What’s in winning an election?

Political competition can be highly emotive. People die, others are mimed; property and businesses are destroyed in the hyped spirit of finding political heroes. But, is winning an election a clear achievement? Those in the contest - when they win - rejoice overwhelmingly claiming that the electorate has confirmed their suitability. And those that lose suffer a sense of devastated humiliation, rejection and exaggerated unworthiness.

Whereas, these feeling are natural and hard to brush off from those who participated in the contest, they may be grossly unjustified. This is because there’re many dynamics that play a role in determining who won and who lost. This is - even without   going into the possibility of manipulations, fouling of the integrity of the processes and systems; or other malpractice or mischief that may have occurred.

It’s unfortunate that only few countries make follow-ups on what informs an electoral victory. And such countries can be identified by the low emotions they place on results. There is the knowing that the results can provide much more information and insights than merely isolating ‘winners’ from ‘losers’.

Of course attaining such appreciation comes with higher civilisation of a society. It works when leaders understand their purpose is to serve and therefore it’s not about them but rather the voters. Consequently, investment in data collection and analysis into people’s choices is not spared. Political analysis is deeper with aims of unearthing new concerns affecting people.

The campaign trail isn’t just about those seeking office telling voters what they’ll do, but also the opportunity for them to listen to what they want. And most importantly knowing leadership is exercised in everyday civic responsibilities and not just in elected positions.

Whereas different societies and countries have unique critical determinants that strongly influence their choice patterns in Kenya three parameters that encompass the person, connections and success; stand out as predominant impacts. These parameters are drawn from historical elections’ outcomes and reinforced by opinion pollsters and media story-framings.

However, the voters are still analytical and they break down these factors further as they evaluate each new entrant in the game. They end up weighing the candidates against 14 sub factors as depicted below.

But going with empirical evidence obtained in the results, it turns out the ultimate decision is simplified and summarised to be either ‘kazi ianze’ or ‘kazi iendelee’. This means that they may seek freshness or prefer continuity. The problem is that the freshness may not even be the person but rather the party ticket, the marketing style, or other unforeseen phenomenon.

To obtain clearer reasons, such models are given mathematical quantifications (impact analysis). Using statistical methods (path coefficients), and drawing from historical results, information on campaign strategies and responses from exit polls, new knowledge can created that improves the game of politics and governance in the country.

The greatest benefit for a contestant to seek this analysis is in understanding their win or loss. Unfortunately, not many care to scientifically review their results. Therefore, those who win at times fail to successfully defend their seats because they only assume the reasons they were elected and the same befall those who lost when they try another time.