🇿🇲 VOTE INSIGHT | Presidential Vote Fragments Across Regions
Early presidential returns are producing a more complicated electoral map than the simple regional contest many expected. Brian Mundubile is showing considerable strength across parts of the urban Copperbelt, Luapula, Northern and Eastern provinces. President Hakainde Hichilema, meanwhile, is accumulating overwhelming margins across his traditional strongholds while also picking up meaningful votes in constituencies once regarded as difficuclt territory for the UPND.
The numbers remain provisional and largely drawn from signed GEN 20 forms, local media reports and polling-station returns awaiting full ECZ aggregation. But they are sufficient to identify an important pattern: this election will be decided by margins, not by the number of provinces either candidate wins.
Consider Northern Province. Mundubile has posted strong numbers in Kasama Central. At Buseko Hall Stream 1, the reported result was Mundubile 299, Hichilema 99. NCU Offices Stream 1 returned 239-120, Kapongolo Primary 339-66, while two Kasenda Primary streams produced 280-106 and 245-130 in Mundubile’s favour. These are substantial opposition margins and demonstrate why Northern remains important to the TONSE electoral coalition.
But Northern Province is not moving uniformly. Kaputa, historically part of the wider northern political belt where UPND struggled, is producing a very different picture. At Ilembwe, Hichilema reportedly received 214 votes against Mundubile’s 85. Chingoyo returned 345-160, while Shikayamba produced 295-104.
Across those three stations alone, Hichilema accumulated 854 votes against Mundubile’s 349. At Mukupa Kaoma in Lunte, another reported result gave Hichilema 354 against Mundubile’s 185. If this pattern survives wider aggregation, it means Mundubile cannot simply inherit the old PF northern vote intact
Eastern Province is equally instructive. Three early streams at Chipata Trades Institute initially gave Mundubile a combined 815 votes against Hichilema’s 434, showing clear opposition strength. Other reported returns have Mundubile leading 326-39 at Champhero in Chasefu South, 245-56 at Mchereka in Lundazi and 261-73 at Lobi. But Hichilema is also finding votes across Eastern.
Reported results include 201-70 at Chindeza in Sinda, 173-91 at Namichenja and 136-86 in Chadiza West, all in Hichilema’s favour. Returns from parts of Chipata Central have also shown UPND competitiveness. Eastern may ultimately favour one candidate, but the more consequential question is the final margin.
The Copperbelt presents another layer. Unverified returns circulating from several urban polling stations generally show Mundubile performing strongly, consistent with TONSE expectations of recovering much of the urban vote previously associated with the PF. One provisional Kalulushi tally after 21 polling stations placed Mundubile at 4,286 against Hichilema’s 3,049, a difference of 1,237 votes. But returns from rural parts of the Copperbelt appear considerably more favourable to UPND. If this urban-rural split persists, carrying the province may become less important than the size of the eventual winning margin.
Then there is the UPND heartland, where the arithmetic changes dramatically. At Katanda in Dundumwezi, one reported result gave Hichilema 724 votes against Mundubile’s one. Boongo reportedly returned Hichilema 1,017, Mundubile zero. Namwianga in Kalomo South produced 527-4, while Mbeta Island in Sioma, Western Province, was reported at 474-9. In North-Western Province, Musele in Kalumbila reportedly returned 431-9, while Mapande in Mushindamo produced 184-1.
A larger reported Mwinilunga West tally of approximately 27,000 for Hichilema against 205 for Mundubile requires constituency-level ECZ confirmation, but it illustrates the scale of margins being reported from UPND territory.
This is where presidential mathematics becomes more important than electoral maps. If Mundubile wins a Copperbelt polling station 250-150, he gains a net advantage of 100 votes. If Hichilema subsequently wins another station 700-5, his net advantage is 695. Mundubile would need almost seven victories of the first size merely to neutralise the surplus generated by the second. Both candidates may win polling stations and provinces, but those victories do not carry equal numerical weight.
Lusaka also deserves caution. The early picture appears fragmented rather than uniformly opposition. At the University of Zambia, reported results across 12 streams gave Hichilema 4,305 votes against Mundubile’s 1,479. Three reported streams at State House polling station produced Hichilema 1,107 against Mundubile’s 489. Evelyn Hone reportedly returned 178-124 for Hichilema, while St Augustine Parish in Munali produced Mundubile 203 against Hichilema’s 61. These are individual locations, not a Lusaka result, but they demonstrate why sweeping claims about the capital remain premature.
Zambia has seen this electoral geography before. Michael Sata built formidable urban support in Lusaka and the Copperbelt in 2006 and again during the 2008 presidential by-election, but Levy Mwanawasa won the presidency in 2006 and Rupiah Banda prevailed in 2008. The circumstances were different, but the mathematical lesson remains relevant. Urban strength can dominate political conversation without necessarily producing enough votes nationally.
This means Mundubile could conceivably carry Northern, Muchinga, Luapula, Eastern, Copperbelt and even Lusaka and still face a difficult national equation. Six provinces do not automatically produce a president. If those victories come at relatively competitive margins while Hichilema takes Southern, Western and North-Western by overwhelming margins, remains strong in Central and collects substantial minority votes inside Mundubile’s strongest regions, the national total can favour Hichilema. The same principle works in reverse if Mundubile begins significantly reducing UPND margins in its heartlands.
This is why Kaputa, Lunte, Chadiza and Chipata Central may ultimately tell us more about the direction of the election than some spectacular victories elsewhere. Hichilema does not necessarily need to win Northern, Luapula or Eastern. If he moves from historically weak performances to 30 or 40 percent in enough opposition territory, every additional vote reduces the surplus Mundubile needs from those provinces. Mundubile faces the same challenge in UPND territory, where some early returns currently show him receiving only single-digit votes.
There are 8,786,300 registered voters in this election. Zambia does not elect its president through a league table of provinces. The national vote is aggregated, with the constitutional threshold determining whether a candidate has secured the presidency. Turnout therefore matters. So do population distribution and the size of victories and defeats.
When supporters eventually ask how a candidate could win five or six provinces and still lose the presidency, the answer may be straightforward: provinces do not carry equal numbers of voters, turnout varies, and electoral margins accumulate nationally. Winning several competitive provinces 55-45 or 60-40 can be overwhelmed by losing other regions 90-10 while allowing your opponent to collect meaningful votes inside your own strongholds.
The figures cited here remain provisional and unofficial until incorporated into the Electoral Commission of Zambia’s formal results process. They should not be read as a projection of the eventual winner.
But the early architecture of the election is becoming visible. Mundubile is demonstrating considerable strength, particularly across parts of the urban Copperbelt and former PF territory. Hichilema is demonstrating extraordinary depth in his established strongholds while appearing competitive in places where UPND once struggled.
The map may eventually show one candidate winning more provinces. The presidency will be decided by the numbers beneath those colours.
© The People’s Brief | Ollus R. Ndomu