India 2014 - Results

[jaichind]

So the prediction winner are the Indian bookies.  They predicted 340 and that is pretty much what took place.

[jaichind]

Kudos to CNN-IBN.  Their exit polls pretty much got the vote share correct.

[jaichind]

Looking at CNN-IBN vote share count we have NDA at 39.75% at UPA at 26.04% which leads to 334 vs 62 in terms of seats.  It is interesting because back in 2009 it was UPA 36.78% vs NDA at 24.29% and the seats victory was 262 vs 159.  So a similar vote share victory leads to very much different seat results.  This is not just FPTP.  It is more about NDA votes are more concentrated in the right places.  Sort of like Labor Party in UK relative to Tories.

[jaichind]

Just to show how effective the NDA is in concentrating their vote in the right places.  In Odisha the UPA actually outpolled NDA 26.9% vs 21.5% but won 0 seats versus 3 for NDA.  Of course BJD swept the other 18.

[jaichind]

The more the count continues the less impressive the NDA win looks from a vote share point of view.  They are at 38.77% for NDA and 24.36% for UPA.  38.77% is only slightly more than what UPA got 2009 (36.78%) and 2004 (36.74%) and not that much different from what NDA got in 1998 when they won 37.39%. 

[jaichind]

It's actually quite depressing in UP: Congress is down more than two dozen seats, and they're only holding on to two seats in the state: Sonia Gandhi's seat, and Rahul Gandhi's seat (where he's ahead at the moment).

In UP this is not the low for UPA. Back in 1998 it won 0 seats with 6.02%  vote share.  At least they get 2 seats this time with 8.5% vote share.

[jaichind]

NDA 334 (38.78%) UPA 61 (23.92%).  The vote share of both fronts are falling slowly over time as the count continues.

[jaichind]

Why did AAP do best in the Punjab?

Mostly because there is strong anti-incumbency against the state SAD-BJP government.  In Punjab the state government is always defeated for the last few decades where SAD-BJP and INC alternate being in power.  In 2012 SAD-BJP actually won re-election when SAD splinter PPP took a bunch anti-SAD votes from INC.  As a result the buildup of scams and scandals are unusually high for SAD-BJP.  On the other hand, being in power in the center for 10 years also built out significant anti-incumbency for UPA.  So for voters fed up with both voted for AAP and we have a 3 way even split between INC-PPP, SAD-BJP, and AAP. 

[jaichind]

NDA 336 (38.57%) UPA 59 (23.82%).  The decline in vote share for both NDA and UPA continues.  38.57% is less than UPA won in 1989 (41.61%) when it only won 215 seats and less than UPA in 1991 (39.34%) when it won 259 seats.

[jaichind]

BSP and DMK both wiped out.  BSP lost all 21 seats and DMK lost all 18 seats.  JD(U) goes from 20 to 2.   BJD actually ended up with 18 which is 4 more than in 20009.  So BJD managed to blunt the BJP Modi wave in a place where BJP does have some strength.  Is is interesting that BJD managed to beat back Modi but JD(U) did not in Bihar.

[jaichind]

SP and BSP wiped out in UP.

Hindu nationalism 3
Development 2

It is a victory for both development in the sense that SP and BSP are out as both pretty much run mafia like regimes but also a victory for Hindu consolidation over caste consolidation.

[jaichind]

The very impressive number of seats for the NDA based on a much less impressive vote share is of course of good distribution of NDA votes.  But looking at results in Bihar, Assam, and UP it is also clear that Modi, weather he planned it or not, was able to provoke a precieved Muslim consolidation against BJP.  This in turn provoked a Hindu consolidation.  In fact during the campaign Muslim leaders took pains to make sure they do not talk about consolidation against Modi for fears it will provoke such a Hindu consolidation.  It seems they lost on both sides.  Not talking openly about it makes it hard to coordinate between different opponents of the BJP in multi-cornered contests as well as to make clear the threat Modi presented to minorities in India.  But not talking about did not stop the Hindu consolidation which pushed NDA to 336 seats.

[jaichind]

As for what INC should do, just like the DPJ after the 2012 Japan elections, there is no time to waste.  There must be a generational shift to younger leaders and party cannot just count on the Gandhi's the deliver the votes.  I would also push for alliances with TMC in WB, DMK in TN, BJD in Orissa, try to go for a grand alliance of RJD JD(U) and INC in Bihar, alliance with AUDF in Assam, alliance with AAP in Delhi/Punjab/Harayana, alliance with BSP in MP/Rajasthan/Chattisgrah, andalliance with JD(S) in Karnataka.  There are no easy options in UP.  The best I can think of is alliance with BSP but that is fraught with great danger.

[jaichind]

BSP and DMK both wiped out.  BSP lost all 21 seats and DMK lost all 18 seats.  JD(U) goes from 20 to 2.   BJD actually ended up with 18 which is 4 more than in 20009.  So BJD managed to blunt the BJP Modi wave in a place where BJP does have some strength.  Is is interesting that BJD managed to beat back Modi but JD(U) did not in Bihar.

Actually, if I am getting it right, BJD is on track to getting 20 seats. Or is the ECI webpage wrong?

NDTV has BJD 18 and NDTV has BJD at 19.  Since Orissa counts slow (it is one of the most backward states) this might be a race condition in change of leads.

[jaichind]

You make very good points, covermyeyes.  My ideas more stem from if there is a perception that these BJP gains are permeate and became the natural ruling party much like INC was back in the 1950s to 1980s.  If so many of these anti-INC traditions of these various regional parties will decline and embrace INC as the way to stop the BJP.  Of course Modi might stumble and then these various parties will see no great benefit to go with INC.  BJD, AIADMK, and TMC of course are examples on how Modi can be stopped so if Modi is proved to be mortal then what I think INC should be doing will not be possible.  If not then it might be possible it no necessary.

[jaichind]

It seems BJP won Ladakh in J&K as part of their 3 seats they won in J&K, a seat where they have no business winning.  What took place was the incumbent MP who was a JKN rebel and won in 2009 running against the JKN backed INC candidate joined BJP and ran for re-election beating the JKN backed INC candidate.  Ladakh is mostly Buddhist and Muslim.  The JKN rebel that joined BJP himself, Hassan Khan, is Muslim.   

[jaichind]

NDA 336 (38.46%) UPA 59 (23.91%).   UPA lost 2 more seats but gain a bit in terms of vote share and NDA continues to lose vote share.

[jaichind]

So in that seat where all the Muslims got killed:

BJP backed independent supported by non-Bodos won?

Incumbent Bodo who broke away from the Bodo party because they were too crazy came in second.

Bodo party candidate came in third.

Is that right?

BJP backed independent Hira Sarania won.  Incumbent BPF ran as an independent because BPF nominated someone else  BPF wanted to nominate someone that is more inclusive and more likely to get votes beyond the Bodo community.  So the Incumbent BPF MP ran as the BODO candidate in the election.  BJP backed Hira Sarania won because of the split in the Bodo vote.  Hira Sarania was an ULFA extremist and a commander of an ULFA battalion.  ULFA is a terrorist organization that fights for the independence of Assam mainly to keep out non-Assamese.  He was arrested back in 2012 for robbery, kidnap and murder but somehow was allowed to contest and now won.

[jaichind]

According to CNN-IBN it is now NDA 334 38.31% UPA 60 23.84%.  I wonder if the voting percentages are normalized fort he NOTA vote which is around 1.1% since the ECI does not consider NOTA votes to be valid votes meaning NOTA cannot win an election even if it wins a plurality. 

[jaichind]

Ah. So the Congress backed BPF candidate was actually the most moderate? It was probably supporters of the incumbent who carried out the massacre?

Correct on the first count.  Most likely right on the second count. The massacre was by Bodo extremists with the victims Muslims.  It is very likely the Bodo extremists wanted the Muslims to vote for the BPF rebel who was THE Bodo candidate but did not do so.  It is also possible that the Bodo extremists made a deal with the BJP backed ex-ULFA extremist independent.  These types of deals has been made in the past.

[jaichind]

JD(U) CM of Bihar Nitish Kumar resigns as CM to prevent a split in the JD(U) as pro-BJP faction are out for blood for this election fiasco.  Possible mid term elections for Bihar.

[jaichind]

Since INC failed to get more than 54 seats (10%) of the Lok Shabha, like 1984, there will be no leader of the opposition.

[jaichind]

Interesting perspective on why the BJP victory last night may not be as historic as often claimed.

I very much agree with this that is why I kept on posting all these comparisons on vote share by alliance. Although I would say this time the BJP did make a breakthrough in Bihar this time.  Historically, unless the BJP is allied with another senior partner in Bihar it usually runs third in Bihar behind INC and another regional party.  This time it by itself became the largest party in Bihar on its own.

On the vote share by alliance, I did map out what the the various alliances got in terms of vote share and seats.  I define UPA as INC and allies, NDA as BJP and allies, Third Front as alternative front of regional that ally with Left Front, Forth Front as rivals regional parties of Third Front and most likely involve BSP.  Of course election to election there are all kinds of shifts on who is in which alliance and in what states.  I computed this data as far back as 1989 by looking at results on state by state basis.  Note that I define vote share and seats won to be sum of votes on a state by state basis of the alliances parties.  For example, SS runs candidates in states outside of Maharashtra against BJP where their alliance does not hold.  So SS votes and seats (there are none) they win outside  Maharashtra does not count toward NDA.  Likewise I count independents that ran with the support of said alliance as for the alliance itself.


Year  UPA                     NDA                      TF                              FF
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1989  41.61%   215     12.96%   97         34.69%    201
1991  39.34%   259     20.86% 124         27.72%    135           3.34%     5
1996  29.77%    143     23.83% 186         28.70%    177           5.74%   19
1998  30.29%    167     37.39% 257         22.67%    104           4.71%     5
1999  34.72%    140     40.86% 301         14.76%      80           4.16%   14
2004  36.74%    226     35.88% 189         14.64%    108           5.33%   19
2009  36.78%    262     24.29% 159         21.66%      83           7.56%   28
2014  23.13%      59     38.45% 336         18.33%      96         10.90%   45

Of course one observes that UPA at 23.13% in 2014 is easily its worst performance ever.  On the other hand it is quite comparable in terms of vote share with NDA in 2009.  And we saw how NDA managed to recover from that.  It is also about the same as NDA in 1996 when it emerged as the largest alliance in terms of seats.  

The NDA vote share of 38.45% in 2014 is really not that much greater than what UPA got in 2004 and 2009 and somewhat less than what NDA got in 1999.  It is less than UPA in 1989 and 1991 when both elections UPA failed to win a majority.  It is also not much different from NDA in 1998 when it failed to get a majority on its own, just like UPA in 2009.

What took place here is the diffusion of the anti-NDA vote among different voting alliances and ineffective tactical voting to defeat NDA.  The negativity toward 10 years of UPA government could be one reason why there was not an energetic tactical voting by the anti-NDA blocs.


 

[jaichind]

Congress performing better in the state polls? Or just fortunate?

These states that had state polls are those states which traditionally INC are stronger than BJP.  Other than Arunachal Pradesh, based on how strong INC are in those states, these results are still a disaster for INC.

[jaichind]

Interesting perspective on why the BJP victory last night may not be as historic as often claimed.

I do take issue with one quote "First, as of the most recent counting, almost 70 percent of Indians did not vote for the BJP"

I do not agree with this.  38.37% of the voters voted for a party which was explicitly in an alliance dominated by the BJP if not the BJP itself.  All these alliance parties indicated that they will support Modi as PM.  Also almost 1% of the vote went to NMS and INLD both which although rivals of BJP in their respective states also indicate that they will support Modi as PM. So one can assume that around 39%-40% of the vote when to parties that were for Modi as PM.   I would change their quote to be

"First, as of the most recent counting, almost 60 percent of Indians did not vote for a pro-BJP pro-Modi election bloc"