‘No community can stand aside,’ Ramaphosa says as he courts Muslim voters in Cape Town

The striking feature was Ramaphosa’s direct appeal to a specific voting community. In Cape Town, he courted Muslim voters while arguing that no community could stand aside. His broader message was that participation, rather than political withdrawal, could affect who controls the city.

He encouraged youngsters to “clock it and go and vote.” He also told ANC supporters that only a huge turnout could remove the DA from power in Cape Town. These appeals connect community identity and youth participation to the practical mechanism of an election: votes determine council representation and, ultimately, governing power.

The campaign therefore sought both persuasion and mobilisation. Ramaphosa was not simply presenting the ANC; he was asking people to turn out in numbers large enough to challenge the DA. The immediate focus was Cape Town, but the contest formed part of a wider ANC-DA struggle over major South African cities. The supplied headlines give no detailed policy promises.

The ANC and DA are South African political parties. ANC stands for African National Congress. DA stands for Democratic Alliance. Their Cape Town contest matters because local government controls important city decisions, including council priorities, spending choices, and the election of the mayor.

The supplied headlines describe the parties as wrestling for control of top cities. They also say the ANC wants the Western Cape back from the DA. That makes Cape Town both a local race and part of a larger provincial struggle. Winning enough council seats can let a party govern alone or lead a coalition.

Cape Town has been governed by the DA since 2006, so the ANC faces an established governing party. The ANC must persuade enough voters to change the council’s balance. If neither party wins a majority, negotiations with smaller parties can decide who governs. The source does not identify every competing party or set out detailed policy differences.

Cape Town has one of South Africa’s largest Muslim communities. A commonly used estimate places Muslims at about 15% of the city’s population, but the figure is not a precise current census total because South Africa’s official census does not collect religion in a way that provides a reliable modern count. The article itself gives no number.

That community matters electorally because a sizeable group can influence close contests. The mechanism is straightforward: voters choose council representatives, and the resulting seat balance determines who can form a governing majority or coalition. A community’s impact depends not only on its size, but also on registration, turnout, preferences, and how closely parties compete.

Ramaphosa’s decision to court Muslim voters shows that the ANC sees them as politically important in Cape Town. High participation could help shift seats, especially if voters move together or if the margin between the DA and its challengers is narrow. The headlines do not state Muslim turnout, party support, or an exact population figure.

Ramaphosa’s turnout argument is about the difference between expressing support and winning power. The ANC can challenge the DA only if enough voters cast ballots for it or for parties willing to replace the DA. A large turnout can change the number and distribution of council seats, especially when the contest is competitive.

The concrete mechanism is local representation. Votes are converted into seats through the municipal election system. A party that wins a majority can govern directly. If no party reaches that threshold, parties negotiate a coalition. Ramaphosa therefore links a “huge turnout” to the possibility of removing the DA from control rather than merely increasing ANC support.

The claim is political, not a guarantee. Turnout alone cannot oust the DA unless votes also produce enough seats or a workable coalition. Still, it highlights the ANC’s challenge in a city the DA has governed since 2006. The appeal also targets young people and Muslim voters, suggesting that mobilisation across communities is central to the campaign.

The ANC’s goal is described as regaining the Western Cape from the DA. That matters because Cape Town is the province’s major city and a high-profile centre of political power. Winning it would give the ANC a stronger position in local government and signal that the DA’s long-running control can be challenged.

The key historical fact is that the DA has governed Cape Town since 2006. In practical terms, that means the party has held the city for about two decades by 2026. The ANC is therefore trying to reverse an established pattern, not take power from a recently installed administration. Its turnout message reflects the size of that challenge.

The supplied headlines do not explain exactly when or why the ANC lost the Western Cape, nor do they provide a detailed record of the DA’s rule. They do show that the contest is part of a broader fight for control of top cities. A successful ANC campaign would alter the city’s council and potentially its governing coalition.

A South African local election determines Cape Town’s council through two channels. Residents vote for a ward candidate and also for a party list under proportional representation. The council combines those results. This system means a party can gain substantial influence without winning every neighbourhood, while smaller parties can win seats too.

After the council is formed, councillors elect the mayor. The party with more than half the seats can normally choose the mayor and govern. If no party has a majority, parties negotiate an agreement. A coalition can then elect the mayor and control council decisions, provided it keeps enough support during votes.

This explains why Ramaphosa focuses on turnout and why the ANC and DA are competing intensely. Votes do not directly make a party’s leader mayor. They first shape the council’s seat totals, then those totals determine whether one party or a coalition can govern. The exact outcome depends on ward results, proportional seats, and post-election agreements.

A shift from DA control to the ANC or a coalition would first change who leads Cape Town’s council. The mayor and governing party or coalition would set priorities, introduce proposals, and guide the city’s political direction. This is why the contest matters beyond the identity of the winning party.

The mechanism is control of council votes. An ANC majority could implement its programme more directly. A coalition would need agreements with partner parties and continued support for budgets and other decisions. That could produce shared priorities, compromises, or instability if partners disagree. The governing arrangement would shape how confidently the administration acts.

Possible changes could include different emphasis in budgets, services, development, and community engagement, but the supplied article gives no specific ANC programme or DA policy comparison. A change of power would not automatically solve every city problem. Its practical impact would depend on the council arithmetic, coalition discipline, and the policies the new administration actually adopts.