Brother Hamjatta: Couple of quick opinions here: 1. The possibility of voter-buyout in Kiang east is very high. No one disputes this. 2. Your 'theory' ends to overemphasize this as cause for the loss, specifically the 1000 absent votes. 3. Your theory is so shaky that it starts to fall apart at it's very seems at the slightest examination from the most untrained of eyes (me). 4. Overemphasizing such a shaky theory serves as a disservice to the opposition here (L) because it gives less credit to other equally and more plausible opinions. A more positive and practical approach would serve us better. Now a quick look at your 'voter-buyout' theory: Your theory makes a fundamental assumption that voter-buyout was the main reason for the high percentage of absentee ballots. This, in my opinion, is a very dangerous assumption even though you tried to provide legitimate reasons as to why this was the case. It also assumes that in the absence of these underhanded tactics by the APRC propaganda wing, the UDP loss in Kiang East would have been reversed. Before looking at the theory alone, lets look at the reasons why I tend to look a bit skeptically at the voter-buyout theory as opposed to other more plausible reasons for the high absentee count. The numbers in previous parliamentary elections in The Gambia show that low turnout is nothing new. There are other reasons but voter apathy is a very strong one to point to. Apathy is defined as indifference. This indifference in my opinion can be caused by a multitude of factors and not only the one you posited in your email about people not caring because they can afford to stay at home and live comfortably. An additional reason for this indifference is when people feel like their vote will not make any difference to what is already a terrible situation. In other words, they are resigned to poverty and a life of suffering. Furthermore, lack of education because of poverty resulting in people who really don't understand the significance of these votes is another plausible reason for indifference. How else can one explain the low voter turnout which has been a hallmark of Gambian and Third World elections from day one? Voter turnouts in more developed countries are usually higher than those of less developed countries. Therefore, to assume the turnout would increase this year because Kiangkas have suffered more harshly than in previous years is being overly optimistic. So, in short, I do not believe voter-buyout by itself is capable of explaining the 1000 absentee ballots. It is strange that you use the word ‘mysterious’ to describe these absentee ballot as if to say this is something new. The following were my contentions with the theory alone by itself. After your 'forensic' scrutiny of the numbers provided courtesy of Mr. Ebrima Sillah, you came to the following conclusions: 1. The UDP's loss in Njolfen can only be attributable to voter-buyout because the absentee vote was 4 times higher than what they actually polled (7%) when it was a known fact that they had strong support in this area (over 50%). 2. Also, this Njolfen loss and the fact that the UDP vote was lower than the absentee ballot in other polling stations points to a massive amount of voter-buyout. Brother, you simply cannot make these assumptions. On assumption number 1 (see above), the fact that purportedly most UDP supporters stayed away should not be a reason to cry voter buyout. Instead the UDP should objectively look at these numbers and ask themselves this question honestly: “In the absence of voter-buyout, what did we not do and what did the APRC do to ensure that their supporters turned up while ours did not?” Once this question is answered, the UDP could move on to more objective and practical answers and solutions to this low turnout predicament. This as opposed to just assuming that voter-buyout was the main culprit. I hope you (Hamji) are now beginning to see why taking the easy way out can serve as a disservice to the opposition. There is no point in listing the other likely explanations for the problem in Njolfen. You are an extremely bright man who should be able to come up with other alternatives. On point number 2 (see above), I just don't see a correlation here. How can one say because the absentee vote was higher than the numbers UDP polled, voter-buyout must now become a factor? This statistic in my opinion proves zilch. We can come up with a multitude of scenarios here. I shall not even go into them for a lack of time. Anyway, I shall keep this short and conclude now. But please note that I do not think your voter-buyout theory is a solid one. We need not overemphasize this theory at the expense of more practical and sensible ones. This opinion should not be considered as an affront to the opposition or yourselves in anyway whatsoever. Have a nice day! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask] if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------