Sachin=GOD Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 Ashok Mallik | Mar 8, 2012, 12.00AM IST For a fleeting half hour early on March 6 - when the party seemed to be running neck-and-neck with the Samajwadi Party in Uttar Pradesh - it appeared the BJP's rejuvenation would be the surprise story of verdict day. It was a false dawn. As the dust settles on the quintet of state elections, the news for India's national opposition party is only a trifle less unsettling than it is for the ruling party. The Congress has been routed in UP, Punjab and Goa. The UPA government has been crippled and an early Lok Sabha election has never seemed more likely. Equally, the BJP's ability to maximise gains from this opportunity has rarely seemed less likely. For the past few months, the debate in the BJP has been between two ideational models: a compelling party leader who will appeal to the initiated but who may not be palatable to all coalition partners, current and potential; or a moderate alliance builder who may have limited vote-catching capacity. After the thrashing in UP, where do these models stand? There is no indication the voter is looking to a polarising leader, or at least a leader who opponents can successfully paint as polarising in a propaganda offensive. Nevertheless, even the most persuasive coalition builder cannot steer a coalition if his own party doesn't look to be crossing the 120-125 Lok Sabha seats threshold. What route the BJP takes and whether it can recover ground sufficiently before 2014 (or whenever the next election is held) is for astrologers to predict. Even so, there are some lessons from the recent elections it cannot ignore. In UP, both national parties were fighting not to form a government but for sectional vote slices they thought would make them crucial to government formation. This revealed a 1990s mindset, harking back to a time when India's largest state made community, caste and gotra-level politics its defining characteristic. Caste and identity still count, but they're not the only game in town. In two successive elections, in 2007 and now, UP's voters have rewarded rainbow coalitions. If the Samajwadi Party had merely optimised its traditional Yadav-Muslim constituency it would have peaked at 150 seats or so. If it has crossed 220 seats in a house of 403, it means it got an incremental vote from traditionally hostile demographic groups. The BJP had individual small-scale caste leaders - but none to stitch together a larger fabric. UP was more ready for this than imagined. Both national parties need to invest in a young - early 40s to early 50s - relatively fresh, sober face as a pan-UP mascot, unworried about caste background and sub-provincial boroughs. They need to promote a state leader rather than a caste leader, one who speaks a modern idiom and does not seem a 20 {+t} {+h} century relic when he addresses a broader constituency. This person could be a Kayastha or a Brahmin, a Kurmi or a dalit. It doesn't matter. If he appears credible and rooted in the state, engages UP's people over a sustained, three-year period, he will get a chance beyond just caste affiliation. The Congress cannot bet on such a leader because it is too scared he may overshadow Rahul Gandhi. What's the BJP's excuse? A certain leavening of political identities is taking place across India. Parties responsive to this phenomenon are being rewarded. Take the Akali Dal. This election it eschewed the so-called "panthic issues", put up 11 Hindu candidates - 10% of its nominees, seven of them won. It is gradually repackaging itself as a Punjabi party rather than a Sikh-identity party. The BJP itself did exemplarily in Goa. Under an upstanding, technocratic leader, it built bridges with an appropriate ally (the MGP) and reached out to Christians. It gave tickets to seven Catholics, all of whom won. Goa offers a template for the BJP to adopt elsewhere, notably in UP. It cannot conti-nue to long for some variant, microcosmic or otherwise, of a 1980s-style religious polari-sation. What if this never happens? The tensions between the BJP's federative impulses and national brand have allowed neither to flower. In reality, the party needs both. In New Delhi, for instance, it has to stand for something other than trenchant parliamentary critiques of the government. As a vote-catcher, Hindutva is dead. The party leadership recognises this but has failed to design a BJP 2.0 central prop. The politics of aspiration and economic change - and accompanying national policies, those that can empower states and inspire middle India, not just fix deals for big business - is waiting for a political vehicle. This is a right-wing party's default position, but one the post-2004 BJP has studiously ignored. As such, on policy issues it sometimes resembles a less corrupt but equally woolly-headed cousin of the Congress. Where is the product differentiation? If the BJP has to be a 120-seat entity in New Delhi, it may as well be one with rigorous, defining policy opinions. This may not take it to power at once, but will give it something far more important: authority. The alternative is to just hang around and hope for something to happen. We know where that approach got it in Lucknow. Times of India Interesting piece by Ashok Mailk. He rightly points out that Hindutva as a Vote catcher is dead (recently BJP lost Ayodhya seat for the 1st time since 1991 - the best example of Hindutva and Ram Mandir as agendas being dead). There is definitely a huge debate going on in the BJP over the selection of the next leader for Lok Sabha 2014 - should it be a hardliner like Modi or someone Moderate? I for one think that someone like Modi would not work in the current scenario and would further reduce the BJPs appeal as a National Party therefore I think someone like Swaraj or Jaitley should lead the BJP in Lok Sabha 2014. Your views...
dial_100 Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 I was speaking to my dad and what I learnt is that they are very stubborn with their policy and belief. They are very difficult when it comes to not accepting the issue but making change about in the policy. Like karnataka issue, I heard that many in BJP/RSS camp are speechless. What I was telling him that BJP should focus on how to win rather than sticking to their age old policies. Why cannot they keep Modi little separate from the center but adopt his policy of PROGRESS only. Thats all they should adopt as a policy. A corruption free, progress seeking party. Use the state that they are ruling to show that they only mean progress, like MP, Guj, Bihar. That way they can easily promote their PM. Nitish, Swaraj or Jaitly should only be their PM candidates. Quickly eliminate all other contenders. By that they will get a quick start towards 2014. Doesn't seem this is likely. It is unfortunate that we are going to see another khichadi government much weaker than this next time.
ViruRulez Posted March 8, 2012 Posted March 8, 2012 I still repeat Nitish Kumar is the best trump card who can win them the election with ease.
achilles Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 They can bloom, but they have no leader. And the leader-materials are not handled properly, like Modi and Nitish, who don't see eye-to-eye.
b555 Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 i havent been much active off late, but am now so will put up the odds in advance :)
anotherhawkeye Posted March 9, 2012 Posted March 9, 2012 I thought the thread was about the flower. :protest:
Sachin=GOD Posted July 24, 2012 Author Posted July 24, 2012 Mirror, mirror on the wall There are several claimants to the throne, but who’s the fairest of them all? Sohel Sanghani Desperately he heaved, driven by ambition ripened by age. ‘But is it really necessary’, pleaded his tired sinews, in vain. “Yes”, was the Loh Purush’s reply. “Oh most certainly yes, for am I not entitled, being the senior most leader?” And so he tried, and so he failed, the voters rejecting his ‘mazboot neta’ pitch. And yet here he is again, maneuvering for that elusive prize. In his judgment, it is his destiny. But did he not also certify Jinnah, a man who fought for the creation of a nation based solely on religion, to be secular? No, perhaps the voters were right. He ought not to lead. Quite a spectacle this, ‘the party with a difference’, morphing into ‘the party with differences’. Leaders jostling for the Prime Prize. And then there’s his camp-follower. The lady who thunders from the front row of Parliament, opposing every proposal the government presents. Yes, she has understood the gravity of being Leader of Opposition, nobly guiding the nation away from poorly conceived new policies. Or is that a hint of a smile? As if she is in on a secret? Or is it the satisfaction that an actor betrays when she knows she’s convinced her audience of an improbable plot? ‘Reddy’ for the limelight, she seems, filling the party’s coffers effortlessly. She’ll be made home minister, perhaps? Or will that perch go to the legal eagle? Sharper than most, with an air of studied silence – he seems to miss little and say even less. But is it choice or compulsion? He can strategize, but can he lead? And what about the pseudo-soldier who was expelled and then brought back when he sang an awkward song? He’s dabbled with defence, finance and external affairs – surely he believes he’s also a Prime candidate? Or will Vice Presidency suffice? No, all these are but the supporting cast, well versed in the coarse art of politicking, but lacking the sheer weight and pull of the two state satraps. Yes, it has to be one of these two – or they’ll lose the battle before it is fought, a la 2009. The first belongs to an allied party, and that may be no handicap. He overturned his state’s ‘goonda raj’ and has given his people some safety. But what next? Does he have a vision? How does he plan to attract business, industry and investment? He may be able to keep the ship afloat, but can he make it sail? In the case of the other state supreme there are no such doubts. He is the man who commands the support of the party rank and file. He is favored by the ideological parent, which makes him the most ardent of all Hindus. He has led his state to a decade of phenomenal growth, reined in corruption, created employment, won investor confidence, built infrastructure – in short he has governed. Is he the man for the job, then? Or is he guilty – a modern day Nero, who fiddled while his people burned? Or did he fan the fire, as has been whispered, but never proven? And where is the remorse? What ‘sadbhavna’ is there in refusing to wear a cap offered in goodwill – if only for a moment? Where is the help the victims desperately need, or the justice they deserve? There is no denying that he can lead, and take us places – but will they be places we’d like to go to? And so it is: what we have are several acceptable losers and perhaps one unacceptable winner. But what about the competition? The ruling dynasty’s crown prince has come a cropper. His resume does not extend beyond his name. There are other capable men in the wings, but they dare not squeak in dissent, lest they be chastised. There are hence two years for those aspiring to dethrone the prince to get their act together, and rally around one claimant to the throne. And the sooner they do it, the better – for how will they govern the nation, if they can’t govern themselves? Link
ravishingravi Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 Modi. It is the best bet. Polarizing yes. But I don't see any uniting force in any case from BJP.
Lurker Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 BJP's best chance have come and gone. Simble..:winky:
Sachin=GOD Posted July 24, 2012 Author Posted July 24, 2012 I think Arun Jaitley would have a pretty good chance if the NDA gets enough seats.
The Outsider Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 The Math simply does not add up for the BJP. Here is an earlier post of mine: Let's take the most optimistic scenario for the BJP(counting only the BJP not allies since their support will be contingent on Modi) in 2014: 1. UP - 30/80 2. Bihar - 10/40 3. Maharashtra - 30/48 (including Shiv Sena since they will gladly support Modi) 4. MP - 20/29 5. Rajasthan - 20/25 6. Karnataka - 15/28 7. Gujarat - 20/26 Throw in another 50 from AP, Assam, Chhatisgarh, Harayana, Delhi, Punjab, Orissa and they still don't cross 200 forget about 271. None of their allies except Shiv Sena is going to support a government with Modi at the helm. It will be political suicide if BJP makes Modi their PM candidate and despite what the internet residing middle class thinks the ground reality is that BJP has got it's ass handed to them on a platter wherever Modi has campaigned outside Gujarat. Their only outside chance is to come to power without Modi - there is no possible way BJP can form the government with Modi at the helm unless the ground realities change drastically.
Lurker Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 I think Arun Jaitley would have a pretty good chance if the NDA gets enough seats. I would vote for Jaitley. Chaddhidharis wont. There lies the quandry. BJP's good candidate are not liked by the BJP vote block. BJP's bad candidates (read ilks of Modi) are going to get ghanta from non-BJP vote block.
Lurker Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 The Math simply does not add up for the BJP. Here is an earlier post of mine: Their only outside chance is to come to power without Modi - there is no possible way BJP can form the government with Modi at the helm unless the ground realities change drastically. BJP generally does good in Jharkhand, around 10 seats or so. But that wouldnt change the overall equation. Best chance for BJP to come in power is thanks to a coalition, and no coalition going to stick with Modi at the helm.
Anonymous Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 BJP generally does good in Jharkhand, around 10 seats or so. But that wouldnt change the overall equation. Best chance for BJP to come in power is thanks to a coalition, and no coalition going to stick with Modi at the helm. Add Jaya in the mix (she is a staunch supporter of Modi), but then again thats only about 30 to 35 extra seats. I personally think, BJP is gonna just sit on the fence until the election results are out and then evaluate their options.
Clarke Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 Why does BJP need to project a leader while the Kangress can get away with it for instance in 2004 :hmmm: People identify with the party symbol much more than MMS & maybe Gadkari :giggle:. Can the respective party workers at the grassroots convince the voters more than their competitors is what matters more i reckon.
The Outsider Posted July 24, 2012 Posted July 24, 2012 Why does BJP need to project a leader while the Kangress can get away with it for instance in 2004 :hmmm: People identify with the party symbol much more than MMS & maybe Gadkari :giggle:. Can the respective party workers at the grassroots convince the voters more than their competitors is what matters more i reckon. Because BJP has used the point that Congress does not project a PM candidate prior to the elections as an attack on the Congress and will be another self goal if they decide not to do it this time as well.
Clarke Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 Because BJP has used the point that Congress does not project a PM candidate prior to the elections as an attack on the Congress and will be another self goal if they decide not to do it this time as well. You're suggesting people holding politicians accountable on how they ran their campaign in 2004 vs 2014 What exactly prompted you to claim that the average voter comes up with that level of scrutiny ? Would a potential PM Sonia Gandhi ever beat the incumbent Vajpayee if the people paid attention to the details of agla PM kaun ?
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2012 Posted July 25, 2012 You're suggesting people holding politicians accountable on how they ran their campaign in 2004 vs 2014 What exactly prompted you to claim that the average voter comes up with that level of scrutiny ? Would a potential PM Sonia Gandhi ever beat the incumbent Vajpayee if the people paid attention to the details of agla PM kaun ? Not just 2004, but 2009 as well when Advani was the projected PM candidate for BJP and Congress despite having an incumbent decided not to project anyone as a PM candidate. It's surely not an issue which is going to turn the elections on it's head, but gives a 1-2% edge in closely contested seats.
Sachin=GOD Posted July 25, 2012 Author Posted July 25, 2012 I would vote for Jaitley. Chaddhidharis wont. There lies the quandry. BJP's good candidate are not liked by the BJP vote block. BJP's bad candidates (read ilks of Modi) are going to get ghanta from non-BJP vote block. I don't think he will be the PM candidate. He's not the type of leader under whose leadership the BJP can win a National election in India BUT he is the type of leader who can very easily be the consensus candidate for the post of PM if NDA comes to power. I don't think the BJP should go into Lok Sabha 2014 with one leader because if they chose someone then all the other PM candidates would simply forget about the upcoming elections and concentrate all their energy into trying to put him/her down and that would mean a certain victory for UPA. They should go into the elections under the collective leadership of those at the top and then decide the PM by consensus if they come to power.
Sachin=GOD Posted July 25, 2012 Author Posted July 25, 2012 The Math simply does not add up for the BJP. Here is an earlier post of mine: Their only outside chance is to come to power without Modi - there is no possible way BJP can form the government with Modi at the helm unless the ground realities change drastically. This.
Recommended Posts