The Outsider Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 Kalyan Singh fecked up is true' date=' infact among all Mayawati has been the best CM of UP which shows how would have others performed. But I still remember the 4-5 months tenure of Rajnath Singh and one bold decision taken during his tenure was giving STF target of killing Top 10 mafias in each and every district. That was one of the period when law and order was at its best.[/quote'] Rajnath was CM for 1.5 years. His tenure was by and large the same as Kalyan Singh. Usually Mayawati screws UP by corruption and sectarianism, Mulayam by gundagardi and sectarianism, but under BJP rule it was a triple whammy of corruption, gundagardi, and sectarianism. How can you expect people to vote for the same faces? These guys still rule the roost in UP politics 15-20 years later. Bihar voted for a development agenda when there was someone to offer it to them, UP voted in Akhilesh Yadav on a development agenda - though it remains to be seen if he can break the shackles of his baap's gundagardi and deliver. jairamesh and ravish were implying that electorate of UP and Bihar are idiots, or should I say members of chewtiyon ki toli, to vote for Mulayam, Mayawati, and Laloo. But the fact is that BJP has done a worse job than these rightly derided politicians when given a chance and that is the reason UP does not vote for BJP anymore. As far as political acumen is concerned you will struggle to find a more politics savvy aam aadmi than in UP and Bihar.
Khalpat Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 Rajnath was CM for 1.5 years. His tenure was by and large the same as Kalyan Singh. Usually Mayawati screws UP by corruption and sectarianism, Mulayam by gundagardi and sectarianism, but under BJP rule it was a triple whammy of corruption, gundagardi, and sectarianism. How can you expect people to vote for the same faces? These guys still rule the roost in UP politics 15-20 years later. Bihar voted for a development agenda when there was someone to offer it to them, UP voted in Akhilesh Yadav on a development agenda - though it remains to be seen if he can break the shackles of his baap's gundagardi and deliver. jairamesh and ravish were implying that electorate of UP and Bihar are idiots, or should I say members of chewtiyon ki toli, to vote for Mulayam, Mayawati, and Laloo. But the fact is that BJP has done a worse job than these rightly derided politicians when given a chance and that is the reason UP does not vote for BJP anymore. As far as political acumen is concerned you will struggle to find a more politics savvy aam aadmi than in UP and Bihar. ha ha ha and the best part was BJP this time fought UP election under leadership of Uma bharti, I mean seriously who in the sane mind will give vote to a party having Uma Bharti and Adityanath as their face. UP people are anything but idiot. Give them a good option and see the difference.
Crookbond Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 ha ha ha and the best part was BJP this time fought UP election under leadership of Uma bharti' date=' I mean seriously who in the sane mind will give vote to a party having Uma Bharti and Adityanath as their face. UP [b']people are anything but idiot. Give them a good option and see the difference. :two_thumbs_up:
Lurker Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 And that's why I back Modi. There is none of this BS 'topi and tilak' pandered by all these melodramatic politicians. Sometimes I would not be sad for Bihar or UP to have another 10 to 15 years of Lalu Prasad Yadav and Samajwadi Party. They will never learn. Haan beta, tum to learn pe learn kiye jaa rahe ho.:giggle::giggle: It is amazing how BJP has turned into barsaati medhak. They come out spitting the same nonsense every 2 years. Is it rocket science that to be a force at the center they need Bihar and UP as safe bets? And yet these two states have perhaps never been in a worse position for them. The last time BJP was a force in Bihar (by itself) was before Jharkhand happened. Jharkand ye aaya, BJP wo gaya. Case closed. UP mein it is little better. They have a solo identity but even lesser seats. Lo kar lo baat. It is not exactly that BJP is putting year long chintan shivir in Patna Gandhi Maidan to attract Biharis. In fact they are dead scared that if they do so Nitish would be miffed. Saale apni party baccha nahin paaye desh ghanta bacchayenge??? Lekin tum learn karte rahe ho yaar. :two_thumbs_up::two_thumbs_up:
The Outsider Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 It is amazing how BJP has turned into barsaati medhak. They come out spitting the same nonsense every 2 years. Is it rocket science that to be a force at the center they need Bihar and UP as safe bets? And yet these two states have perhaps never been in a worse position for them. If not UP, WB and Bihar then the Southern states - wahaan bhi ghantaa hai. UP, Bihar, WB, TN, AP, Karnataka, and Kerala contribute 300 seats. As things stand with Modi at the helm and no JD-U to prop them up in Bihar, and no pre poll allies they will be lucky to win 30 out of these 300 seats. Bana lo sarkaar with Modi in the remaining 240 seats.
BeautifulGame Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 This. NDA or BJP also do not have anything to show or fight for in the coming election infact BJP without Modi is similar to Congress B Team having a mixture of good and bad leaders for the time being good leaders quantity is more in BJP. Look people of India might vote on the basis of religion, caste and local issue but there is one factor which brought VP singh, Vajpayee into power and that is HOPE(remember Sabko parkha humko parkhein). This one word can do wonders for them. I would say sit in opposition but have Modi as your leader rather than be in power with hypocritic alliances such as Nitish or Mamta and do nothing new. What bought Vajpayee into power was strong coalition not some hope theory
BeautifulGame Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 But the same 'public' will vote largely on the basis of who the potential PM candidates from the respective camps are going to be. So the 'public' does decide who gets to be the PM. People hardly vote on the basis of who is the PM candidate.Most places the issues will be regional and state and that will decide the elections. It is more likely to be a mandate for the performances likes of Akilash , Mamta , Jaya , Nitish , Patnyak etc than about Rahul vs Modi internet builds up.
ravishingravi Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 Wasn't Nitish Kumar in the cabinet as home minister at the time of the riots ? Surely he must have quit his position and separated from NDA ? This is essential definition of what being a secular means in India. Political expediency, nothing more.
ravishingravi Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 People hardly vote on the basis of who is the PM candidate.Most places the issues will be regional and state and that will decide the elections. It is more likely to be a mandate for the performances likes of Akilash , Mamta , Jaya , Nitish , Patnyak etc than about Rahul vs Modi internet builds up. This is true.
BeautifulGame Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 Wasn't Nitish Kumar in the cabinet as home minister at the time of the riots ? Surely he must have quit his position and separated from NDA ? This is essential definition of what being a secular means in India. Political expediency, nothing more. Everyone is a hypocrite in politics doesnt matter which party he belongs. Problem for Nitish is Modi simply polarises muslim votes.He cant just risk losing the 15% muslim vote bank to congress(Considerable portion of his vote bank) by bcking Modi as PM canditate.Thats like playing right into the hands of Laloo and Congress. Its not about secularism but u cant expect Nitish to risk commiting political suicide in his state by supporting Modi.Thats just the reality
Lurker Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 Kalyan Singh fecked up is true' date=' infact among all Mayawati has been the best CM of UP which shows how would have others performed. But I still remember the 4-[b']5 months tenure of Rajnath Singh and one bold decision taken during his tenure was giving STF target of killing Top 10 mafias in each and every district. That was one of the period when law and order was at its best. Khalpat bhau, woh Rajnath Singh tha ya Kalyan Singh? I am thinking it was Kalyan Singh. Wasn't it KS who was threatened by Shiv Prakash Shukla to be assasinated but STF got to him before that?
The Outsider Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 Wasn't Nitish Kumar in the cabinet as home minister at the time of the riots ? Surely he must have quit his position and separated from NDA ? This is essential definition of what being a secular means in India. Political expediency, nothing more. Wasn't Vajpayee the PM of India at the time of the riots and wanted to throw Modi out, but couldn't. If the Congress high command is with Sonia, the BJP high command is with RSS. Both exercise power with zero political responsibility. And Nitish was not the Home Minister, Advani was. Why should Nitish have quit if the PM himself wanted to throw out Modi but could not? :dontknow:
seedhi Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 Wasn't Vajpayee the PM of India at the time of the riots and wanted to throw Modi out, but couldn't. If the Congress high command is with Sonia, the BJP high command is with RSS. Both exercise power with zero political responsibility. And Nitish was not the Home Minister, Advani was. Why should Nitish have quit if the PM himself wanted to throw out Modi but could not? :dontknow:According to the reports, it was Advani who stopped Vajpayee from sacking Narendra Modi. Nitish Kumar subsequently supported Advani as PM candidate. Frankly, this is clear cut hypocrisy by Nitish Kumar. At least Ram Vilas Paswan was somewhat principled - he left the NDA after the Gujarat riots and has been opposed to the BJP ever since.
Lurker Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 According to the reports' date=' [b']it was Advani who stopped Vajpayee from sacking Narendra Modi. Nitish Kumar subsequently supported Advani as PM candidate. Frankly, this is clear cut hypocrisy by Nitish Kumar. At least Ram Vilas Paswan was somewhat principled - he left the NDA after the Gujarat riots and has been opposed to the BJP ever since. Kya logic hai. :hysterical: This is why BJP is where it is today. Agar Modi ko joote maar ke bahar kar dete Vajpayee saab to BJP, and Indian, history would be different today. Instead BJP lost it charm, Modi became its modern mascot, and now it is all Nitish Kumar's fault :clap: Partition was not the only time RSS/bhagwa loony brigade were in sync with Lahori logic!
The Outsider Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 According to the reports, it was Advani who stopped Vajpayee from sacking Narendra Modi. Nitish Kumar subsequently supported Advani as PM candidate. Frankly, this is clear cut hypocrisy by Nitish Kumar. At least Ram Vilas Paswan was somewhat principled - he left the NDA after the Gujarat riots and has been opposed to the BJP ever since. What kind of logic is this? Nitish had nothing to do with the CM of a state - his interaction was with Vajpayee who held the same views as him, but got overruled due to the high command. Why should Nitish have resigned?
seedhi Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 What kind of logic is this? Nitish had nothing to do with the CM of a state - his interaction was with Vajpayee who held the same views as him' date=' but got overruled due to the high command. Why should Nitish have resigned?[/quote']The point is that Nitish Kumar was and is comfortable in supporting LK Advani who was the HM in 2002 and who also stood up for Modi. Yet, Nitish Kumar refuses to have any truck with Modi. It is clear cut hypocrisy by him.
The Outsider Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 The point is that Nitish Kumar was and is comfortable in supporting LK Advani who was the HM in 2002 and who also stood up for Modi. Yet' date=' Nitish Kumar refuses to have any truck with Modi. It is clear cut hypocrisy by him.[/quote'] The CM of the state is much more responsible for what happens in and the aftermath of the riots than the HM of the country. As I said earlier, if it were up to me I would not have supported an alliance with Advani either but as things stand Advani is not even in the frame - he has even given up being leader of the opposition. Not sure what relevance it holds in today's politics - branding Nitish a hypocrite? Well, who isn't a hypocrite in politics?
seedhi Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 The CM of the state is much more responsible for what happens in and the aftermath of the riots than the HM of the country. As I said earlier' date=' if it were up to me I would not have supported an alliance with Advani either but as things stand Advani is not even in the frame - he has even given up being leader of the opposition. Not sure what relevance it holds in today's politics - branding Nitish a hypocrite? Well, who isn't a hypocrite in politics?[/quote']First of all it is irrelevant whether Advani is "in the frame" today or not. Nitish Kumar backed him in 2009 as the PM candidate. And now he wants no truck with Modi who was all throughout been supported and praised by Advani. It is clear his opposition to Modi is not based on principles but on expediency. This is the point post # 574 was making.
Desi Cartman Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 This maybe off topic but its so sad http://www.yupptv.com/VOD/player.aspx?sc=1661859 Congress did alll this openly and till date there is no justice. So freaking sad. I am not a fan of modi either but how can parties term Congress secular is beyond me.
Lurker Posted April 15, 2013 Posted April 15, 2013 This maybe off topic but its so sad http://www.yupptv.com/VOD/player.aspx?sc=1661859 Congress did alll this openly and till date there is no justice. So freaking sad. I am not a fan of modi either but how can parties term Congress secular is beyond me. Good post, wrong thread By the by 1984 is most likely the beginning of the fall of Congress. It has steadly gone downhill since and Delhi riots are partially responsible for the same.
Recommended Posts