Felix Kwakye Ofosu, an aide to former President John Dramani Mahama, has expressed his strong rejection of the idea to engage in a public debate with Vice President Dr. Mahamudu Bawumia. This dismissal comes in the wake of President Nana Akufo-Addo’s invitation for Mahama to publicly debate Bawumia before the upcoming December elections. During President Akufo-Addo’s address to chiefs in Tamale, he emphasized the role of open dialogue within a democracy and suggested that such a debate would illuminate Mahama’s views on pressing national issues. Kwakye Ofosu, however, characterized the proposed debate as a “dialogue for the deaf,” arguing that it would yield no productive outcome.
Kwakye Ofosu elaborated on his position during the Point Blank segment on Eyewitness News, fundamentally disputing Dr. Bawumia’s economic assertions. He attributed a range of inaccuracies to Bawumia’s economic arguments, positing that these inaccuracies render any potential debate meaningless. In his view, it would be unproductive to engage in discussions with someone whose reasoning he believes is fundamentally flawed. He cited examples of Bawumia’s claims regarding Ghana’s economy, particularly highlighting discrepancies between past and current economic indicators, suggesting that Bawumia’s perspective does not align with factual realities.
Kwakye Ofosu referred to Bawumia’s contention that the current state of the Ghanaian economy is superior to the one seen during President Mahama’s administration. He pointed out the stark contrast in currency value and national debt levels, arguing that the notions presented by Bawumia are not only illogical but also deceive the public regarding the nation’s financial health. According to Ofosu, he considers Bawumia’s statements about economic performance as attempting to reframe the narrative, which he believes would not lead to any constructive discussion in a debate scenario.
Furthermore, Kwakye Ofosu underscored the absurdity of potentially debating someone whose logic he perceives as detached from reality. He contended that engaging with someone who has a skewed understanding of the economic situation would simply reinforce misunderstandings rather than promote clarity. His comments imply a deep frustration with what he sees as misinformation about Ghana’s economic status and an inability to confront those inaccuracies in a constructive manner.
The language used by Kwakye Ofosu illuminates the increasing tensions and contentious relationships in Ghana’s political landscape as the election approaches. By framing the debate as futile, he not only deflates the challenge issued by President Akufo-Addo but also asserts a strong confidence in Mahama’s previous governance over the current administration under Akufo-Addo. His remarks are indicative of a broader narrative strategy from the Mahama camp, positioning them as defenders of a more stable economic past against current claims of progress.
In conclusion, Felix Kwakye Ofosu’s comments reject the idea of a public debate with Dr. Bawumia as an unproductive venture. His critique centers on what he perceives to be misleading statements by Bawumia concerning Ghana’s economy, reflecting a deeper frustration with political discourse and the dissemination of economic information. As the political climate heats up with the impending elections, such exchanges will likely shape public perceptions and campaign strategies moving forward.
