The beauty of the verdict of the 2004 general elections was that it rendered the business of predicting future outcomes a tricky, even foolhardy, exercise to undertake, given the manner in which the mainstream media had all but declared the BJP-led NDA a runaway winner based on their own perceptions of the “India Shining” yarn, till rural India provided the reality check.
Still, that doesn’t deter bravehearts from trying to “pry into a voter’s secret communion with democracy”, i.e. feel the pulse of the voter.
Among them is Arun Nehru, the Jenson & Nicholson paint seller who joined the Congress at the behest of cousin Rajiv Gandhi and then did a 180-degree lurch towards the BJP. As one of Rajiv’s backroom boys who did the strategising, Nehru now wears the crown of tabletop psephologist, using his own back-of-the-envelope calculations to gauge which way the poll straws are moving.
Nehru was among those who got the 2004 result horribly wrong, but that hasn’t stopped him from sticking his neck out on what could happen this year.
His key finding (published in today’s Deccan Chronicle): It is going to be another “hung” Parliament in 2009, with the Congress getting 16 seats more than the BJP. The Congress will end up with 150 seats to the BJP’s 134 this time.
In 2004, the Congress had bagged 145 seats (up 32 seats from 1999), the BJP 138 (down 44 from ’99).
With the two major “national” parties short of the 272 figure by between 122 to 138 seats, the regional parties together slated to take 260 seats, a gadbad coalition is in the offing again.
Arun Nehru’s prognosis compares favourably with former Andhra Pradesh chief minister N. Chandrababu Naidu‘s a couple of months ago when he said the two main parties put together were unlikely to reach the 272-mark. More recently, the former Uttar Pradesh chief minister Kalyan Singh had said the BJP would get 118 seats.
While each side and its supporters can find reasons to quibble over the predictions, while the predictions may yet go wrong, there are some interesting points to ponder from Arun Nehru’s reading of the situation:
# Aside from their geographical presence, can the Congress and BJP really be considered “national” parties? Out of 129 seats in the four States in the South, the BJP can hope to get a look-in in 19 seats in only one of them (Karnataka).
# Congress is expected to draw a blank in one State (Tripura) out of the 28 in the Union, but the BJP is not expected to open its tally in seven of them (12 if you spell out the five Northeastern States besides Assam and Tripura).
# In India’s largest State (Uttar Pradesh), the two parties can only hope to gain 15 of the 80 seats on offer. But the BJP, which is in favour of smaller States, seems to be doing well in small, newly created States (Chattisgarh, Jharkhand, Uttaranchal).
Predicting Indian elections is a treacherous exercise given the imponderables at play. An assassination, a “timely” death of a top leader, the possibility of a surgical strike against terror hideouts in Pakistan, etc, could decisively tilt the verdict, one way or the other.
Nevertheless, despite the pitfalls of coalition politics being rammed into their skulls every day, despite prime ministerial candidates being grandly nominated, the fact that more than half the country is disinclined to go with the “national” parties provides a humbling insight into the clutter-free mind of the rural Indian voter able to differentiate hype from tripe on artificially manufactured “national” issues far better than her literate, media-exposed, urban counterpart.
(* Or why all those ‘Advani for PM’ Google ads may go waste)
Read the full article: Soon, a move away from coalitions
Also read: CHURUMURI POLL: Who will win 2009 poll?
Psephology is not an easy profession. But I believe that General Elections 2009 will be a lot different from 2004, primarily becoz delimitation of constituencies. Now 28% of the seats wud b urban as opposed to the earlier number of 13% in 2004.
Urban voters generally vote more on national issues as compared to rural voters. Several constituencies have changed completely. For instance, sitting Congress MP Sachin Pilot will now have to look for another seat as his Dausa constituency in Rajasthan has been reserved for Scheduled Castes. Union minister Kapil Sibal, whose Chandni Chowk constituency has expanded to approximately four times of its present strength, will now have to factor in the aspirations of the new population that has been added.
Why has India failed to produce one organization with some credibility to conduct surveys to predict the results of next election? Some of our graduates from the leading institutes are leaders in developing statistical tools in the west. They are also involved in conducting surveys in the developed countries. Why has India failed to support such scientific surveys?
How can Arun Nehru or Chandrababu Naidu who have no access to any surveys can make any meaningful predictions?
Can we learn from an NGO like Pratham, who has been conducting surveys since four years to assess the success/failure in education sector? Despite the great imporatnce of education sector it was Pratham which has more or less perfected the survey methodology and is able to produce excellent results for people in charge to learn about the probelms and also possible solutions.
We need an independent NGO or even profit seeking organization which can conduct a scientific survey to study the changes taking place in our political system and not depend upon the guesses of politicians or experts however prominent they may be.
hmmm….There are few wrong prediction in the chart, and why the question of thrid front ruling delhi does not arise
1. In West Bengal Left will NOT win 30 seats (provided Cong does not sabotage Mamata-didi by refusing to make TMC-Cong alliance). Shd TMC-Cong unites, Left will be down to 15 or even single digit.
2. Left wil not get 8 in Kerala either – it will be less.
3. As Left will get half or even worse than its existing strength, third front will become severely damaged.
4. All non-BJP, non Cong cannot unite and form one front. SP-BSP, AIADMK-DMK will never be in same front.
Most likely scenrio is: BJP (or COng) will get largest number of seat, and smaller players will jump in to form the Govt.
BJP getting 130 seats is highly improbable. They will have to count themselves lucky if they get any more than 100 seats. This election is the begining of the end of BJP. Like the Jan Sangh, BJP will turn into a non-entity in a few years. They need a lot of rethinking, critical analysis of their defunct policies and bring in intellectual vigor and strategy to their politics. Ram mandirs, anti terrorism and valentines day will not get them anywhere. BJP is a reactive party with little political and emotional maturity and compounded to that they have a old man with one foot in his grave as the PM in waiting. It will take a few decades for the BJP to reinvent themselves and come back as contenders. The Sangh Parivar will need to do a lot of rethinking as they have created enemies everywhere by their narrow view of History and lack of understanding of Indian Plurality.
Congress would also not get a majority but they need to rope in a lot of allies to form the government. The regional parties will sell themselves to the highest bidder. Conggies can buy the TDPs, Prajarajyam, DMK, PMK , AIADMK, NCP, RJD etc.
Mayawathi will hold the key as she will emerge as the new power center in India politics. If BJP get more seats than hundred she can play spoilsport for congress and with the left parties and the other regional parties she can contest for the PM position.
If there is any one singular, crucial, most important factor that elections depend on it is arithmetic of alliances.
Flashback 2004
It is said that India Shining campaign of BMP was a damp squib. It is also said the masses related to the Aam Aadmi campaign of Congress, giving it a thumbs up sign vis a vis the BJP’s India Shining stuff.
This is a flawed theory.
There is not much evidence to prove India shining failed or Aam Admi worked.
That’s because every state voted (and will always vote) differently. There is no one single national issue which binds all Indians. Each state votes on the basis of incumbency (or the lack of it) of the existing STATE govt. and the arithmetic of alliances.
1. IN 2004, If India Shining was a failed campaign, why did it work in Karnataka, Rajasthan, Madyha Pradesh, Gujarat, Orissa, where BJP won handsomely?
Here’s why:
Karnataka: there was palpable anger and incumbency among the rural masses against the urban focused SM Krishna govt.
Gujarat: Modi had just won the assembly elections and the honeymoon period was still on. Yet cong did not do badly.
Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. NO signs of incumbency because the BJP govts were still fresh.
Orissa: the combined vote share of BJP and BJD has a fantastic lead of 15%…which is extremely difficult to beat.
NDA failed in TN, Kerala, AP, Maharashtra, Bihar, UP , Haryana and Cong because:
TN: THe arithmetic of the alliance of DMK, MDMK, PMK, Left and Congress had a massive 20% lead over AIADMK which had virtually no partners.
with 20% lead, no amount of India shining campaigns will help.
maharashtra: the arithemtic of alliance between NCP and Congress held its own against Shiv Sena and BJP.
Bihar: the arithmetic of alliance of LJP, RJD, Left and Congress was numerically stronger, therefore extremely powerful vs. just BJP and JDU
AP: there was a ten year incumbency agains Naidu. Stylish ad campaigns cannot do much in the face of such a heavy incumbency
Kerala: Cong was in tatters after the split. Karunakaran was thrown out and infighting cost Cong very dear. Therefore left parties gained. Since BJP has no presence in Kerala, a campaign like India shining would not work.
West Bengal: left is too powerful; Add to it, disunity between TC and Cong, and Left gained considerably. Again, a state where BJP has no presence, India Shining would not work.
Conclusion: Ad campaigns are just a criminal waste of money. Most voters would have already made up their mind as to which party to vote for. No amount of hardselling will help change their mind.
Even if BJP had not done their India Shining campaign, the 2004 results would have been exactly the same because like i pointed out each state voted either on incumbency of the existing state govt. or arithmetic of alliances.