By the evening of 3 December, we will all know whom the voters have chosen in the five states. How many will see pro-incumbency verdicts?
Most flogged to death word in TV studios and in op-eds during elections is anti-incumbency. Analysts, commentators, pundits and pollsters are all obliged to talk about it; the latter being asked to perform the virtually impossible task of “measuring” anti-incumbency. The funny thing is: it is pro-incumbency that has been the dominant theme in the 21st century when it comes to elections. The interesting thing to watch if the states where elections are being held now stick to this trend. Going by polling and anecdotal data, it does look like one of the four major states will see a pro-incumbency verdict, with the other three being a toss-up. The authors have written a book called “The Pro-Incumbency Century” that analyses this baffling trend. During numerous surveys, people seem angry and unhappy with the ruling regime. And yet, come election time and the incumbent retains power? Not many analysts have paid serious attention to this phenomenon.
It is worthwhile citing just three examples of pro-incumbency verdicts among the many discussed in the book. The first comes from Telangana where voters will decide the fate of two term Chief Minister and supremo of BRS (formerly TRS). After the acrimonious bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in 2014, the TRS led by K.C. Rao won a narrow majority with 63 seats in the new 119-seat Telangana Assembly. By the end of 2017, there were visible signs that “anti-incumbency” had set in. There was a big jump in farmers’ suicides amidst agricultural distress. More importantly, the Congress, the TDP and the Left parties formed an “alliance” to oust TRS in the 2019 Assembly elections. Many analysts thought his goose was cooked. But Rao sprang a surprise on everyone by dissolving the Assembly in 2018—one year before its term was over—and called for fresh elections. There was a bigger surprise: the voters gave K.C. Rao a thumping repeat mandate as the TRS won 88 seats in the elections. The opposition alliance “arithmetic” failed. How did this happen?
The next example is from Kerala in 2021. A big development in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections was then Congress president Rahul Gandhi losing to Smriti Irani in Amethi. Another shocking development was the Left alliance getting virtually wiped out in Kerala where Rahul Gandhi comfortably won the Wayanad seat. It seems the manner in which the CPI(M) Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan handled the Sabarimala shrine controversy had angered voters so much that they had decided to punish the Left in 2019 when it managed to win just one of the 20 seats from the state. Almost everyone concluded that the defeat marked the end of the active political career of Vijayan when Assembly elections came around in 2021. In any case, for about five decades, Kerala had seen “anti-incumbency” verdicts as ruling regimes were routinely thrown out. Most analysts assumed the Left losing Kerala in 2021 was a foregone conclusion. In any case, media attention was focused on the high-pitched battle in West Bengal where elections were simultaneously being held along with Tamil Nadu, Assam and Puducherry. But come the day of results and Pinarayi Vijayan achieved the seemingly impossible by winning a second successive mandate. In fact, the Left increased its tally from 91 in the 2016 elections to 99 in the 140-member Assembly. How?
The third example too broke all electoral records. In 2017, the BJP won a massive mandate in Uttar Pradesh and Yogi Adityanath was installed as the Chief Minister after much deliberation by the top brass. His first tenure was controversial, with public opinion polarised strongly for and against him. A series of events preceding the 2022 elections made it look as if Yogi was skating on thin ice. The prolonged farmers’ agitation against the three farm reform laws (now withdrawn) had created a perception that the powerful vote bloc of Jats in western Uttar Pradesh would go against the BJP. The young SP leader Akhilesh Yadav had stitched a formidable alliance with a number of smaller parties claiming to represent Jats, non-Yadav OBCs and even Dalits. The Muslim vote, of course was solidly behind that alliance. For many analysts, a big loss for Yogi in western Uttar Pradesh delivered by a combination of Jat, Yadav and Muslim votes looked a certainty. It appeared on a weak wicket even in eastern Uttar Pradesh that has a strong presence of OBCs and Muslims. Yet, Yogi Adityanath did what no Chief Minister of the state had done in history: he won a second consecutive mandate to rule, defying all talk of anti-incumbency. Sure the SP led alliance put up a strong challenge; sure the number of BJP seats fell from 312 in 2017 to 255. But the BJP vote share actually increased by 1.7% and the majority was more than comfortable. How?
These examples do not indicate freak results. The fact is: pro-incumbency verdicts have become the norm in this century. We had the UPA getting a pro-incumbency mandate in 2009. The NDA got a bigger pro-incumbency mandate in 2019. By all accounts, a third consecutive term as Prime Minister for Narendra Modi appears a distinct possibility in 2024. Mamata Banerjee humiliated a resurgent BJP in West Bengal by winning a third consecutive mandate in 2021. Despite being unpopular, Nitish Kumar has won four consecutive mandates in Bihar. The champion, of course is Naveen Patnaik, who has won five consecutive pro-incumbency verdicts. It is almost certain his party the BJD will win a sixth consecutive mandate in 2024 and Patnaik will break the record of being the longest serving Chief Minister of a state. Arvind Kejriwal is another near miracle. His party AAP has been decimated twice by the BJP in the 2014 and 2019 Lok Sabha elections in Delhi. He has paid back with AAP decimating the BJP twice in the Assembly elections in 2015 and 2020. The trend was started perhaps by Lalu Yadav, who won three consecutive mandates in Bihar despite going to jail on charges of corruption. Sheila Dikshit in Delhi and Tarun Gogoi in Assam won three consecutive mandates for the Congress, and the facts suggest that they lost the grip not because of their own unpopularity but largely because of their central leadership (read anger against UPA2).
Let’s come back to the five states that are going to the polls right now. The fact that Shivraj is still in the contest, with a strong popularity rating, even after 20 years of being in power, is itself a huge statement. The “fatigue” factor is not an anti-incumbent sentiment. Five years back, even though Congress managed a couple of more seats than BJP in MP, the BJP vote share was higher. This itself is in contradiction with the first cardinal rule in the definition of anti-incumbent verdict, that the incumbent must drop its vote share substantially. It did not happen in 2018 and data suggests its unlikely to happen this time either.
The second rule is that the CM should be “unpopular” which again is not the case with Mamaji, Bhupesh Baghel or even Ashok Gehlot for that matter. The third one being a palpable anger against the state government on the ground resulting in huge upswing for the opposition party. Here also the data does not indicate a similar trend-line in any of these states as such.
By the evening of 3 December, we will all know whom the voters have chosen in the five states. How many will see pro-incumbency verdicts? But be cautious to read too much into the over-simplified analysis like “India shining failed in 2004”, which doesn’t tell you that BJP won the majority of rural seats for the first time in 2004, while it lost its urban bastions as the turnout dropped in urban middle class which was more of voter’s apathy rather than voter’s anger. The grey areas of “fatigue” and “apathy” are easy to understand but difficult to interpret and explain many times in a world that likes to see everything in binaries.
Yashwant Deshmukh is Founder & Editor in Chief of CVoter Foundation and Sutanu Guru is Executive Director.