Zimbabwe's Presidential Term Debate: A Social Media Reflection on Public Sentiment and Constitutionalism

This study investigates discourse on X (formerly Twitter) surrounding President Mnangagwa's potential term extension in Zimbabwe. Using qualitative thematic analysis of 500 posts (2023–2025) and Digital Democracy Theory, it examines how competing narratives are mediated. Findings reveal predominantly oppositional discourse anchored in constitutional legality, with citizens invoking Section 91(2) as a primary tool of resistance, a form of “performative constitutionalism” driven by deep historical mistrust. Pro-extension narratives centred on developmental continuity exhibited internal contradictions, exposing intra-elite fractures and poor coordination within Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front, in contrast to the unified state propaganda observed elsewhere in Africa. Critics further contextualised the term-limit debate within broader socio-economic failures, reinforcing opposition beyond legal arguments. The study demonstrates that X embodies Digital Democracy Theory's duality: a contested arena where citizen-led constitutional defence co-exists with state-aligned narrative management, while publicly exposing critical fractures within ruling power structures.