannot sanitize his premature, misinformed, uninspired and, more importantly, miserable shot at the presidency in 2013 by saying Kenyans are not ready for change. So why is he running for governorship in a Kenyan County? Kenyans have been yearning for change even before he decided ran for the presidency. It was utter contempt for the people for Kenneth to make such a reckless claim. This is because the road to change in this country must begin with the unwavering believe in its good people. I have consistently responded to those who would belittle the people that these same people are the only hope for change in this country anyway.

To want change and demean and dismiss the people in the same breath is self-defeating. Kenneth’s assumption is that we have been offered the change and refused to take it. My goodness! And if he is to be believed, he imagines that he was that change. What a pity! His argument is that since Kenyans rejected him, we are not ready for change. This is the kind of argument that you get from a self-righteous joke of a politician and not the charismatic and inspiring type. Kenyans rejected him because he had nothing new to offer them. They know emptiness when they see it?

Politics is about narratives. Kenneth had none. So, my question to him would be, what change did he offer? He was not a change candidate and he did not have a change message. In fact, he did not even have a unique message, leave alone one for change. Remember that clumsy slogan he had? I cannot remember what he stood for because he either stood for nothing, or for the painfully commonplace. Come on, you cannot tell us that you are running for president to fix roads, bring us water, education, electricity and end corruption. Really? That is what politicians have been telling us for the last half a century!

Lack of narrative, Kenneth’s water loo

For you to make an impact as a politician, you must have a compelling new narrative that resonates with the people, a sizeable base, a constituency big enough to take you past the finish line to victory. I have argued that in 2013 only two presidential candidates had a political narrative, Uhuru and Raila. And their narrative was, unfortunately, tribe! They were presenting themselves as tribal kingpins at the top of two tribal coalitions.

Not only did Kenneth not have a narrative, he did nothing to confront the tribal narrative of the two tribal kingpins who were his top competitors. How do you expect to trounce tribal kingpins without deconstructing the tribal narrative that makes them front-runners and provide an alternative non-tribal narrative? Kenneth should not justify his own failure to present himself as an alternative by claiming Kenyans do not want change.

We do. He just wasn’t it! The second reason he gave was even more annoying. He claims that the 2017 elections is a closed race between Jubilee and Cord tribal coalitions and there is no space for anyone else. Utter nonsense!

First, anyone calling the 2017 elections a whole 10 months ahead is a stranger to Kenyan politics. We cannot yet tell how the tribal configurations of the next general election will look like. Not even a witchdoctor can! One would surely expect Kenneth to know this.

There is no guarantee that the two coalitions will remain intact until 2017. To claim that these are the only two coalitions and there is no space for anyone else is naive and premature. Kenneth’s lame excuses have very serious implications to the political psyche of voters.

He has made people believe that the tribal kingpins in CORD and Jubilee are not beatable, yet it is him who was incapable of defeating them. To prove the extent to which he has bought into the tribal narrative, he has joined Jubilee where “his people” ostensibly are. Very pedestrian move. By abandoning the search for the presidency in favour of his tribal overlord, Kenneth wants Kenyans to believe that the tribal narrative is the only option, that the tribal warlords are undefeatable and that the best thing to do is to support “yours”.

For a country that is desperately in need of a new non-ethnic political narrative, this is the greatest disservice that Kenneth has done to Kenyans after running a rudderless and doomed presidential campaign. He would have done better to stay out of the fray. He would have in future managed to convince voters that he is a Kenyan candidate. With his move, he has confirmed that he was a tribal candidate and that he is angling himself for space in future in the tribal narrative.