By Maroof Asudemade

There is a reminder that needs to be sent, not only to APC members who are bold enough to contemplate crossing over to the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) to support Bimbo Adekanmbi, but also to those jittery enough to remain in APC while secretly working against the party from within.

Before anyone takes that decision, there is a simple question to ask: Where will you be more valued, recognised and trusted? Is it in the political family where you have built relationships over the years, or in a new political home where you will arrive as a stranger?

Roofs are leaking in Oyo APM too. The manner in which Governor Seyi Makinde reportedly ignored many capable hands who have worked with him for years and settled for Bimbo Adekanmbi and Open Salawu, both relatively new entrants to his political camp, has inevitably generated silent controversies, disappointment and discontent among some members of his political family who had nursed the ambition of succeeding him or becoming his running mate. That is the irony of political migration: sometimes, the grass does not become greener simply because one has crossed the fence.

This is, therefore, an appeal to reason to disgruntled APC aspirants and members who remain unhappy about the manner in which Senator Sharafadeen Alli emerged as the party’s governorship candidate. Consensus politics is not a beauty contest in which everybody gets a crown.

When a political party adopts consensus, the fundamental reality is that several aspirants may enter the process, but only one can ultimately emerge. In this particular case, it could have been Bayo Adelabu. It could have been Fatai Buhari. It could have been Akeem Agbaje. It could have been Raufu Olaniyan. It could have been Hakeem Alao. Or it could have been another aspirant entirely.

Whoever emerged would still have faced the same difficult responsibility: pacifying those who lost, healing bruised egos, rebuilding trust and persuading supporters of the unsuccessful aspirants to remain committed to the larger project. That is politics.

The emergence of one candidate does not automatically make the others losers. It merely gives one person the responsibility of carrying the party’s flag while giving the others the opportunity to decide whether their political relevance is bigger than one contest.

Senator Sharafadeen Alli is also not a stranger to the APC. Whatever disagreements members may have with the process that produced him, he has an established relationship with the party and has been part of its political structure. That is fundamentally different from entering another political party where one’s political history, networks and contributions may not carry the same weight.

The comparison with what has happened in the APM camp is therefore instructive. Bimbo Adekanmbi and Open Salawu may be capable politicians. They may have their own strengths, experience and political value. But their relatively recent arrival in Governor Makinde’s political camp naturally creates a different dynamic from that of people who have travelled with him for years.

Politics is built on relationships. And relationships are built on history, sacrifice, loyalty and trust. A politician who has spent eight years serving a political administration may reasonably ask: After all these years, after all the battles we fought together, after all the sacrifices we made, why should the person who came yesterday suddenly become the preferred choice? That question may not always be fair, but it is politically understandable.

This is why picking a fellow homeboy or a long-standing political associate is often less difficult and less acrimonious than elevating a relatively new entrant above those who have been around for years. The latter can easily be interpreted by old associates as an act of displacement — even when that may not have been the intention.

Therein lies the lesson for the aggrieved in APC. Do not mistake disappointment with a process for rejection by the entire political family. You may disagree with how Alli emerged. You may believe another aspirant was better qualified. You may feel your preferred candidate deserved the ticket. You may even have genuine reasons to be angry. But before you leave, ask yourself what you are actually leaving behind.

You are leaving people who know your political history. You are leaving people who know what you contributed to the party. You are leaving a structure in which your name, relationships and political capital already mean something. You are leaving a platform where, even after disagreement, you remain part of the conversation. And you are entering somewhere else where you will have to introduce yourself again.

That does not mean that political defection is always wrong. Politicians have legitimate reasons to change parties. Political parties sometimes betray their founding principles. Leaders sometimes treat members unfairly. There are moments when leaving is justified. But anger is a poor architect of political destiny. A political decision taken in the heat of disappointment can become a political burden that lasts for years.

The question should not simply be: Who annoyed me? It should be: Where is my political future more secure? Where is my contribution more likely to be recognised? Where do I have stronger relationships? Where have I built a support base? Where do people understand my strengths and weaknesses? Where can I negotiate from a position of familiarity rather than from the vulnerability of a newcomer?

And perhaps most importantly: If I leave today, am I actually becoming more politically valuable, or am I merely becoming useful to somebody else’s immediate political calculation?

This is where some aggrieved APC members need to be careful. Every political party welcomes defectors when their presence serves an immediate purpose. But political hospitality should not be confused with political ownership. A person may be celebrated during the excitement of defection and become ordinary once the election is over.

The politician who has been in APC for years, however, has something that a new entrant cannot acquire overnight: institutional memory and political roots. Those roots matter.

A party member who loses a primary today can win a nomination tomorrow. A politician who fails to secure a ticket in one election can become the candidate in another. A person who is disappointed by one leader can build a relationship with another. Politics is a marathon, not a reaction to one afternoon’s disappointment.

There is also a moral dimension to political loyalty. If every politician abandons his party whenever he loses an internal contest, political parties will never develop the culture of internal democracy, reconciliation and succession that democracy requires. The real test of political maturity is not what a politician does when he wins. It is what he does when he loses.

Anybody can celebrate victory. The statesman learns how to absorb defeat without destroying the house in which he intends to live tomorrow. Those who are angry with the APC leadership should therefore demand reconciliation. They should insist on fairness. They should demand that the party accommodate divergent interests. They should negotiate for their supporters. They should make their grievances known.

But there is a difference between fighting for your place in a party and fighting against the existence of the party itself. If your grievance can be resolved within APC, why abandon the platform? If your political future can still be negotiated within the party, why surrender your established political capital? If you have spent years building a political identity, why throw it away because somebody else was chosen for one office?

The wiser approach is to stay, organise, negotiate, contribute and prepare. The candidate may change. The leadership may change. The political equation may change. But your political relevance should not depend entirely on whether your preferred aspirant won one contest.

And to those who are considering remaining in APC while secretly working against it, the message is even simpler: You cannot build your future by destroying the house you may still need tomorrow. If you believe the party is worth belonging to, work to strengthen it. If you believe the candidate can be improved, engage constructively. If you believe the leadership has made mistakes, organise democratically to correct them. But working secretly against your own party while retaining its membership is neither courage nor loyalty. It is political self-sabotage.

The 2027 election will eventually come and go. Political alignments will change. Today’s winners may become tomorrow’s losers, and today’s aggrieved members may become tomorrow’s beneficiaries. What will remain is the political record each person leaves behind.

So, to every APC member nursing the temptation to cross over because of disappointment over the emergence of Senator Sharafadeen Alli, I offer one simple piece of advice:

Before you leave, look back at the road you have travelled. Ask yourself whether eight years of political investment should be discarded because you did not get what you wanted at one particular moment. Ask yourself whether becoming a celebrated newcomer elsewhere is better than remaining an established stakeholder where your political footprints are already visible. And ask yourself the question that should guide every serious political decision:

“Will I be more valuable as a stranger somewhere else, or as a stakeholder where I am already known?”

The answer may well determine whether today’s disappointment becomes the beginning of a new political chapter or merely the beginning of a long journey into political irrelevance.

In politics, a lost ticket is not necessarily a lost future. Sometimes, the wisest political move after losing is not to leave. It is to stay, heal, reorganise, rebuild and prepare for the next opportunity. Because political doors that are closed today can open tomorrow — but only for those who are still standing when the door opens.