By Jones Gadama
As the 2025 Parliamentary Elections approach, the political landscape is buzzing with analyses, predictions, and spirited debates.
Among the many narratives swirling around the major parties, one perception that needs urgent correction is the notion that the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) decision to contest fewer seats—specifically 197 out of 229—is a sign of weakness or panic. Far from it, this is a calculated, intelligent strategy designed to maximize the party’s strengths, conserve precious resources, and ensure sweeping victories where it truly matters.
Those quick to view this as a disadvantage are missing the bigger picture: the DPP is playing chess while others are playing checkers.
Let’s be clear: the DPP’s decision not to field candidates in 32 constituencies is not a retreat but a masterstroke of political prudence and foresight. Historically, these constituencies have proven to be tough battlegrounds for the party with negligible chances of success.
Time and again, DPP has poured valuable resources—both financial and human—into these areas only to be met with disappointment.
It is a well-known fact in political circles that continuing to contest in these “unwinnable” zones is not just a waste of money but also a drain on the party’s energy and focus.
This year, the DPP has chosen to break from this unproductive cycle, demonstrating a maturity and strategic acumen that sets it apart from competitors who insist on blanket coverage without regard to efficacy. By selectively focusing on 197 constituencies where the party has a realistic or strong chance of winning, the DPP is ensuring that every kwacha spent is an investment towards victory.
This approach is not about conceding defeat; it’s about channeling efforts where they will yield maximum impact.
Critics might argue that leaving 32 seats uncontested leaves a vacuum. But in reality, those constituencies are often strongholds of other parties with entrenched political loyalties.
The DPP wisely recognizes that trying to win over these areas would require disproportionate effort and resources with little return.
Instead, it is better to concede these seats temporarily while consolidating power in areas where gains are achievable and sustainable.
This is not surrender but strategic regrouping—laying the groundwork for future growth while securing immediate wins.
Moreover, the DPP’s strategic restraint means it can rally its campaign machinery, volunteers, and finances with laser-like precision.
Campaigns are expensive endeavors; fielding candidates everywhere without regard for potential success can dilute a party’s message and exhaust its capacities.
By focusing on constituencies where the party enjoys historical support or where voter sentiment is trending favorably, DPP is positioning itself to not just win seats, but to do so decisively—with large margins that will translate into a strong parliamentary presence and greater influence.
This focused approach also enhances the DPP’s ability to engage deeply with selected communities.
Instead of spreading itself thin trying to appease every corner, the party’s candidates can invest quality time in voter engagement, issue-based campaigning, and grassroots mobilization in targeted areas. This kind of concentrated effort builds trust and enthusiasm among constituents, a critical factor in close races.
It’s a quality-over-quantity method that promises not just wins but lasting relationships with voters.
To underscore the brilliance of this strategy, consider the contrast with the Malawi Congress Party (MCP), which is contesting nearly all 229 seats. While MCP’s near-total coverage may look impressive on paper, it comes with risks of overstretching resources and diluting campaign effectiveness.
MCP’s ambition to cover almost every constituency could lead to shallow campaigns that fail to resonate deeply with voters.
The DPP, on the other hand, is demonstrating political maturity by acknowledging the limits of its reach and focusing on what it can realistically achieve.
It’s also important to recognize the broader electoral dynamics at play.
With the United Transformation Movement (UTM) scaling back coverage due to waning voter support, the political battlefield is evolving.
The DPP’s strategic positioning allows it to capitalize on these shifts—targeting constituencies where UTM’s decline leaves a vacuum and where voters are looking for a credible alternative to MCP’s dominance.
The DPP’s approach is a textbook example of strategic resource allocation in politics. It recognizes that winning an election is not about contesting everywhere but about winning where it counts.
By concentrating on fewer constituencies, the party is sharpening its campaign’s impact and ensuring that every candidate it fields has the support and resources needed to triumph convincingly.
Furthermore, this strategy sends a strong message to voters and party supporters: the DPP is confident, calculated, and focused on delivering results. It is not throwing candidates into the fray just for show but is committed to meaningful contests where the party is ready to win big.
This breeds confidence among supporters, volunteers, and donors alike, creating a virtuous cycle of enthusiasm and commitment.
Detractors who claim the DPP is faltering should pause and consider the long game. Politics is not a sprint but a marathon. By choosing battles wisely, the DPP preserves strength for both the current election and future contests.
This measured approach also allows the party to build strategic alliances and negotiate from a position of strength, rather than being overextended and vulnerable.
The DPP’s decision to contest 197 seats instead of all 229 is a bold, intelligent, and forward-thinking strategy that should inspire confidence rather than doubt.
It reflects a party that understands the nuances of electoral politics, values efficient resource management, and is committed to delivering decisive victories.
This is not a sign of weakness or desperation but a demonstration of political savvy and discipline.
As election day draws near, it is clear that the DPP is not just participating—it is poised to dominate where it matters most, proving that sometimes, less truly is more. Voters and observers alike should take note: the DPP’s strategic restraint is its greatest strength.
Feedback:+265 99 208 24 24.
[email protected]
