The gain and loss of power both require restraint. Former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham would likely rewrite the manner and tone in which he addressed the nation the evening of the FNM's 2012 election loss.
With the crush of emotions descending on him following the PLP's recent electoral decimation, including his bitter loss of the Centreville constituency he held for four decades, it may have been best that former Prime Minister Perry Christie did not appear the night of his party's staggering defeat.
Unfortunately, as was often the case while he was in government, defeated Fox Hill MP Fred Mitchell demonstrated no restraint in his bizarre and ballistic bombast after the loss.
The words and tone he offered suggested someone in meltdown, with no sense of humility, restraint or self-reflection. Rage and the lust for power typically limit one's capacity for self-awareness, prudence and good judgement.
There was a telling line in Mitchell's wild-eyed rant which summarized his mindset and further offended a populace that overwhelmingly rejected the PLP: "Politics is not a crying game. It is a competition for power. Power is the only fact. They have it, we want it and need it to govern and protect the poor in this country."
Most of the poor and most Bahamians do not believe that the PLP desired power in order to serve the poor. Most believe that Mitchell and other senior PLPs lusted for power to serve their own self-absorbed needs and to protect their interests.
Since the election, a number of PLP parliamentarians have spoken of their undying concern for the poor. But in office, the PLP's corruption, waste and luxury living and travel at taxpayer expense was an affront to poorer Bahamians, whom the PLP often used as props. The PLP victimized the country with its reckless governance.
Most of the poor, much like the hard-working, laboring and middle classes, did not feel that the Christie-led PLP government was serving their interests. Rather, they believed that many senior PLPs were busy padding their pockets and those of their close associates, family and friends.
The people of Centreville and other traditional PLP seats grew tired of the PLP taking them for granted and treating them as supposed fools at election time, offering handouts and other inducements to secure votes. The rum and entertainment strategy of the PLP failed spectacularly.

Grassroots
Most of the poor abandoned the PLP after the PLP abandoned them over the past five years. Hence the wipeout of PLP MPs in grassroots areas.
If they govern well and offer uplifting policies and programs for the inner city areas of New Providence, Prime Minister Dr. Hubert Minnis and the FNM may be able to rewrite the political geography and the political voting patterns of these areas.
Because of his background and biography, Minnis has the opportunity to shatter the PLP's supposed lock on certain constituencies, in both senses of the word. The FNM should be aggressive and unyielding in these efforts.
While it clearly has a superior progressive record than the two Christie administrations, the FNM, because of Hubert Ingraham and now Hubert Minnis, is on track to being seen as the more progressive political force in the country.
Correspondingly, the PLP's historic narrative and mythology is being upended. The problem within the PLP is that they are far from figuring out how to respond to this challenge. And they are uncertain as to how to attract a younger generation of voters no longer wed to the shibboleths of a PLP that no longer exists.
When Bahamians from all walks of life compare Brave Davis and Hubert Minnis, there is no doubt that most view the latter as the greater champion of the poor and grassroots.
While the PLP gushed about its supposed love for the poor during the recent budget debate, Minnis offered specific proposals for grassroots Bahamians, including the possibility of free Wi-Fi in certain areas, a pilot program for computers for children in government-operated preschools, and other proposals.
At the last election, the PLP base shattered. Thousands of PLPs could no longer bring themselves to vote for the party of their youth, or, in other cases, the party of their parents and grandparents.
The PLP is run by an oligarchy. It is mostly a business with a political arm. When Christie secured the leadership of the PLP, he boasted that he would reform the party. It was an empty boast intended for an external audience.

Wipeout
Within the PLP Christie governed mostly on behalf of the oligarchs, the PLP high command and a consortium of cronies. The wipeout on May 10 has done nothing to diminish the power or control of these groups. It may take another electoral defeat to displace the political barnacles, who will continue to weigh down the PLP ship.
The nearly wholesale rejection of the PLP and the revelations of misconduct, abuse of power and all manner of cronyism by the PLP, revealed by the Minnis administration, have not brought on a hint of humility or remorse from PLP parliamentarians.
They do not even have the ability, for political purposes, to fake humility or remorse. One reason is that they are still playing mostly to the PLP gallery and not the wider public, who are disgusted by their performance since May 10.
The PLP defense team seems to think that Bahamians are stupid -- that most are buying their defense in response to alleged misfeasance of PLP Cabinet ministers and their rationalizations of the poor conduct of the Christie administration.
Because they all seem to be jockeying for position within the PLP, they are unable to admit error, to express remorse, to say, "We messed up" or "Sorry, we often took you for granted".
Such expressions of contrition are not signs of weaknesses. They are a necessary condition for most Bahamians to even begin to look again at the PLP.
Given his temperament and pattern of political engagement, Mitchell is likely to continue to be belligerent in his new role in the Senate. While this will appeal to the hardest of the PLP base, it will also turn off many PLPs and most voters.
The FNM should utilize political jujitsu, using the weight of the PLP's petulance, belligerence and defensiveness in Parliament to knock down the weakness of its opponents and further unmask their shameful record over the past five years.
The remnants of the PLP in the House of Assembly may believe that they are mounting a valiant defense of their party's legacy in government. But what may have been accomplished in the early years of PLP-led government, in the early years of majority rule and of young nationhood, has long ago been tarnished.
It was tarnished because of the PLP's accommodation of money launderers, drug traffickers and other sordid individuals who connived to destroy our social fabric, weaken families and undermine social norms during the latter part of the 1970s into the 1980s.
The legacy of the more recent PLP-led administrations between 2002 and 2007 and 2012 and 2017 is one of mismanagement, corruption and conflicts of interest. Instead of reforming the PLP, Christie, with the complicity of others, did more harm than good to the legacy and lifeblood of the party.
The PLP is incapable of change given its current leader and most of its parliamentary group. As Mitchell indicated in his enraged post-election screed, the PLP really only knows and respects power.
Perhaps the PLP will only reform after being denied power for a substantial period of time. Even then, the jury will remain out on such a prospect.

o frontporchguardian@gmail.com, www.bahamapundit.com.

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian