Ethnic identity continues to play a significant role in shaping political discourse in Nigeria by influencing voter preferences, party strategies, and electoral outcomes. Political parties often align with specific ethnic groups or regions to secure votes, and candidates may leverage ethnic affiliations to gain support. This can lead to the politicization of ethnicity, where ethnic loyalty supersedes policy evaluation. Such dynamics contribute to persistent regional divides and can undermine national cohesion by fostering divisive politics. Moreover, ethnic identity can overshadow pressing issues like corruption and insecurity in political debates, thus affecting policy priorities .

The formation of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2013 significantly altered Nigeria's political landscape by consolidating opposition strength against the long-dominant People's Democratic Party (PDP). The APC was formed through a merger of several major opposition parties, including the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) and the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP). This unification enhanced the opposition's capability to challenge the PDP, and it eventually led to the historic peaceful transfer of power in 2015 when Muhammadu Buhari of the APC was elected president, marking the first time an incumbent president lost an election in Nigeria's democratic history .

The continuity of regionalism in Nigerian politics despite national unity efforts can be attributed to entrenched ethnic identities, historical regional power dynamics, and political strategies that exploit these divides. Political parties often focus on regional bases to secure substantial votes, reinforcing regionalism. Additionally, socio-economic disparities and uneven development across regions exacerbate local grievances, further entrenching regional identities. Efforts to foster national unity are often undermined by these factors, as well as by perceived inequities in federal resource distribution and representation in government, perpetuating regional divides .

Alternating power shifts between the APC and the PDP in Nigeria's presidency suggest a maturing democratic process, as they reflect successful competitive politics and indicate that no single party has absolute power. These shifts can reinforce democratic norms by demonstrating that changes in leadership can occur peacefully through elections. However, they also imply ongoing political volatility, as frequent power shifts may lead to policy instability and hinder long-term national planning. Additionally, the strong influence of personal and ethnic affiliations in elections rather than policy-based voting continues to shape the democratic landscape, which can affect the effectiveness of governance .

Military coups from 1966 to 1999 had a profound impact on the development of Nigeria's political party system by repeatedly disrupting democratic processes and stalling the evolution of political institutions. The series of coups led to long periods of military rule, during which political party activities were banned, reducing the space for political engagement and institutional development. This interruption hindered the establishment of stable party structures and the maturation of sound democratic practices. Democratic governance only resumed in 1999, forcing parties like the People's Democratic Party (PDP) and others to rebuild or establish new structures to participate in the Fourth Republic .

In recent Nigerian elections, the People's Democratic Party (PDP) has often focused on highlighting its historical achievements during its years in power, attempting to leverage its experience in governance to appeal to voters. The PDP also emphasizes unity and diversity, aiming to counterbalance the regional and ethnic strategies of rivals. Conversely, the All Progressives Congress (APC) has positioned itself as a reformist party, capitalizing on public dissatisfaction with the PDP's past governance, particularly around issues of corruption and economic management. The APC's strategy includes forming broad coalitions and emphasizing change and development to attract a wide voter base, seen in its successful election campaigns culminating in peaceful power transitions, such as the one in 2015 .

Challenges that have impeded the progress of democracy in Nigeria's Fourth Republic include widespread corruption, political violence, and electoral malpractice. These issues undermine the public's trust in democratic institutions and processes. Additionally, ethnic and regional divides often lead to tensions and conflict, complicating governance. Economic challenges, such as poverty and unemployment, further exacerbate dissatisfaction with the democratic process. These factors collectively weaken democratic norms and the effectiveness of governance .

During Nigeria's First Republic, regionalism had a profound impact on the political party dynamics because the major political parties were regionally based. The Northern People's Congress (NPC) dominated the North, the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) dominated the East, and the Action Group (AG) controlled the West. This regional dominance meant that power was distributed along geographical and ethnic lines, which led to significant political tensions and challenges in forming a cohesive national government .

Political instability during Nigeria's Second Republic was primarily caused by allegations of electoral fraud and economic challenges. The National Party of Nigeria (NPN), which won the presidency under Shehu Shagari, faced accusations of manipulating electoral processes to maintain power. Additionally, the country grappled with significant economic issues, which exacerbated public discontent and undermined the credibility of the civilian government .

Nigeria's transition back to democracy in 1999 has significantly influenced its political environment by establishing a multi-party system that encourages competition and political pluralism. It led to the dominance of the People's Democratic Party (PDP) initially, reflecting a new era of civilian governance after years of military rule. Economically, the return to democracy has encouraged foreign investment and economic reforms aimed at liberalizing the market. However, persistent challenges such as corruption, political instability, and economic inequality continue to constrain economic growth and affect political stability negatively .