IS THE FNM CONCEDING? The campaign is invisible

In the high-stakes theatre of Bahamian politics, momentum is the invisible currency that dictates the fate of parties. For the Free National Movement (FNM), however, the accounts appear to be running dry. As the country moves toward a pivotal electoral cycle, the once-mighty “Torch” seems to be flickering in a vacuum of organizational lethargy and leadership dissonance. From the silent streets during daylight hours to the reported internal warnings from the party’s old guard, the signs are becoming impossible to ignore: the FNM is fighting a losing battle.

One notable issue for the current FNM campaign is its limited visibility. In a culture where political energy is often demonstrated by “boots on the ground” and direct voter engagement, the FNM’s approach of maintaining a lower profile during the day contrasts with the high-visibility campaigns of the past. This strategy has left some observers puzzled, as it diverges from established expectations in Bahamian politics.

When candidates go out to connect with voters, they sometimes encounter fewer open doors. This may not be only an issue of timing, but could also suggest an ongoing challenge in connecting with some segments of the electorate. Among party supporters, concerns are emerging as difficulties become more apparent. If the party is unable to engage with the Bahamian people in their homes, it may struggle to secure broad support at the ballot box.

Perhaps the most telling sign of the FNM’s precarious position is the rumoured caution coming from the top. Sources within political circles suggest that former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham has carefully assessed the current landscape. The advice reportedly given to Michael Pintard—to be cautious with donors—reflects a prudent and measured approach. Ingraham, a veteran of political campaigns, understands what a winning effort requires and recognizes the feeling of defeat before it arrives.

This assessment is mirrored by the “mass exodus” of key party supporters. When the stalwarts and the financiers begin to drift away, it is rarely because of a single disagreement; it is usually because they no longer see a viable path to power. They are witnessing a campaign that lacks the vigour and the vision required to topple an incumbent government.

At the centre of this storm is Michael Pintard, whose leadership style has become a focal point of discussion. In politics, personality can be a bridge or a barrier. For Pintard, it is increasingly appearing to be the latter. His assertive approach and perceived dejection have created a mix of leadership qualities that some find disheartening at the base.

The gravitas required to lead a major political party goes beyond loud rhetoric; it demands the ability to inspire confidence during a crisis. Instead, Pintard’s appearance—often described as “un-FNM” by party traditionalists—is alienating the very people he needs most. The question now circulating in the halls of the FNM is whether Pintard has the self-awareness or the “gravitas” to recognize that his leadership may be the primary obstacle to the party’s success.

As if internal concerns weren’t enough, external pressures are also increasing. Allegations involving U.S. authorities and the potential to interview figures like Marvin Dames add an additional layer of legal and international complexity that the FNM may find challenging to address at this time. In a campaign already facing difficulties, these challenges act as further obstacles for the party.

The FNM must acknowledge a challenging reality: continuing with the current strategy may not be courageous, but could have serious consequences. Party leadership is encouraged to inform Pintard that the current direction might lead to electoral setbacks. The concern visible on the leader’s face may indicate a party seeking to regain its direction, energy, and connection with the Bahamian people.

The FNM was built on the foundation of transparency and national service. To honour that legacy, it must evaluate whether to continue its current approach or embrace the significant changes necessary to endure. At present, the situation is challenging, and many—from donors to former leaders—appear to recognise this.