The Hindu : The Big Picture : Vajpayee's popularity alone was not enough

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, May 20, 2004

The Big Picture

The Big Picture

Vajpayee's popularity alone was not enough

Suhas Palshikar with CSDS Team

In calling for early elections, the Bharatiya Janata Party's strategists had banked heavily on the popularity of Atal Bihari Vajpayee. The reasoning was simple and persuasive. One, Mr. Vajpayee's popularity rating was way above that of the Congress president and it was unlikely that Sonia Gandhi would be able to close the gap during the campaign. Two, the Central Government was not very unpopular and the people were likely to wish to give it another chance, specially if Mr. Vajpayee's name was attached to it. And, three, the BJP could turn the election into a `Vajpayee versus a question mark' race. The findings of the NES 2004 suggest that while the BJP was quite right in the first two assumptions, the third assumption was deeply flawed.

Mr. Vajpayee was and indeed remained popular throughout the campaign. But his popularity and a desire to give him another chance did not translate as easily into votes for the NDA as the BJP strategists may have assumed.

The campaign by the BJP and the projection of these two leaders by the media turned the election, at least partially, into a battle between the two. Ironically, the candidate who had a greater acceptability as the next Prime Minister has lost the so-called battle between the two. This election saw the exit of Mr. Vajpayee who was preferred by almost 40 per cent of the respondents in an unprompted choice.

Interestingly, they were not as interested in the party Mr. Vajpayee was leading. No other BJP leader was accepted by even one per cent of the respondents as the next Prime Minister. L.K. Advani, the BJP's Lauh-Purush (iron man) and the architect of its Hindutva face, has only less than half per cent of the respondents accepting him as Prime Minister. Mayawati, Mulayam Singh Yadav, Sharad Pawar and Laloo Prasad Yadav are ahead of Mr. Advani in the popular preference for the nation's top post.

In fact, for any casual observer of politics in the country, it was evident since 1999 that Ms. Sonia Gandhi's credentials to become Prime Minister was a non-issue for the majority of the people.

Even after a long drawn campaign against her, the BJP could not gain from this issue. But in focussing on the issue of the Congress president's foreign origin, the BJP and the media might have actually helped her acquire an image.

Over five per cent of our respondents said they might not have voted for the NDA if Mr. Vajpayee was not leading it.

A little over two per cent said they might have considered voting for the Congress only if Ms. Sonia Gandhi was not the leader. It may not be an exaggeration to say that the BJP lost in spite of Mr. Vajpayee and the Congress gained power in spite of Ms. Sonia Gandhi.

Surprising though it may appear, almost half of the population was willing to give the NDA another chance. Those who were satisfied with the Government easily outnumbered those who were dissatisfied (27 per cent). People had a generally favourable assessment of the BJP in terms of its ability to solve the problems before the country. The NDA was not defeated because people felt that it was doing too badly. But, perhaps, shrill claims about the `feel-good' factor did not go down well with the electorate.

Although a robust proportion of the electorate agreed that the country's image had improved, safety and security of the country had improved, and development of the country also improved, the anxieties about real life and day-to-day economic issues mattered the most. People did not perhaps assess the economy in terms of forex and sensex, but in terms of survival and existence.

Only a small minority (17 per cent) thought that the employment situation had improved. For most, it either remained the same or had deteriorated. For a party campaigning on the logic of "feel-good" factor, this must be seen as a severe indictment. Another issue that was probably central to the people's choice was the performance of the State Governments.

For 22 per cent of the respondents, the State Government mattered the most while making their voting choice and 23 per cent said that both the State and Central Governments mattered. Thus, for almost half of the respondents, the State Government was the main consideration.

If we take into account the fact that a majority of the States were governed either by the BJP or by the other partners of the NDA, we might understand the apparent paradox that the people seem to have voted out the government that they thought was doing a reasonable job. And even in the States where the NDA was not in power, the result has been against the party in power at the State-level (Punjab, Haryana, Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu). This point is reflected in the responses to the question on performance of the State Government. In most case, the people were dissatisfied with the performance of their State Government. The combination of disapproval of the State Governments and protest against the economic conditions may have worked against the NDA. Perhaps, a closer look at the people's response to the questions related to economy can tell us more about these elections.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

The Big Picture

News Update

Stories in this Section

Radical shift in the social basis of political power

Methodology of National Election Study 2004

A vote for secular politics

The turnout was low but not alarmingly so

Reform: the elites want it, the masses don't

Caste matters, but so do a whole lot of other things

Alliances did the trick for the Congress