Would Abiola Have Been a Good President?

[omaks]

Originally Posted by lateesha

Going by the way he handled women,NO

lateesha, going by the way he handled the women in his 'adult life' (and indeed his family),YES. However, that is not the only yardstick required in choosing a Leader.

[Eja]

Originally Posted by omaks

lateesha, going by the way he handled the women in his 'adult life' (and indeed his family),YES. However, that is not the only yardstick required in choosing a Leader.

Omaks, na true? You mean say de man stick long rish one yard? Gahdem!!! No wonder. And there I was thinking the hos were only interested in the ugly man's money...

[lateesha]

Originally Posted by omaks

lateesha, going by the way he handled the women in his 'adult life' (and indeed his family),YES. However, that is not the only yardstick required in choosing a Leader.

Uncountable women unprotected and over 100 children.
The man was totally irresponsible.
He may have spread HIV and syphilis in office since obviously he didn't know what condoms were used for.
If he was irresponsible in his own life,I don't expect he would have been responsible in leadership.

[lateesha]

what the fried fish?
The man is dead.

I might as well be answering to a thread that reads
"could Abacha have been a televangelist if he lived longer" ?

[Ewuro]

Originally Posted by WaleAkin

I was really waiting for this answer and then it came. Thanks Lala. It's not all these lamentation of Jeremiah that we have read on this thread but about the simple yet hidden fact that MKO despite having a stained past was willing and ready to lead Nigeria and help alleviate the masses suffering.

We never believed in Gov Fashola until we began to see his goodworks despite being a product of political godfatherism. Fashola proved us wrong and in less than 2 years cleaned up Lagos. Now, what gives the impression that MKO wouldn't have done the same?

SDP moved like a mighty rushing wind and I still remember it's mother of all conventions in the pictureque city of Jos where he won the mandate and just as Auspicious posited, it's not about MKO but about our political consciousness that was truncated.

I therefore write that we lost the best president via June 12 cancellation.

The question remains hypothetical. So people respond to it as matter for conjecture, a mere academic excersie.
However bringing Fashola into this is like like comparing Kola with Sugar cane. Fashola is not known for seducing all sorts of the bad and ugly women with money. He never even clamoured for the position in which the almighty God and fate had prepared for him. He was a consumate professional solicitor and advocate who was appointed Tinubu's Chief of staff. Tinubu recognised the discipline, intelligence and his commitment to humanity and took one honest decision to promote and support Fashola's candidacy.

Fashola must have demonstrated the spartan discipline he is now known for for a long time. Morning shows the day. Abiola's leopard would never change his skin colour. Abiola ate too much 'egun' to have changed later in the day.

As a democrat I supported that the mandate Abiola won be given to him, though I would never have voted for such a profilgrate. Those who denied him only made him a matyr in the minds of some people. Everthing that made Abiola was dependent on corruption and not construction.

[Bunch17]

Originally Posted by Ewuro

Abiola's leopard would never change his skin colour. Abiola ate too much 'egun' to have changed later in the day.

As a democrat I supported that the mandate Abiola won be given to him, though I would never have voted for such a profilgrate. Those who denied him only made him a matyr in the minds of some people. Everthing that made Abiola was dependent on corruption and not construction.

Gaddem!

Ewuro is on fire folks. Oga Sir, What gives? Is all well?

[WaleAkin]

Ewuro,

Firstly, did you vote in 1993? If yes, who did you vote for? MKO or Tofa? If the answer is no, then there's no need for this discourse, I however await ur answer.

Secondly, is Fashola a product of political godfatherism or not?

Have a very good evening Sir.

[omaks]

Originally Posted by Eja

Omaks, na true? You mean say de man stick long rish one yard? Gahdem!!! No wonder. And there I was thinking the hos were only interested in the ugly man's money...

Eja Baba, i trust you. I think many of those women who 'danced with Abiola' did it for the money too. The fact is no one grumbled then amongst his harem of women, no one died, everyone got paid, and now everyone has other directions to go in search of another paymaster. Why are we breaking our necks because of how someone lived his libve? One thing you can't take away from the man is 'He was a good man to far many people than he was a bad man to a little few people'
.

Originally Posted by lateesha

Uncountable women unprotected and over 100 children.
The man was totally irresponsible.
He may have spread HIV and syphilis in office since obviously he didn't know what condoms were used for.
If he was irresponsible in his own life,I don't expect he would have been responsible in leadership.

No, MKO lived his live the way he deemed fit, and those with whom he had relationships with in various forms must have been aware of his ways for them to still keep faith with him, irrespective of whatever they may have felt about it. if they complained we were not party to it, but the fact remains that they remained in the relationship in spite of what they were all aware of. It was a matter between CONSENTING ADULTS. Whether you want to accept it or not, Abiola's Moral Pedigree is a RELATIVISM. Some may see his way of life as bad, some as good and some as unconcerned. What i say is 'To everyone to his/her own'.

BTW Lateesha, no one complained that he did have any sexual disease, and i think it is unfair to make assumptions like that to buttress your viewpoints. Substance, facts, that's what we should stick to here. Thanks.

[Ewuro]

Originally Posted by WaleAkin

Ewuro,

Firstly, did you vote in 1993? If yes, who did you vote for? MKO or Tofa? If the answer is no, then there's no need for this discourse, I however await ur answer.

Secondly, is Fashola a product of political godfatherism or not?

Have a very good evening Sir.

WaleAkin,
We are in the realm of conjectures. You also concured with another post that we would never know the answer to that hypothetical question. I have already answered the question you posed in the context of the debate.
The antecedents of Fashola and Abiola are as opposing as the opposing ends of the real number line.
It is almost impossible for Abiola to promote social social justice as Fashola is acclaimed to be doing in Lagos. This is the issue I shall take up with you or any other contributions in this thread.

[MsMak]

The question: Would Abiola have been a good president?

My answer: NO.

My reasons:

1. He was always more motivated by his selfish/personal interests than any love for the country. A classic example: it is known fact that MKO Abiola financed many of the coups that continued to perpetuate military rule in Nigeria. Why? Because many of these military boys were his friends, and his businesses benefitted from their patronage and government mandated contracts.

2. Similar to Yaradua, Abiola emerged as the winner on June 12 from a very flawed process. Somehow, it seems we all conveniently forget that there were many political parties and several presidential aspirants prior to those elections. By fiat, IBB banned all existing parties and created two of his own: SDP and NRC. If i am not mistaken, the presidential aspirants were selected and approved by him too. This was by no means a democratic process. The choice between Tofa and Abiola was forced upon us, and in my humble opinion, not much of a choice at all.

3. Showed too much deference to the West; makes me believe that he would have remained their lackey if he was President. Who knows how many more of our policies would have been designed to favor Western interests before Nigeria.

4. He did not show responsibility in his domestic affairs; and this would have been an unncecessary distraction. This is an unfortunate point, but one that must be mentioned. For a highly visible position such as the President of Nigeria, one's personal life would and still does come into play. We want someone who would be focused on their job with as minimal distractions as possible. For example, how much of the country's resources would go towards security for all those wives, children and relatives? How about the abuse of "first ladyship" (remember how we all complained about Nyako's four wives?)? And going by how Abacha met his fate, would Abiola's legendary love for women not have posed a serious security risk as well?

5. He apparently did not manage many of his businesses very well; i find it hard to believe that he would have managed a country/nation any better. Suffice to say, there were obviously little or no plans laid down for continuity of his various businesses in his absence (a good leader should know how to identify good managers and delegate). Besides, it appears the business models were simply designed around govt. contracts and patronage. Not very wise.


These are the reasons i can think of now. Again, they are simply my humble opinion. I am open to correction and further education on these and other points. I may be relatively young but i am always a willing student of Nigerian history.

[Lalakokofefe]

We are going on and on about the way he ran his personal life and his businesses, and extrapolating that to the way he would have ruled Nigeria. The place to start this discourse is to define "good".

So, what is the definition of good in the question "Would Abiola have been a good president?

[Uwaa Sef]

Originally Posted by Mikky jaga

In Awo, Nigeria lost the best president it never had.

Pure crap.

Later

[Austin]

YES. President elected ABIOLA would have been a damned good president of Nigeria. No doubt about it.

Its actually funny that people are now asking about the Nigerian or African Obama, they forget that before Obama there was MKO. Yeah, Nigeria and indeed Africa had had its Obama moment since 1993, but what did we do about to him.

Sometimes I think our case is just so pathetic, we keep losing it because we fail to recognise, or don't even know exactly, what we are looking for. Like I have harped severally, oun ti a wa lo si Sokoto, o wa l'apo sokoto wa; meaning, what we are chasing after in far away Sokoto land, is actually inside our trousers pocket. O ma se o!

[elgaxton]

I dont really know much about Abiola and his family but my question is this: Was He able to handle his family?

If No! Then he couldn't have been able to handle Nigeria with all her problems with the Military watching menacingly.

He who is faithful in little will be faithful in much Vice Versa!

[maxsiollun]

In many ways, he was part of Nigeria's corrupt elite. A government led by him would have continued with business and corrupt dealings as usual. His emergence was predicated on his membership of the corrupt elite.

Moreover the fact that the army so bitterly opposed him probably means he would have been lucky to survive up to one year without being overthrown (or killed) in a violent coup.

[omaks]

Originally Posted by elgaxton

I dont really know much about Abiola and his family but my question is this: Was He able to handle his family?

If No! Then he couldn't have been able to handle Nigeria with all her problems with the Military watching menacingly.

He who is faithful in little will be faithful in much Vice Versa!

To answer the highlighted aspect of your post i would say this much. The only people who have a problem with Abiola's polygamous lifestyle are those other than the numerous women he had a relationship with. To confirm this one should recognise that almost all of the women who had the priviledge to share his life with him attest to how benevolent and kind he was to them in many ways, and most importantly financially. If that is not 'Handling his family' i don't know what else is.

To move on further. Abiola was reputed to be generous to the needy extensively. He was charitable to the highest level imaginable. He was loved by many people because of his generousity. This eventually stood him in good stead during his quest to become the President of Nigeria. So you see, not only did Abiola handle his 'Inidiate Family', but he made many people feel part of his extended family through his benevolence.

Like i have said before, no human being is 100% perfect, and absolutely true in Abiola's case too, but that does not mean we should denigrate his person solely because of his foibles. There was more to the great man than his short - comings, and we should be honest enough to recognise that. Whether he would have been a good/great President or not is one thing none of us has priviledge to experience, and any assumptions to that effect will be one thing only; CONJECTURE.

[Mikky jaga]

Originally Posted by maxsiollun

In many ways, he was part of Nigeria's corrupt elite.

...and decided towards the end of his life to pitch his tent with the masses. What about that? Why are you so fixated on one part of the man's life and refused to consider the other? That is very bias stance for a public commentator.

Originally Posted by maxsiollun

Moreover the fact that the army so bitterly opposed him probably means he would have been lucky to survive up to one year without being overthrown (or killed) in a violent coup.

Did you conduct a poll among "the army" to come to your conclusion that "the army so bitterly opposed him". What is public knowledge is that it was a few clique within the military that forced Babangida to do a rethink. And why do you believe Abiola could not deal with this clique as the Commander in Chief?

Max, your bias could barely be disguised.

[Imation]

Originally Posted by maxsiollun

http://maxsiollun.wordpress.com/2008...ome-president/

http://maxsiollun.wordpress.com/2009...1993-election/

God Knows best.

[maxsiollun]

Mikky - I have no bias one way or the other re Abiola. My point was that he made his money and power by doing deals with the military. That same military establishment denied him his mandate. Even after the annulment he was trying to do deals with them, believing (wrongly) that Abacha would hand over power to him after a brief period of military rule under Abacha.

My assessment of the military opposition to Abiola is based on the public views of the military officers themselves. Please note:

*The DG of military intelligence Brig Akilu was quoted as saying that "Abiola will be president over my dead body".

*Have you read Prof Omo Omoruyi's memoirs? Omoruyi was a key insider to the transition programme. He claimed that Brig David Mark also said that he would shoot Abiola the day he was sworn in (yes - this is the same guy who is our current Senate President).

*Gen Abacha also said "God forbid" the day when Abiola would be in a position to retire him.

So we had a situation where the Defence Secretary, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and head of military intelligence were all saying they would rather harm MKO than let him become president.

[blooming_i]

People continue to miss the point.

The debate is NOT about if Abiola would have been a good President.

It is, rather, about the need for a people's sacred mandate to be respected.

Yeah, they continue to miss the point. People who voted for Abiola were aware of his marital status/philandering/corruption etc. So, I guess we'll never know if he would have been a "good president" - whatever that means, since there have been no "good president" so far among those who have been ruling the country since his demise.

So the point is, the people's mandate was stolen from them. We were not given the opportunity to know how his government would have turned out or witnessed the effects of his governance on the people who voted for him.

So, to the question: "Would Abiola Have Been a Good President?" I say those who voted for him and rest of the populace will never know.