When Loyalty Is Rented: The Quiet Death of Political Marketing in Nigeria, By Adetokunbo Modupe

An election stripped of a contest of ideas does not simply produce poorer campaigns. It produces a weaker mandate, and a weak mandate is the seed of weak governance.  That is the deeper stake in the question this OpEd raises, and it is why the issue deserves treatment beyond the familiar language of vote buying.

Adetokunbo Modupe is right to name the shift. Where persuasion once carried elections, financial inducement increasingly does, and he captures it in the idea of a temporary loyalty purchase that expires the moment the exchange is complete. 

For Proshare’s discerning readership, the consequence is concrete and economic. The quality of an electoral mandate determines the quality of the economic policy that follows. A government that must recover the cost of its acquisition tends toward opaque procurement, distorted subsidies and fiscal choices made for political settlement rather than public return. 

That transmission runs into inflation, debt sustainability, regulatory predictability and the sovereign and market risk that investors price every day. An election decided by spending rather than purpose is therefore not only a democratic problem. It is a cost-of-capital problem.

The task before Nigeria is, accordingly, larger than merely stopping cash-for-vote exchanges at the unit level. It is to restore an electoral culture in which parties advance ideas, manifestos are costed and tracked, campaign finance is transparent, enforcement is credible, and citizens have sufficient economic security to refuse inducements without paying for the refusal. 

Where those conditions are absent, elections become exercises in mobilisation rather than mandates for governance, and the mandate on which government rests is diminished before the first decision is taken.

Is political marketing still the most effective strategy for winning elections in Nigeria?

Increasingly, it appears to have been replaced by something far more expensive, less creative, more direct, and, regrettably, more effective.

For decades, political marketing has been recognised as one of the defining features of modern democratic elections. Just as businesses market products to consumers, politicians market themselves, their parties, and their ideas to the electorate. Elections are expected to be contests of ideas in which candidates persuade citizens that they possess the competence, character, vision, and leadership required to solve society’s problems.

As a communication professional who has worked on political campaigns, I understand the rigour required to develop an effective political marketing strategy. It requires extensive research, audience segmentation, issue mapping, message development, branding, stakeholder engagement, media planning, and strategic communication. Every message is carefully designed to resonate with different voter groups while projecting credibility and inspiring public confidence.

At its core, political marketing applies the traditional principles of marketing.

The product is the candidate’s character, competence, track record, leadership qualities, and manifesto.

The price is the trust, confidence, time, and commitment that citizens invest in both the candidate and the democratic process.

The place comprises the channels through which voters are engaged—from town hall meetings and community interactions to traditional media, digital platforms, and campaign rallies.

The promotion involves storytelling, advertising, debates, endorsements, media relations, grassroots mobilisation, and social media engagement.

The objective is straightforward: persuade citizens that one candidate offers a better future than the alternatives.

But does this still define electoral politics in Nigeria?

Increasingly, electoral success appears to depend less on persuasion and public policy than on economic leverage. Rather than competing on ideas, many political actors seem to compete on financial capacity.

As poverty deepens and economic hardship intensifies, many citizens are compelled to prioritise immediate survival over long-term governance considerations. In such circumstances, the electoral franchise risks becoming a tradable commodity rather than a sacred democratic responsibility.

It is within this context that I believe a new electoral phenomenon has emerged—Temporary Loyalty Purchases.

Temporary Loyalty Purchase is an electoral practice in which conventional political marketing is largely abandoned in favour of direct vote acquisition through financial inducements or material incentives. It is a system in which economic hardship and voter vulnerability are exploited to procure electoral support and suppress the power of informed democratic choice.

Rather than persuading voters through ideas, policies, performance records, or ideological conviction, candidates simply purchase short-term allegiance.

The loyalty secured is neither emotional nor ideological.

It is purely transactional.

And, like every commercial transaction, it expires almost immediately after the exchange.

In such a system, polling units become marketplaces. Political agents become sales representatives. Electoral success depends less on the strength of ideas than on the ability to outspend political opponents.

The implications are profound.

A dangerous cycle begins to emerge:

Poor governance → Deepening poverty → Greater voter vulnerability → More vote buying → Poor governance.

The cycle then repeats itself, election after election.

When this happens, democracy gradually shifts from being a contest of ideas to becoming a contest of financial muscle. Elections cease to reward competence, integrity, and vision. Instead, they reward those with the greatest capacity to finance temporary political loyalty.

This raises a far more fundamental question than whether vote buying exists.

The real question is whether Nigeria has reached a point where Temporary Loyalty Purchases are steadily replacing political marketing as the dominant strategy for winning elections.

If the answer is yes, then the solution extends well beyond electoral reforms alone. It requires restoring economic dignity, reducing poverty, strengthening civic education, enforcing electoral laws, and rebuilding a democratic culture in which votes are earned through credible performance, visionary leadership, and public trust—not purchased through desperation.

Political marketing should remain the art of persuading citizens. Democracy flourishes when ideas compete freely, and voters make informed choices. But when temporary loyalty becomes the currency of elections, both political marketing and democracy itself risk becoming casualties.

The debate is therefore open.

Has political marketing truly lost its relevance in Nigeria’s electoral landscape, or can it still compete with the growing influence of transactional politics?

About the Author

Adetokunbo Modupe is the Chief Consultant, TPT International Limited