2019 India April–May LS general elections and assembly elections of 2019

[jaichind]

CSDS Maharashtra post-election survey

BJP-SHS performed above par in rural areas and cut off a bunch of gains the NCP had expected to make.  VBA clearly retained the ex-Dalit Buddhists vote and the VBA-AIMIM did cut into the INC-NCP Dalit support.  Marathas  did not swing toward INC-NCP as expected while BJP-SHS retained their edge with Upper Caste and OBC voters.  I am suspicious of the Muslim voters as clearly a bunch of Muslims voted for AIMIM for it to win a seat.

                        INC  NCP  BJP SHS Others
Locality               
Rural                15    18     24    26    18
Urban               19    12    33    19     17

Caste Community               
Upper Castes      7      3     63    21      6
Marathas            9    28      20   39      5
OBCs                14     5      44    31     7
Dalits                13   11      18    12    45
STs                   11    37     23    12    16
Muslims            56    30       9      4      1
Buddhists           5     4        4      2    85

Economic Class (only the extreme ends)               
Poor                 19    17     27     18   18
Rich                 11    13     38     2 1   17

[Filuwaúrdjan]

[Frodo]

What's the distribution of Muslims in India?  The only maps I can find are from their 2001 census.  Is there anything more recent?  I want to see how that correlates with Al's maps above.  

[Frodo]

What would be the best possible electoral result if you support continued Indian economic reform?

Analyzing Narendra Modi's performance on the Indian economy

On paper it would be a solid majority for NDA.  I still feel Modi being out and having someone else from the BJP as PM would be better.  This demonetization was a disaster and all this fake economic data scandals all seems to be ways to cover up the impact of demonetization which continues to today.  An alternative would be a solid majority for UPA although while I do think Rahul Gandhi have matured as a campaigner this election cycle I think it would be a mistake to make him PM this election cycle.  

What do you think of the likelihood of Modi going through with these reforms now that he has won such a huge mandate?

I doubt it.  I think from the grassroots point of view "Reforms" are not things listed in that link.  That list would be what investment community want.  Reforms from the grassroots are really development like electrification and toilets.   I suspect that NDA would end up focusing on those than neo-liberal reforms that I would be for.

From Reuters:

Exclusive: India to see 'big-bang' reforms in Modi's second term, says government think tank

In the first 100 days of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s second term, a slew of ‘big-bang’ economic reforms that should please foreign investors are likely to be pursued, according to a top official at the government’s main think tank.

The reforms will include changes in labor laws, privatization moves, and creation of land banks for new industrial development, said Rajiv Kumar, vice chairman of NITI Aayog (National Institute for Transforming India), who reports directly to Modi.

“They (foreign investors) will have reasons to be happy. You will see a slew of reforms I can assure you of that. We are going to pretty much hit the ground running,” Kumar told Reuters in an interview.

Modi is chairman of the think tank.

If he succeeds, Narendra Modi will definitely become the Ronald Reagan of India.  

[jaichind]

What's the distribution of Muslims in India?  The only maps I can find are from their 2001 census.  Is there anything more recent?  I want to see how that correlates with Al's maps above.  

This topic is very sensitive, especially around the size of Dalit population.  There have been census after 2001 but they are not released.  Ergo the 2001 numbers are the latest official numbers.

[jaichind]

From Reuters:

Exclusive: India to see 'big-bang' reforms in Modi's second term, says government think tank

In the first 100 days of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s second term, a slew of ‘big-bang’ economic reforms that should please foreign investors are likely to be pursued, according to a top official at the government’s main think tank.

The reforms will include changes in labor laws, privatization moves, and creation of land banks for new industrial development, said Rajiv Kumar, vice chairman of NITI Aayog (National Institute for Transforming India), who reports directly to Modi.

“They (foreign investors) will have reasons to be happy. You will see a slew of reforms I can assure you of that. We are going to pretty much hit the ground running,” Kumar told Reuters in an interview.

Modi is chairman of the think tank.

If he succeeds, Narendra Modi will definitely become the Ronald Reagan of India.  

I think it depends on what Modi's goals are.  His speech to the BJP after his election victory seems to indicate that
a) He wants to run for a 3rd term om 2024
b) His goal is to win a vote share landslide on the order of the Indira Gandhi 1971 and Rajiv Gandhi 1984 landslides
c) He wants to be the greatest PM in Indian history

If so it seems to me that radical economic reform is not likely.  To achieve the landslide he is looking to achieve in 2024 he will need to move to the center on communal issues which will anger his base that is looking to build the Ram Temple in Ayodhya cancel Article 370 of the Constitution that grants J&K autonomy.  If Modi does not give them those things then he will need to spend political capital to keep his Hindu nationalist base in good humor and as a result not have enough political capital to  go for significant economic and financial reform

I think if Modi's goals are to maintain the 45% vote share of the NDA for 2024 and peruse a Hindu nationalist line then I think he will have the political capital and support from his base for such reforms. Any attempt to move to the center will cost him so much politically that economic reform would be off the table.

And signs of economic slowdown is already coming in.  The Jan-March 2019 GDP growth just came in at 5.8% vs 8.1% a year ago and versus market expectations of 6.3%.   Also these days India GDP numbers are based on the formal sector (unlike a few years ago) and then extrapolating info what the informal sector GDP growth might be.  Demonetization in 2016-2017 means that the informal sector is still most likely under-performing the formal sector so real growth might be further below that.   

[jaichind]

New Modi Cabinet Has More Ministers with Declared Criminal Cases than 2014 Team

https://www.news18.com/news/politics/new-modi-cabinet-has-more-ministers-with-declared-criminal-cases-than-2014-team-2167155.html?ref=hp_top_pos_1

It seems 39% of the new Modi cabinet will have criminal cases against them

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Top ten percentages for the two national parties...

BJP

1. Gujarat, Surat – 74.5
2. Gujarat, Navsari – 74.4
3. Gujarat, Vadodara – 72.3
4. Himachal Pradesh, Kangra – 72.0
5. Rajasthan, Bhilwara – 71.6
6. Maharashtra, Mumbai North – 71.2
7. Haryana, Karnal – 70.1
8. Gujarat, Gandhinagar – 69.7
9. Rajasthan, Rajasmand – 69.6
10. Madhya Pradesh, Hoshangabad – 69.4

Congress

1. Kerala, Wayanad – 64.7
2. Tamil Nadu, Karur – 63.1
3. Tamil Nadu, Kanniyakumari – 59.8
4. Tamil Nadu, Tiruchirappalli – 59.3
5. Puducherry – 56.3
6. Uttar Pradesh, Rae Bareli – 55.8
7. Assam, Kaliabor – 55.1
8. Tamil Nadu, Thiruvallur – 54.5
9. Kerala, Idukki – 54.2
10. Karnataka, Bangalore Rural – 54.1

[jaichind]

The TN 22 by-elections are really a semi-assembly election. These 22 seats in 2016 went AIADMK 21 DMK 1 and the by-election went DMK 13 AIADMK 9.

In 2016 these 22 seats went along with all

                         22 seats            All 324
                    Vote share Win   Vote Share Win
AIADMK            44.2%    21      41.4%     136
DMK+               37.8%     1       40.3%      98
DMDK+              6.3%               6.1%
PMK                   5.4%              5.4%
BJP+                  2.9%              3.0%
NTK                   0.9%              1.1%

Where

DMK+ is DMK-INC-IMUL-PT-MAMAK
DMDK+ is DMDK-MDMK-CPI-VCK-CPM-TMC
BJP+ is BJP-IJK


The by-election result was

              Vote share   Win
DMK           45.6%     13
AIADMK      38.6%      9
AMMK          8.2%
MNM            2.6%
NTK             3.2%

Where BJP-DMDK-PMK-PT-TMC backed AIADMK while INC-IMUL-CPI-CPM-MDMK-IJK backed DMK. AMMK did worse than expected given the fact that all of AMMK candidates had to run as independents since AMMK was not registered as a party (AMMK claims to be the real AIADMK).

Looking at the relative lean of these 22 seats the DMK bloc is most likely going to win by 10% in an all TN assembly election. There is also the factor that AMMK might win more votes if it is allocated a common symbol. Also there is the issue that Rajinikanth's RMM will most likely run in the next assembly election with unknown impact.

[Oryxslayer]

Sonia officially replaces Rahul.

[jaichind]

Sonia officially replaces Rahul.

Only as the leader of INC Parliamentary party.  Rahul Gandhi, for now, is still the President of INC.

[jaichind]

Thinking about where things went wrong for INC I concluded that for me it really started with the death of YSR, INC CM of AP, in an helocoper accident right after the 2009 election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Andhra_Pradesh_Chief_Minister_helicopter_crash

This event set of a chain of events that destroyed the Sonia Gandhi brand and allowed for the total meltdown of INC in 2014 which its still has not really recovered from.  The real reason, in my mind, for the 2009 INC victory, is that the Sonia Gandhi brand was well above that of the BJP.  Sonia Gandhi was actually not that popular before 2004 and was clearly less popular than BJP PM Vajpayee.  Her ability to chain up a loos coalition of anti-BJP parties in 2004 plus a serious state level anti-incumbency threw the election to INC in 2004.  But when it appeared that she was poised to become PM she gave it up to have Manmohan Singh to become PM.  This selfless act, regardless of the real reasons behind it, propelled her image that place nation above herself and her party.

After AP CM YSR passed away INC high command bungled dealing with YSR's son Jagan Reddy's demands his share of power in AP.  As a result Jagan Reddy formed YSRCP which clearly took away the INC base in the Seemandhra (non-Telangana) part of AP.  The weakened in INC in AP allowed TRS's KCR to step up demands of Telangana.  Seeing that its position weakened in AP to the point of total annihilation, Sonia Gandhi acted in 2013 to grand the creation of  Telangana hoping to retrieve the INC position in  Telangana even as it writes up it base in Seemandhra to YSRCP.  That very act projected an image of Sonia Gandhi putting the interests of INC above that of the nation and destroyed her brand.   While it was clear that UPA will lose in 2014 the polls did not really show a NDA landslide back in 2013.  It was really after the UPA decision to create Telangana that the INC position in the polls started to drop dramatically even as Sonia Gandhi did achieve her tactical goals of persevering the INC position in  Telangana.

At the time this did not seem obvious in 2009 and the decline of INC in AP after the death YSR was an existential to INC because the BJP itself did not hit rock bottom until 2012 when it was hammered in the UP assembly elections nearly dropping to 4th place behind SP BSP and almost INC-RLD.  It was only Modi's assembly victory in late 2012 in the Gujarat assembly by a wide margin was it clear that the BJP position was rising upward.

Looking back now almost 10 years later it seems to me that the most recent and potentially permeate decline of INC really started with the death of the AP INC CM YSR in 2009.   

[jaichind]

There seems to be a rift between BJP and JD(U) although I think they should be able to patch it up.  JD(U), it seems, wanted 2 JD(U) ministers slots in the new Modi cabinet.  BJP was only willing give 1 and as a result JD(U) decided not to join the Modi cabinet.  Right after this the Bihar JD(U) CM Nitish Kumar also did a cabinet reshuffle and added 8 ministers to his 25 member cabinet where all 8 are from the JD(U) none are from BJP.

With NDA beating UPA 54.3% to 32.3% (if you count UPA backed CPI(ML) candidate as part of UPA) there fulcrum of conflict in Bihar might be moving to be within the NDA.  What is critical here is the nature of seat sharing in the 2020 Bihar assembly elections.  BJP was desperate for an alliance in 2019 LS elections and accepted an equal share of seats between BJP and JD(U).  The JD(U) position for 2020  assembly election seat sharing must be: Well for 2019 LS elections it was BJP 17 JD(U) 17 LJP 6 then in the state assembly election the seat distribution should be even  more favorable to the regional party and demand at least half the seats.  There is no way Bihar BJP will accept this saying that the 2019 LS seat sharing did not reflect the true relative strength of BJP and JD(U).  All these maneuvers are really about the 2020 Bihar assembly elections.  If so a possible BJP-JD(U) split or at least conflict might give RJD-INC-RLSP-HAM a fighting chance in 2020. 

[xelas81]

Thinking about where things went wrong for INC I concluded that for me it really started with the death of YSR, INC CM of AP, in an helocoper accident right after the 2009 election...

Didn't BJP also support creation of Telangana?
While I agree that creation of Telangana hurt INC in both Telangana and AP, while would the issue matter in rest of India?

[jaichind]

Thinking about where things went wrong for INC I concluded that for me it really started with the death of YSR, INC CM of AP, in an helocoper accident right after the 2009 election...

Didn't BJP also support creation of Telangana?
While I agree that creation of Telangana hurt INC in both Telangana and AP, while would the issue matter in rest of India?

It was not the decision per say but the issue of following principles.  BJP and BJS (which is proto-BJP) has always been for smaller states since they have been for a stronger federal government so they prefer many small states.  INC has been for large language based states each with their own identities within a federal structure.  So Telangana has always been against INC principles.  In particular INC and YSR campaigned in 2009 against the creation of Telangana.  So when Sonia Gandhi backed the creation of Telangana she was seen as hypocrite that put the interests of her party above that of nation.  Most of India, frankly, did not care outside the AP region.  But the optics of being a hypocrite destroyed the image Sonia Gandhi and INC.  Had YSR not died in 2009 none of this would have happened. 

[jaichind]

I have been looking over the LS results on a district by district basis and what I have concluded are

a) The BJP surge occurred in rural areas where it has been a traditional area of weakness and the BJP had expected to lose ground given the recent rural agricultural crisis   
b) Districts which saw a surge in turnout which is historically negative for the incumbent party of said district tended to have the largest vote share increase for the incumbent party which is mostly BJP

So the rural turnout surge, especially in Muslim and tribal areas, which signaled problems for the BJP acted in exactly the opposite way and produced the largest swings in favor of BJP.

What one can exact from this is not really that good of a news for the BJP in 2024.  This seems to imply that, like the pre-1989 era, voting is shifting away from self-interest but toward larger ideas.  The reason that might be  bad news for the BJP in 2024 is that this implies an more elastic electorate in 2024 if these trends continue.  In many ways if I were the BJP I would prefer to win 250 seats with the NDA at 310 seats with something like 41% vote share for the NDA.  That would mean a solid win with a non-elastic electorate which would set things up for a good 2024 election where NDA might lose some ground but still win.  A more elastic electorate might be a greater chance of larger swings against the BJP in 2024.

History has not been positive for winners of large landslides.  The 3 wave mega landslides where the winning coalition won close to or at 50% of the vote share were 1971 1977 and 1984.  In all 3 cases the winner lost power in the next election.   

This election the BJP clearly had the resource and communications edge.  But I guess beyond a certain point these advantages might start to work against the incumbent.  Of course all of this would require the INC to survive the current leadership crisis in order to get its house in order to fight another day in 2024.   

[jaichind]

Post election developments, mostly positive for BJP and negative for Opposition

1) In UP, SP-BSP-RLD alliance is off for now as each party rebuilds.  BSP's Mayawati seems open to restoring the alliance once she feels that SP has regained the support of its old Yadav-OBC base.  I think in reality BSP broke off the alliance to try to go after SP's Muslim base so when the alliance is stitched up again for the 2022 UP assembly election BSP is in a stronger position vis-a-vis SP.  So in the meantime the 11 assembly by-elections coming up will be a fragmented opposition to take on BJP.  It will be interesting to see the vote share in these by-elections.

2) As mentioned before tension is rising in the BJP-JD(U) alliance in Bihar which is mostly jostling over distribution of seats for the 2020 assembly elections.  There are rumors that JD(U)'s Nitish Kumar might dump BJP to join with INC or RJD-INC.  Most likely scare tactics by JD(U) to get BJP to accept being second fiddle in the 2020 assembly elections.

3) Rajasthan INC in crisis mode after the BJP landslide victory in LS elections.  INC CM Ashok Gehlot and his deputy and inter-party rival Sachin Pilot are going after each other and Rahul Gandhi is nowhere to be seen to be solving this problem.  Even if this leads to more defections to the BJP I think the net benefit to the BJP will be marginal since any additional power to the BJP will only create its own opposition in reaction.

4) Maharashtra  INC also falling apart as INC leader and current leader of the Opposition  Radhakrishna Vikhe Patil leaves INC and is expected to join the BJP.  This has been expected as Patil's son joined the BJP before the LS and ran in the LS elections as a BJP candidate with his father's support. Again not sure the real net benefit to BJP is as now the BJP will inherit local opposition to the Patil clan.

5) More alliance news in  Maharashtra where SHS is showing anger at BJP over the seat alloaction for the assembly elections.  BJP had agreed to a even split of seats but insist on priority given the existing MLAs.  Since the BJP won twice as many seats as SHS in 2014, this really means the seats allocated to the SHS will have a much greater INC-NCP lean which means all things equal BJP will end up winning more seats.  The SHS's main goal is to gain by the CM slot and put BJP in its place as second fiddle in Maharashtra.  The BJP will not allow this.

6) Separately in Maharashtra INC-NCP is trying to get Dalit-Muslim based BVA-AIMIM to join its alliance to take on BJP-SHS later this year in assembly elections.  BVA does not seem to be playing ball and now there are voiced in INC to dump NCP and ally only with BVA-AIMIM. NCP is a party of Marathas which has social conflict at local levels with Dalits.  If INC breaks off its alliance with NCP it might end up being BJP-SHS vs INC-VBA vs NCP-NMS which will be a BJP-SHS landslide victory of course.  Only chance of the opposition will be for a grand alliance of INC-NCP-BVA with some tactical understanding with NMS.

7) INC party in Telangana assembly is mostly gone.  12 out of 18 INC MLA have decided to merge the INC legislative party with TRS (with lots of cash inducements of course).  Since 12 is 2/3 of 18 this is all nice and legal.  The INC will now be left with only 6 MLAs.  On the long run this does not help TRS that much.  After 2014 assembly elections in AP which TDP-BJP defeated YSRCP a lot of YSRCP MLAs defected to TDP.  None of that stopped the TDP from being swept out by YSRCP in 2019.

JD(S)-INC government in crisis after the BJP landslide victory in LS election and could fall any time. There might be a chance of a snap election if JD(S) and INC snap ties.  The came some municipal elections couple of days where INC and JD(S) running separately where INC actually did fairly well and beat by the BJP.  This sort of shows the BJP landslide victory might only be with Modi at the top of the ticket and not reflect actual BJP strength.  This INC victory have stopped the actions of various INC rebels for now.
 

9) BJP's on again and off again ally in Northeast NPP which is a pro-BJP NCP splinter has been granted national party status as it did well enough in 4 states (Manipur, Meghalaya, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh) for assembly elections to be labeled a state party in 4 which qualifies it to be a national party.  This means that NPP can now run anywhere in India with its own dedicated symbol.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

[jaichind]

With the LS over the BJP now sets their eyes on the assembly elections in the fall for Maharashtra, Haryana, Jharkhand, and J&K.

For Maharashtra it seems most of its energy is spend on trying to maneuver SHS into accepting a BJP CM for another term which would not be easy.

For J&K the current BJP strategy seems to be  to push for delimitation so create more seats in Hindu majority Jammu and decrease seats in Muslim majority Kashmir.  In theory this is against current law so it would be tough but that is the only way to increase the odds of BJP winning the assembly election.  Even if they do this then at best the number of seats from Jammu and Kashmir would be roughly similar (versus 46 to 37 today) and even if the BJP sweeps the 4 seats in Buddhist plurality Ladakh (a big if), the fact is BJP will not win any seats in Ksahmir and there are pockets of Muslim majorities in Jammu in the best case scenario the BJP could win something like 38-39 seats out of 87.  But the very act of delimitation would just push INC JKN and PDP post election to work to create a non-BJP government so the goal of a BJP CM of J&K would not be realized.

In Haryana where the BJP government is not that popular the BJP is targeting to win 75 out of 90 seats while in Jharkhand where again the BJP government is not that popular the BJP is targeting 65 seats out of 81.  Spoiler alert: they will not hit these targets.  I can see the BJP coming back to power in both states if they try to project a different CM candidate and they try to use Modi popularity to win.  It is unlikely they can win with the seat targets they indicated.

In Haryana I think the target of 75 is to try to match the 1977 JNP landslide win of 75 seats.  But that was a change of government landslide and right after the JNP won the 1977 LS election where JNP defeated the INC led bloc 70.4% to 22.6% in terms of vote share.  The BJP victory in the 2019 LS election was large but not that large in the LS election.

In Jharkhand on 3 times since 1977 have any pre-election alliance even won a majority of the Jharkhand assembly seats.  1977 (right after the JNP landslide), 1985 (after the Rajiv Gandhi LS landslide in 1984) and 2014 (after the Modi LS landslide in 2014.)   In 1985 INC only got 43 out of 81 and in 2014 BJP-AJSU only got 42 out of 81 after both parties just won a landslide victory in the LS election within 12 months of the assembly election.  in 1977 JNP+ did win 55 seats out of 81 but that was right after the 1977 LS election where the JNP+ crushed INC 63.1% to 23.0%.  The 2019 BJP-AJSU victory was large but not that large.  All signs are that the BJP can at best retain a narrow majority if it plays it cards right in  Jharkhand with 65 seats unlikely to take place.

[xelas81]

With the LS over the BJP now sets their eyes on the assembly elections in the fall for Maharashtra, Haryana, Jharkhand, and J&K.

For Maharashtra it seems most of its energy is spend on trying to maneuver SHS into accepting a BJP CM for another term which would not be easy.

For J&K the current BJP strategy seems to be  to push for delimitation so create more seats in Hindu majority Jammu and decrease seats in Muslim majority Kashmir.  In theory this is against current law so it would be tough but that is the only way to increase the odds of BJP winning the assembly election.  Even if they do this then at best the number of seats from Jammu and Kashmir would be roughly similar (versus 46 to 37 today) and even if the BJP sweeps the 4 seats in Buddhist plurality Ladakh (a big if), the fact is BJP will not win any seats in Ksahmir and there are pockets of Muslim majorities in Jammu in the best case scenario the BJP could win something like 38-39 seats out of 87.  But the very act of delimitation would just push INC JKN and PDP post election to work to create a non-BJP government so the goal of a BJP CM of J&K would not be realized.

In Haryana where the BJP government is not that popular the BJP is targeting to win 75 out of 90 seats while in Jharkhand where again the BJP government is not that popular the BJP is targeting 65 seats out of 81.  Spoiler alert: they will not hit these targets.  I can see the BJP coming back to power in both states if they try to project a different CM candidate and they try to use Modi popularity to win.  It is unlikely they can win with the seat targets they indicated.

In Haryana I think the target of 75 is to try to match the 1977 JNP landslide win of 75 seats.  But that was a change of government landslide and right after the JNP won the 1977 LS election where JNP defeated the INC led bloc 70.4% to 22.6% in terms of vote share.  The BJP victory in the 2019 LS election was large but not that large in the LS election.

In Jharkhand on 3 times since 1977 have any pre-election alliance even won a majority of the Jharkhand assembly seats.  1977 (right after the JNP landslide), 1985 (after the Rajiv Gandhi LS landslide in 1984) and 2014 (after the Modi LS landslide in 2014.)   In 1985 INC only got 43 out of 81 and in 2014 BJP-AJSU only got 42 out of 81 after both parties just won a landslide victory in the LS election within 12 months of the assembly election.  in 1977 JNP+ did win 55 seats out of 81 but that was right after the 1977 LS election where the JNP+ crushed INC 63.1% to 23.0%.  The 2019 BJP-AJSU victory was large but not that large.  All signs are that the BJP can at best retain a narrow majority if it plays it cards right in  Jharkhand with 65 seats unlikely to take place.

BJP getting majority of seats J&K impossible. BJP goal should be winning enough seats in Jammu and Ladakh to force INC-JKN-PDP government. That would be pretty good results for BJP, since it would be very unstable coalition and have high chance of ending up President's rule.

[jaichind]

BJP getting majority of seats J&K impossible. BJP goal should be winning enough seats in Jammu and Ladakh to force INC-JKN-PDP government. That would be pretty good results for BJP, since it would be very unstable coalition and have high chance of ending up President's rule.

Agreed that BJP getting a majority of seats in J&K will not take place, especially when at least 6-7 seats in Jammu will be majority Muslim.  Still I think the BJP goal is for a BJP CM.  What the BJP really want is the repeal of Article 370 which grants autonomy to J&K which proto-BJP (BJS) opposed from the beginning.  In fact the founding of BJS was in part due to objection to Article 370.  I think getting rid of Article 370 might create intentional problems so a BJP CM is a way to undermine Article 370 from within.  It seems unlikely though and I agree a PDP-JKN-INC coalition government would give the BJP the chance to paint INC as pro-Muslim.  In many ways JKN sees this coming and on its own broke off ties with INC on the premise that INC has to be decoupled from the Muslim parties (JKN and PDP) so it can go after the Hindu vote in Jammu.

[jaichind]

Some not so good news for BJP on the economic front post election. 

During the election there were rumors  that the latest employment survey showed that the Indian unemployment reached a 45 year high.  The BJP government would not release this report since it would sort of show that the 2016-2017 demonetization did hurt the rural informal sector.  After the election the report did come out and confirmed the rumors.

Then just a couple of days ago Arvind Subramanian, a noted economist and top economic adviser to the Modi government until recently came out with report that indicated that the Indian GDP growth in the 2011-2016 period was most likely 4.5% and not 7.0% due to changes in methodology that took place in 2011 that skewed the numbers.   
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/indicators/view-indias-economy-is-in-crisis-after-reduced-gdp-estimate/articleshow/69766125.cms 

It is not clear if Arvind Subramanian is right but there had been plenty of other indicators that Indian GDP growth might be overstated where the formal sector is surging but informal sector is stagnating yet the economic figures seems to be measuring only the formal sector and assuming the rate of growth is the same for the informal sector.  The reason why this is a problem is part of the Modi brand is that Indian economic growth under Modi made India a Great Power again since the early 1700s and Modi got for India worldwide respect.  Now part of that narrative is being questioned from a statistical point of view.   Of course I doubt the average Joe on the street will care much about battles over how GDP is calculated. 

[jaichind]

This story of INC's failed big data Project Shakti reads a lot like the Romney 2012 Orca only far worse.  It seems that INC tried to run a 543 district campaign which would be justified back in its heyday in the 1970s and 1980s but was way beyond its means these days.  The net result was tons of fake data which mean that the INC was not able to react to the Modi surge correctly as it was building.

https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/politics/why-couldnt-congress-data-analytics-team-gauge-the-modi-2-0-wave-4107701.html

Other stories that sounds like the Romney 2012 campaign was that Rahul Gandhi, the day before the counting, was convinced that INC would win 150 seats based on feedback he received from his data team as well as various INC CMs.  He even call DMK's Stalin to offer him a position in a INC led cabinet and started to make phone calls of various INC candidates that he did not know but was convinced will be elected the next day. 

It also seems that in the SP-BSP camp,  SP's Akilish Yadav was convinced that SP-BSP will win at least 40 seats out of 80 in UP and was in touch with Rahul Gandhi to share the same feedback.

The net result was that counting day led to a massive shock to the Opposition camp.

[jaichind]

The Mint made a similar point I did about the regional unbalance of the BJP surge



I still like my organization of states into Hindi, non-Hindi Indo-Aryan, Dravidan and Sino-Tibetian.  Their chart data on Region B is deceptive since Region B also has Maharashtra where half the seats are being contested by SHS which would artificially lower the BJP vote and seat count   

https://www.livemint.com/opinion/online-views/opinion-a-case-for-provincializing-the-bharatiya-janata-party-1560881327114.html

Back on the topic of NDA/BJP performance in states grouped by languages. I also computed vote share in the 1991-2019 period by such groups.

NDA total
                    1991    1996    1998     1999     2004    2009    2014    2019
Hindi             29.5%   37.1%  40.7%  42.8%  34.7%  31.8%  46.4%  55.3%
Indo-Aryan    22.0%   21.7%  39.9%  41.1%  38.4%  28.0%  37.5%  48.1%
Sino-Tibetian   5.3%    5.1%   13.2%  10.1%  18.5%   7.2%   31.2%  29.0%
Dravidian        5.5%    4.7%   27.0%  40.3%  33.5%   3.9%   26.2%  17.9%
Total            20.9%   23.9%   37.5%  41.3%   35.8% 24.1%  38.9%   45.4%

BJP only
                    1991    1996     1998    1999     2004    2009    2014    2019
Hindi             29.5%  32.1%   35.7%  34.1%  30.1%  25.9%  44.2%  49.6%
Indo-Aryan    19.9%  17.6%   22.2%  23.1%  22.4%  20.4%  29.9%  39.8%
Sino-Tibetian   5.3%    5.1%    9.0%    5.6%   13.2%   7.2%  11.4%  19.8%
Dravdian         5.4%    4.6%   12.1%   8.2%    7.7%    3.7%    6.9%    7.2%
Total             20.1%  20.3%   25.6%  24.0%  22.3%  18.7%  31.1%  37.6%

BJP allies
                    1991    1996     1998    1999     2004    2009    2014    2019
Hindi              0.0%    5.0%    5.0%    8.7%    4.6%   6.0%    2.2%   5.7%
Indo-Aryan     2.1%    4.1%   17.7%  18.1%  16.0%   7.7%    7.6%   8.4%
Sino-Tibetian   0.0%   0.0%     4.2%    4.5%    5.3%   0.0%  19.8%   9.2%
Dravidain        0.0%   0.1%   15.0%   32.2%  25.8%   0.2%  19.3% 10.7%
Total              0.8%    3.6%   11.8%   17.3%  13.5%   5.4%   7.8%    7.7%

[jaichind]

It seems for now Rahul Gandhi is firm on going as INC leader.  The rumors are that Ashok Gehlot  will take over as INC president.  I think on the long run Rahul Gandhi might end up coming back as a leader of some sort.  I actually thought he did a good job in 2019 on the stump as opposed to 2014.  What he failed as was execution.  Ideally he should take on the role of the Chairman of the Board and have someone else take over as CEO/COO of INC.  Of course to be good a such as Chairman of the Board role he has to be good at forming relationship with the leaders of other opposition parties which it seems he is poor at and looking to his mother Sonia Gandhi to play that role.