Gujarat Assembly Election 2017 – Waterloo for BJP averted by Pavithran

On the counting day of 18^th December 2017, at one point, Congress had shown to cross the half way mark of 91 – much to the agony and dismay of many BJP workers and BJP Bhakthas who were watching the media and some media pundits analyzing had shown their utmost joy openly on the sudden upswing of Congress. But, to their dismay and disappointment of Congress Bhakthas, the scale had tilted towards BJP’s favour which, to the joy and jubilant of BJP supporters, had maintained the lead till the final counts were over. Still, it was felt by many including BJP that the results, though helped them to form the government for the sixth successive term – which itself was a major herculean task, Gujarat being Modi’s home state, they had expected to do better at least to retain the 115 seats won by the BJP in 2012, if not the goal of 150+ set by the BJP.

But, let us see the seats won by the BJP in a pragmatic way. In the surcharged situation with the bitter political acrimony and with the aggressive campaign from neech politics to Aurangzeb and from Gabbar Singh Tax to Grand Stupid Idea and also that of Rahul’s new found Bhakthi with his Temple Run perhaps as a Sacred Wearing Brahimin Hindu Bhakt to catch the eyes of the Hindu majority voters along with his roping the most powerful and popular forces of Patel, Thakore and Dalits duly represented by Hardik Patel, Alpesh Thakore and Jignesh Mevani who had suddenly emerged as a most powerful lobby against Modi in Gujarat assembly election, the retention of power by the BJP in Gujarat itself was not an easy task. Further the difference of BJP’s win of 99 as against 80 of Congress + is 19 which is on the face of it a good difference – 8 seats over the magic half-way mark of 91 of 182.

Though this victory is not big enough for the BJP, but a loss would have been devastating. Still one major solace for the BJP is that its vote share of 49.10 is more than 47.90 during the last assembly election of 2012 and it is a wonder that the BJP had the same vote share of 49.10 in 2007. Still the BJP vote share is 8% higher than that of Congress vote share of 41.1%.

But the seats won by the BJP were 115 in 2012 and 117 in 2007 – with the lower and same vote shares respectively. It is quite strange that even with higher percentage of vote share, the BJP in 2017 could garner only 99 seats! That is to say that the higher vote share yielded 18 seats less!

Why?

It is because the votes for BJP were all concentrated whereas Congress’s votes were spread more evenly across. Increased margins in a few seats rather than enough margins to win the seats in majority of assembly constituencies will help to get more seats. The highest margin for a BJP victory is 1.17 lacs in Ghatlodia, whereas the highest margin for the Congress is just 50,776 in Mandvi. In fact BJP won in 18 seats with margins of 50,000+ whereas Congress won just one Mandvi seat with 50,000+ margin. In all these 18 seats, the votes beyond the Congress mark are basically useless. The same votes, if secured in some other seats may have meant something. This is why we see the aberration between vote share and seats.

The chart above about margin will prove the above observation. Congress by securing winning margin below 10,000, had won 35 seats as against BJP’s score of 26 seats. Again with margin between 10000 to 50000 votes, Congress had got 41 seats as compared to BJP’s 53.  Again upto 1 lac margin, Congress got 1 as against 18 for BJP and in 1 lac and over margin, Congress nil seat and BJP 2 seats. This concentration of higher margins in a few seats as against winning margin spread over many seats will be detrimental to fetch more seats overall.

As a corollary, the following data is worth our attention:

Hence it is upto the BJP to note these factors so as to go in for course correction to spread its reach to more seats instead of wasting their time in improving its vote share in a few seats.  But, it is easy to pass comments but, in actual practice, it needs overall perspective to achieve this end. As otherwise it may boomerang in losing seats and even vote share. Voters are sometimes very much unpredictable and hence a golden means with matured and measured approaches are to be resorted to.

One danger in aiming at spread out evenly the victory margins in majority of seats may lead to low margins leading to losing those seats itself. In this election both Congress and BJP had suffered defeats due to low margins in 16 seats and 11 seats respectively.

In this election, Urban – Rural Divide was very much visible – vide the chart below:

The loss of 17 seats in Rural by the BJP in comparison with Congress was the real culprit to reduce the number of seats in the final tally. The region that had given the BJP a nightmare was Saurashtra and Kutch Region. In that region, Congress gained 18 seats from the BJP from Saurashtra, and that pretty much explains the election – Congress won every single non-BJP stronghold in the region. In fact in phase one, the two parties ran very close, winning half the seats each. It was the second phase which made the difference for the BJP.

One more interesting factor is the spoil role played by NOTA – None of the Above. In the recently held Gujarat Election, more than 5.5 lacs voters chose not to vote for any candidate in Gujarat and instead of went for NOTA affecting the results in several constituencies across State. In 30 seats, the votes polled on NOTA were greater than the difference of votes polled by the winner and the runner-up. The BJP won 15 of those seats, the Congress won 13 seats and Independents won 2 seats. Arguably, NOTA was a factor in determining the victor in these seats.

While Hardik Patel campaign had not made much impact on the electorates, Jignesh Mevani factor had given Congress an edge over the BJP – out of 20 Schedule Caste dominated seats, BJP could get a poor 9 seats and Congress the rest. Similarly, out of 50 OBC dominated seats, BJP and Congress shared the victory equally – winning 25 each.

The bigger shock for the BJP was the Koli dominated seats. BJP won only 6 seats out of 21, with Congress gaining 8 from the BJP from 2012. BJP had lost 15 seats compared to 2012 in Saurashtra and it was mainly due to Cotton – Agrarian Distress in Cotton belt and not Caste – as predicted by some pundits. Still, HAM TRIO – Patel, Thakore and Dalit – factors cannot be ruled out completely, failure of the BJP Government to give adequate support price for cotton might have been resulted in their voting against BJP. Another factor was the predominant influences of Christian NGOs who were responsible to mobilize the voters to vote ‘against nationalists forces’ as appealed by the Bishop of Ahemedabad.

One more interesting factor: BJP won 19 out of the 30 seats where Prime Minister Narendra Modi campaigned – a 63.3% conversion. On the other hand, Congress won 22/42 seats where Rahul Gandhi campaigned, a 52.3% conversion – This includes Somnath seat as well.

Hence Rahul could be satisfied with his campaign in Gujarat Election – though he had to explain a lot whether the crowd pulling was of his own or due to his outsourced young HAM Trio.

It is a fact that Congress had gained from 61 seats to 80 seats – jump of 19 seats. How much these jump could be attributed to Congress’s inherent strength and how much HAM factor had its influence? – is a good question. Congress had witnessed big lossess – Shaktishin Gohil (Mandvi, Kutch), Arjun Modhwadia (Porbandar), Siddharth Patel (son of Chimanbhai Patel, Dabhoi) and Indranil Rajguru (Rajkot West) – all lost their seats. Further 2 rebel Congress candidates who contested as Independents had won and one candidate was reported to have joined BJP without any conditions making the BJP tally to 100!

Hence Congress’s win might be ‘a borrowed and outsourced victory’ and this is all the more real, as its key leaders and potential chief ministerial/ministerial names had lost their seats in the election.  

On the other hand, new Congress names and supported candidates like Chhotubhai Vasava (Jhagadia), Alpesh Thakore (Radhapur), and Jignesh Mevani (Vadgam) – all won. So there is another lesson here for the Congress – its organic leadership was rejected, while acquisitions and outsourced agents favoured. Hence Congress inherent strength was not strong enough to gain victory and its dependence on HAM forces might not be sustainable for long due to HAM’s conflicting social interests and perspectives.

But on the BJP side, all big names had won. There was one major lesson to learn for BJP. 20 defectors from other parties had been given tickets in the election by BJP – much to the heart burns of loyal candidates by Amit Shaw. Of these only 9 out of 20 could win the elections and there was a feeling that if the defectors were not given seats in the election, things might have been different – as per some BJP loyalists. Here it is a lesson for the party not to ignore the homegrown talent.

Congress’s loyalists journalists are quite happy on Rahul’s performance in Gujarat election – his words of wisdom – I will win election with Love and not by Hate as practiced by Modi; BJP wanted a ‘Congress mukt Bharat’, but, Congress did not want a ‘BJP mukt Bharat’ etc. – are being applauded by them. Even his Rahul’s Temple Run is being looked as ‘Smart Secularism’ as against Modi’s ‘Soft Hindutva’ – one that acknowledge the religious identify of the majority without lapsing majoritarianism or compromising on the constitutional rights of the minority. 

The BJP had cried foul on his first visit of Rahul Gandhi to Somnath Temple in the thick of election campaigns quoting an entry in temple dairy wherein it was alleged that his name was written pertaining to persons belonging to other religion to get permission. Somnath constituency recorded a voter turnout of more than 75% in Phase 1 of the elections and Congress won Somnath seat with a record percentage of votes over 53% over BJP's around 41% - Congress had thus retained Somnath seat and this clearly shows that the objection raised about Rahul's Hindu identity had not affected the fortunes of Congress victory in Somnath in particular and Saurashtra Region in general where Somnath is situated. 

But there was a strong criticism that for votes sake, Rahul is ready to accommodate and articulate Religions and Castes depending upon local contingencies as seen by the voters that Rahul had gone an extra mile to announce ‘a separate reservation’ for Patel much to the embarrassments of Thakore and Dalit Leaders in the HAM.

One more pro-Congress journalist had this to say:

‘Hardik Patel, Alpesh Thakor and Jignesh Mewani – HAJ trio – or HAM Trio – individuals create instant drama, they lack the epic pull of interests. Interest, not individuals and ideologues is the gold standarad of Gujarat politics. Anger and dissatisfaction might surface occasionally, but interest is the cement that guarantees votes.  Ham are not delivery boys of politics.”

Perhaps Rahul will contact HAM again during Lok Sabha election in 2019 – if found necessary and till then, he may keep a safe distance from them.

Those who love Democracy will never want Rahul – who is now elevated to the position of President, not to succeed as a Politician, as there should be adequate checks on the Ruling party so that the country will prosper.

THINK INDIA THINK.