The DA’s 2024 result was, on the surface, solid. But while its share of the ballot ticked up, it lost more than 100,000 votes compared to 2019. The party is not dramatically expanding its reach; it is holding its core while the electorate around it shrinks. It is winning the same argument with fewer people listening.
The DA’s national story over the past two decades is one of steady, then stalled, ascent. From 12.37% in 2004 to a peak of 22.23% in 2014, the party gradually consolidated itself as the main opposition. Since then, however, its growth curve has flattened. The 2019 dip to 20.77% and the modest recovery in 2024 suggest the DA has reached something like a ceiling in its current form. It is strongest in urban, middle-class and minority communities — particularly in the Western Cape and affluent parts of Gauteng — but continues to struggle to break into the black working class and rural vote.
This narrowness is a strength and a weakness. On the one hand, the DA has built a loyal core that values predictable governance, clean administration and fiscal discipline. In a landscape scarred by ANC patronage and municipal collapse, the DA’s record in Cape Town and the Western Cape still counts for something: roads are maintained, finances are better managed and basic services are generally more reliable than in many ANC-run municipalities. On the other hand, the profile of the DA’s support — older, white, more suburban and more middle class — makes it difficult to position itself as a natural home for the unemployed, the precariously employed, or those who see the post-1994 economy as stacked against them.
Ideologically, the party has tried to walk a tightrope. It began the democratic era with an unapologetically liberal, market-first posture under Tony Leon, opposing the ANC from the right on economic and crime policy. Under Helen Zille, it pivoted towards a more socially conscious liberalism, embracing some redistributive programmes and seeking to broaden its appeal to black voters. The Mmusi Maimane experiment attempted to symbolically rebrand the DA as a party of “all races”, but internal tensions and factional battles left the party more bruised than renewed.
Safer script
By the time John Steenhuisen took over, the DA had reverted to a safer, more traditional liberal script: rule of law, clean government, market-friendly economics and hard opposition to ANC corruption and race-based policy. This consistency kept its core intact but did not unlock a new constituency. In many townships and rural communities, the DA was still seen less as an alternative government than as a party speaking to minorities and the middle class.
It was against this backdrop that the DA took its biggest strategic gamble: joining the government of national unity (GNU). For the first time, the party is not just opposing the national government; it is part of it. Its six ministerial and six deputy ministerial posts offered an unprecedented opportunity to showcase its governance philosophy nationally, influence policy and prove that it could do more than criticise from the sidelines.
The gamble is obvious. If the GNU delivers tangible improvements — more reliable services, better economic management, progress on crime and corruption — the DA can claim partial credit and point to its ministers as evidence that its model works beyond the Western Cape. If the GNU stumbles, the DA will be tied to that failure in the public mind: no longer the clean outsider but a co-author of disappointment. For a party whose identity has been built in fierce opposition to the ANC, governing alongside it represents an identity shock. The DA must now perform a difficult double act: partner and critic. It must show that it can work constructively in the cabinet while still drawing clear red lines on issues such as expropriation, race-based policy and state centralisation. Coalition theory offers little comfort. Junior partners often pay a heavy price; the party that compromises more and controls less is frequently blamed by its base and overshadowed by its senior ally.
The gamble is obvious. If the GNU delivers tangible improvements — more reliable services, better economic management, progress on crime and corruption — the DA can claim partial credit and point to its ministers as evidence that its model works beyond the Western Cape. If the GNU stumbles, the DA will be tied to that failure in the public mind: no longer the clean outsider but a co-author of disappointment.
Coalition politics will shape the DA’s next major electoral test: the 2026/27 local government elections. That contest will be the first real verdict on the party’s decision to enter national government. The DA will attempt to defend its Western Cape heartland, expand its footprint in key metros such as Johannesburg, Tshwane, Ekurhuleni and Nelson Mandela Bay, and avoid punishment from voters who see the national government as failing to improve their lives.
Early post-election polling suggested that the DA initially benefited from the GNU, with several reputable surveys placing it marginally above its 2024 result. Yet, by-election data and provincial polling flagged vulnerabilities: softening support in parts of the Western Cape, pressure from smaller parties appealing to coloured and Afrikaans constituencies, and uneven performance in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal. The DA continues to outperform expectations in local contests thanks to its organisational machine and its ability to mobilise its core voters. But even the strongest machinery cannot indefinitely compensate for a stagnant or shrinking base.
Internally, the DA remains more stable than most South African parties, but stability should not be mistaken for coherence. Steenhuisen’s decision to step down, framed in his farewell address as “mission accomplished”, sharpened long-standing internal tensions rather than resolving them. While his tenure succeeded in taking the DA into national government for the first time, that institutional breakthrough failed to produce electoral expansion. The party peaked at 22.23% in 2014 and has not surpassed that high-water mark since; its 2024 result of 21.8% concealed a net loss of votes and followed a big contraction in local government support in 2021. In practical terms, the DA entered the national government without enlarging its social coalition.
This gap between institutional access and electoral momentum exposes a structural problem. Entry into the GNU altered the DA’s position in the political system, but it did not alter how large sections of the electorate perceive the party. For many voters, particularly outside its traditional base, the DA remains eligible primarily as an opposition force rather than a governing project with mass appeal. Steenhuisen’s departure therefore raised a deeper, more uncomfortable question: whether the position of the DA leader has become an increasingly exposed role, burdened with the symbolism of national ambition but constrained by a stubborn electoral ceiling. Successive leaders inherit high expectations, limited room to manoeuvre and a base that punishes deviation, while growth requires exactly that.
These tensions surface most clearly amid transition, when internal positioning collides with public messaging. Leadership debates are rarely only about direction; they are also about risk. A united DA, disciplined and clear in its purpose, remains a formidable campaigning force. A divided DA, as the period 2017-19 demonstrated, turns inward, expends energy on factional management, and loses narrative control. The danger is not open conflict but quiet paralysis; a party so cautious about internal balance that it struggles to take bold external positions.
Leadership debates are rarely only about direction; they are also about risk.
The deeper question, however, goes beyond leadership and personalities altogether. It is whether the DA can make the psychological and political shift from being defined primarily by opposition to the ANC to offering a convincing account of what comes next. For two decades, its political identity has been anchored in negation: stopping corruption, stopping mismanagement, stopping cadre deployment. That language resonated in an era of ANC dominance, when the primary task of opposition was exposure and resistance. In a coalition era, it is no longer sufficient.
Voters now demand a constructive offer. They want to know not only what the DA will block, but what it will build: what kind of economy it seeks to create, how it understands social redress, and how governance translates into tangible improvements for those who have never experienced the benefits of the post-apartheid state. Without that shift — from protest to proposition, from critique to construction — the DA risks remaining trapped in a permanent transitional moment: close enough to power to share responsibility, but too constrained to redefine itself as a genuinely expansive national force.
To do that, the party must:
- Craft a credible economic narrative for people who have never seen themselves reflected in the DA’s politics, particularly the black working class and unemployed youth.
- Use the GNU strategically, demonstrating tangible improvements that justify compromise.
- Confront its demographic and cultural limits directly. As long as it is perceived primarily as a party for minorities and the middle class, its national ceiling will remain low.
The DA enters the local elections and the 2029 poll with a paradox at its core. It is organisationally one of the strongest parties in the country, with a proven governing record in specific contexts and a coherent ideological identity. Yet it is constrained by its history, its electorate and its own caution. Participation in the national government has come amid political volatility rather than stability.
Surviving the GNU is not the real test. Many parties survive coalitions. The test is whether the DA emerges from this period as a broader, more credible national force capable of leading a future coalition on its own terms or whether it settles into the role of a well-run regional party with limited national reach. In that sense, the stakes could not be higher. If “mission accomplished” is to mean anything beyond the act of entering government, it will be judged by what the DA does with power, whether it merely manages the consequences of ANC decline or helps shape what comes next.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.