For him, his party is open to an NRP-led alliance, which he said, is the most favorable thing ahead of the polls.

“This is not about Ousainou Darboe or Hamat Bah because it is beyond both of us. It is the interest of Gambians that is at stake. In 2006, over 60% of Gambians fail to vote. We have to reflect our minds honestly and sincerely. Why did they refuse to go and vote for our candidate we put forward under NRP/UDP alliance?” Bah asked.

So Hon. Hamat says this is not about Hon. Ousainou nor Hon. Hamat. That it is beyond both of them. Yet Hon. Hamat clamours for an NRP-led alliance of opposition parties with Hon. Hamat as Presidential candidate by default. Now where 60% of Gambians did not vote (it is unclear who they would have voted for among APRC/ARC/NADD if they had voted) why does Hon. Hamat think think those 60% silver-bullet voters would vote for the ARC in 2011 if Hon. Hamat is the Presidential candidate of ARC? Or did Hon. Hamat mean he deserves to be the presidential candidate of an ARC/NADD coalition?????? This is not making sense to me. If someone can get an explanation from Hon. Hamat we would appreciate it. It is not good to just talk for the sake of talking.

A former Upper Saloum parliamentarian, Hamat Bah is of the view that the NRP party is not convinced that a UDP led alliance can unseat President Jammeh. “If we want to genuinely remove President Jammeh for the sake of Gambians and for the sake of regaining our dignity, we need to reconsider our position and push a way forward,” he stated.

Here I think Hon. Hamat is inferring that Even though NRP voluntarily joined the UDP in an ARC alliance, the NRP voters formed part of the 60% silver-bullet voters who stayed home in 2006. And that if Hon. Hamat had been the presidential candidate for the ARC in 2006, these NRP silver-bullet voters would have come out to vote. There is something sinister and disingenuous about the way Hon. Hamat is thinking. First of all, let us agree with Hon. Hamat that it was because he was not the candidate of the ARC that was why the NRP voters did not vote for the UDP-led ARC. We must therefore interrogate what portion of the 60% silver-bullet voters are NRP voters????????? Giving Hon. Hamat the benefit of doubt and saying even 1/2 were NRP voters, what makes Hon. Hamat so sure that those who did come out and voted for the ARC alliance would have voted for it if Hon. Hamat were the ARC presidential candidate???? Ok let me slow down because this is iterative arithmetic and it could be complicated.:

Let's say 100,000 voted for ARC, 30,000 voted for NADD, and 150,000 voted for APRC. Since Hon Hamat said 60% of registered voters did not vote, (SBVs), we have to assume that those who voted constituted 40% of registered voters (100,000+30,000+150,000 = 280,000). Therefore, 700,000 is the total registered voters. This means the SBVs comprise 420,000 voters, and half of them, 210,000 are NRP voters.....Hehehehehe. And if 210,000 NRP voters did not vote for the ARC after Hon. Hamat shared with us that his constituents urged him to join the UDP in forming the ARC, why would they not vote for the ARC??????????? Perhaps it is because the 100,000 voted for ARC. Was it true that the NRP constituents actually supported the idea of Hon. Hamat joining the UDP in a UDP-led ARC????? Again forget that the numbers are actually accurate. We could take the actual voter roll for the 2006 elections and you would come away with the same appreciation.

And if the 210,000 NRP SVBs voters did not vote for their chosen alliance ARC, it is their God-given right. However, if we say 210,000 of the SVBs are NRP SBVs, how do we partition the other 210,000 SVBs among APRC, Pure UDP, and NADD????????????? And here's the kicker: How many of the 210,000 NRP SVBs forgot to vote for Hon. Hamat for his National Assembly seat??????????????

The second wing of this logic is that let us assume for fancy that Hon. hamat were the presidential candidate for ARC in 2006 and all of the 210,000 NRP SVBs came out in their eminent splendour and voted for ARC. Then the 100,000 who voted for ARC stayed home, and we partition the other 210,000 SVBs among APRC and NADD, would Hon. Hamat win??? For fancy sakes again, let us assume half (105,000) voted for APRC and the other half (105,000) voted for NADD, you will see how APRC remains victor with the ARC coming in second place. WHich is what ARC did in 2006...Come in second. If we further say that well if 105,000 SVBs were to vote for APRC depending on who leads the ARC, it will be safe to assume that they would have voted for APRC when Hon. Ousainou led the ARC, right? Right. So it goes without saying that the 105,000 SVBs attributable to APRC are really NADD voters. And if we add all 210,000 non-NRP SVBs to NADD's tally, NADD then should have gotten 240,000 votes in 2006 when Hon. Hamat was the ARC candidate. Which means that NADD wins, ARC comes in second, and APRC comes in dead last. And we still had 100,000 ARC voters who may have abstained when the NRP SVBs found reason to vote ARC.

Meaning that Hon. Hamat joining the UDP to form the ARC and compete with NADD and APRC was a monumental error in judgement. It robbed NADD from victory and ridding us of Yahya. This is both callous and inconsiderate.

It also means that if Hon. Hamat had joined the UDP and NADD and insisted on a NADD flagbearer, the opposition would have achieved the greatest goal of the century. UNITY and RIDDING Gambia of Yahya at the same time. That would have been an astonishing mandate that sends all of Yahya's presumption of overwhelming love from Gambians asunder.