Analysis of indian general elections 2009.
While psephologist and self proclaimed political experts, the TV news anchors are all analyzing and talking about whether the way BJP handled 26/11 or Varun Gandhi episode made the difference etc. How Rahul Gandhi has brought change to the country blah blah blah.
My opinion: All BS.
My Heroes for UPA: Raj Thackeray, Vijayakanth, Chiranjeevi.
Analyzing the leads/results, in most states the current state government has won the majority seats. Be it TN, AP, Kar, Mah, Orissa, MP, Raj, Guj, Bih, Chattisgargh, Delhi. Exceptions in UP, Kerala, WB etc.
My opinion: All BS.
My Heroes for UPA: Raj Thackeray, Vijayakanth, Chiranjeevi.
Analyzing the leads/results, in most states the current state government has won the majority seats. Be it TN, AP, Kar, Mah, Orissa, MP, Raj, Guj, Bih, Chattisgargh, Delhi. Exceptions in UP, Kerala, WB etc.
Election result majority positions by state
UPA, NDA, ThirdFront, FourthFront ---Courtesy: NDTV.com
Now what does this mean? Does this mean in most states, the people are satisified the performance of their current state governments? Is there a pro-incumbancy factor sweeping the country towards the state governments and central government.?
Superficially, it appears a big YES
Or Is It? Is it pro-incumbency or Divided anti-incumbency? On preliminary analysis it is divided-anti-incumbency at work.
Anti Incumbency votes divided in the following states significantly to provide a pro-incumbency result.
TN - AIADMK, Vijayakanth
Kar - Cong, JDS
AP - TDP, Chiranjeevi
Mah - Sena-BJP, MNS
Bih - Cong, Lalu-Paswan
The above five states made all the difference. Had NDA became the biggest coaliation if they won Rajasthan and Delhi, then the heroes for NDA would have been DeveGowda, Lalu-Pawan.
Now, the bigger question is why did the people not consolidate anti-incumbency vote to a single bloc rather than splitting across two or more challengers.
The answer to the question is evident as well. All the challengers who had to split anti-incumbency votes had already been provided with full term opportunities either in running the respective state government of participating in central government.
Be it AIADMK, Sena, TDP, Lalu all of them had been given their chance. Hence a growing number of voters were looking at other alternative than the traditional challengers. Thus providing a wave of pro-incumbency results across the nation.
To prove this theory, if an overwhelming number of constituences have second position and third position votes totalling to 1.25 times the first position vote, especially of the incumbent, then divided-anti-incumbency has won the election rather than performance or pro-incumbency, as proclaimed by UPA. Let me try to do the analysis after all results are out and put the info here.
Now, what is in store for the opposition/challengers? By now, they would have made the analysis in the above stated lines, coz politicians are gazillion times smarter than the psephologist.
The take away shall be to consolidate anti-incumbency forming better alliances in subsequent alliances.
However alliances bring their own issues of life and death for the parties. Case in Point Tamil Nadu. In TN, in the absence of any major wave, neither AIADMK can win elections as long as Vijayakanth is in play and same is the case with Vijayakanth.
---start hypothetics---
If I were Vijayakanth, i will choose my prime enemy, whether it is DMK or AIADMK.
Read more!
Now what does this mean? Does this mean in most states, the people are satisified the performance of their current state governments? Is there a pro-incumbancy factor sweeping the country towards the state governments and central government.?
Superficially, it appears a big YES
Or Is It? Is it pro-incumbency or Divided anti-incumbency? On preliminary analysis it is divided-anti-incumbency at work.
Anti Incumbency votes divided in the following states significantly to provide a pro-incumbency result.
TN - AIADMK, Vijayakanth
Kar - Cong, JDS
AP - TDP, Chiranjeevi
Mah - Sena-BJP, MNS
Bih - Cong, Lalu-Paswan
The above five states made all the difference. Had NDA became the biggest coaliation if they won Rajasthan and Delhi, then the heroes for NDA would have been DeveGowda, Lalu-Pawan.
Now, the bigger question is why did the people not consolidate anti-incumbency vote to a single bloc rather than splitting across two or more challengers.
The answer to the question is evident as well. All the challengers who had to split anti-incumbency votes had already been provided with full term opportunities either in running the respective state government of participating in central government.
Be it AIADMK, Sena, TDP, Lalu all of them had been given their chance. Hence a growing number of voters were looking at other alternative than the traditional challengers. Thus providing a wave of pro-incumbency results across the nation.
To prove this theory, if an overwhelming number of constituences have second position and third position votes totalling to 1.25 times the first position vote, especially of the incumbent, then divided-anti-incumbency has won the election rather than performance or pro-incumbency, as proclaimed by UPA. Let me try to do the analysis after all results are out and put the info here.
Now, what is in store for the opposition/challengers? By now, they would have made the analysis in the above stated lines, coz politicians are gazillion times smarter than the psephologist.
The take away shall be to consolidate anti-incumbency forming better alliances in subsequent alliances.
However alliances bring their own issues of life and death for the parties. Case in Point Tamil Nadu. In TN, in the absence of any major wave, neither AIADMK can win elections as long as Vijayakanth is in play and same is the case with Vijayakanth.
---start hypothetics---
If I were Vijayakanth, i will choose my prime enemy, whether it is DMK or AIADMK.
If i choose DMK, then to defeat it i shall align with AIADMK and win an election however i cannot then call myself as an alternative anymore. So I will alienate myself from AIADMK after the victory and in the subsequent election, to avoid divided-anti-incumbency i shall join DMK. This shall take me into the same viscious circle that PMK and MDMK fell into in mid 1990s and have ceased to be a challenger anymore in this election.
My other option shall be to choose AIADMK as my enemy and continue as a seperate challenger to continue help DMK win and AIADMK get weaker. However by the time AIADMK becomes weak enough for me to be the prime challenger, DMK would have gained from strength to strength and be formidable, rich enought be pay Rs.1 lakh per vote, by having been in power for all the years while i am busy weakening AIADMK.
---end hypothetics----
Vijayakanth, and all the secondary challengers in indian politicis, learn lessons from PMK and MDMK, or pray for a wave.
It will be very interesting to see how regional parties and challenger parties evolve their strategies after this elections, more than how BJP re-invents itself.
My other option shall be to choose AIADMK as my enemy and continue as a seperate challenger to continue help DMK win and AIADMK get weaker. However by the time AIADMK becomes weak enough for me to be the prime challenger, DMK would have gained from strength to strength and be formidable, rich enought be pay Rs.1 lakh per vote, by having been in power for all the years while i am busy weakening AIADMK.
---end hypothetics----
Vijayakanth, and all the secondary challengers in indian politicis, learn lessons from PMK and MDMK, or pray for a wave.
It will be very interesting to see how regional parties and challenger parties evolve their strategies after this elections, more than how BJP re-invents itself.
posted by TJ @ 8:12 PM
1 comments
