In the movie there is a clear picture of the political leadership in Ghana and the views that people have concerning the political leadership of the country. This article gives an analysis of the political leadership of Ghana in relation to the general elections which held in the country. The December elections are likely to lead to a break of the political ups and downs in Ghana as the winner of the presidential sit will be declared giving him a break of thoughts. In the movie there are clear indicators from the beginning on which party that is likely to win between the two main contestants that is the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the New Patriotic Party (NPP). The movie has been given the title Do and Die Affair simply depicting the political situation of Ghana.
In the Ghanaian political situation, the election is said to be a do and die affair because if the contestant is able to emerge as the winner he shall have to survive but if he loses the sit he will simply diminish. For instance President John who had succeeded the former president Rawlings has been a president in Ghana but if he loses in the general elections he will leave no stone to be unturned to win. The other contestant Nana Addo has one chance to contest for the presidential sit and that if he does not win this time round he has no chance to stand again as a presidential contestant. It is therefore a do and die for Addo as well as for John Mill.
Ghanaian elections are perceived to be passionate in the sense that those supporting the contestants aim at winning because they know they will benefit at the end if their candidate wins. The elections are based on the concept of do and die affair and this has made the youths to be more aggressive in their campaigns of supporting the contestants because of the promises that they have been given by the contestants. For instance the youth have been promised jobs opportunities and other rewards if their team wins but if it does not win they will not benefit from the government that they never supported during the campaigns. The political leadership in Ghana depicts the concept of winner-take-all because the contestant who wins as the president has the authority to appoint the cabinet, all agency heads, regional heads, district heads as well as the metro heads and it is therefore impossible for those people who were supporting the opposition party to benefit or be appointed in those positions.
Unlike in the US, the Ghanaian performance in the debates does not count much because the results obtained in the 2008 and 2012 elections are quite different from the final results obtained after the voting exercise. The Ghanaian leadership depicts a different picture from the real intentions of holding the elections in the country. In the Ghanaian context the elected people are not promoted into power to serve the interests of the citizens but it is a chance for them to gain an opportunity to satisfy their needs as well as the needs of the few supporters who supported them in their campaigns.
During the 2012 elections John Mahama emerged as the winner for the presidential sit in Ghana simply because he was under the National Democratic Congress which most people believed that it will serve their interests. The NPP on the other hand lost the sit because the party has always been associated with the few elites who seem to be controlling the economy of Ghana. As per the analysis of the Ghanaian political leadership, it is well understood that the desire for people to get into power cannot cause violence in the country but the issue of moral authority in the country has much weight over the issue and it therefore needs to be established to deal with the electoral misconducts for the country to reap the fruits of democracy.