1. The
Election:
national
perspective
The
election
witnessed
a
record
turnout
of
4.8
million
voters,
85%
of
those
registered.
Mnangagwa
received
50.6%
and
Chamisa
44.3%
of
the
poll.
Predictably
most
of
Mnangagwa’s
support
came
from
Zimbabwe’s
rural
provinces
Mashonaland,
Midlands
and
Masvingo
while
Chamisa
dominated
the
urban
areas
of
Harare
and
Bulawayo.
(See
Table
1).
Both
Mnangagwa
and
Chamisa
improved
on
the
votes
of
their
predecessors
Mugabe
and
Tsvangirai
in
the
2013
elections.
Mnangagwa
gained
350,000
more
votes
than
the
former
President
while
Chamisa
doubled
Tsvangirai’s
votes.3
On
the
other
hand
the
Parliamentary
vote
resulted
in
a
much
more
decisive
for
Zanu
PF.
The
ruling
party
won
144
seats
while
the
MDC
Alliance
figure
was
64,
giving
Zanu
PF
a
two
thirds
majority
in
the
House
of
Assembly,
before
the
allocation
of
proportional
women’s
seats.
As
Table
2
shows
while
the
MDC
Alliance
presidential
candidate
won
in
provinces
such
as
Matabeleland
North
and
Manicaland,
Zanu
PF
gained
the
upper
hand
in
these
provinces.
The
contrast
between
the
closeness
of
the
Presidential
vote
and
the
major
lead
of
Zanu
PF
in
the
Parliamentary
results
may
have
reflected
the
factionalism
in
Zanu
PF
as
a
result
of
which
many
voted
for
the
party’s
Parliamentary
candidates
while
voting
against
the
Presidential
nominee.
The
‘winner
takes
all’
principle
at
parliamentary
level
also
masked
the
fact
that
many
rural
voters
did
not
vote
for
Zanu
PF,
and
that
many
seats
were
lost
to
a
divided
opposition
where
the
combined
vote
was
larger
than
the
Zanu
PF
vote.4
A
proliferation
of
political
parties
on
the
walls
of
Bulawayo
–
in
what
ultimately
remained
a
two-‐horse
race.
(July
2018)
3
4
International
Crisis
Group,
After
Elections:
Zimbabwe
Government
Legitimacy
in
limbo.
2018.
See
the
next
section
for
a
more
detailed
discussion
of
this
issue.
4