Jharkhand 2014 is BJP's to lose

Polling was completed for all the assembly segments of Jharkhand yesterday. In all the state recorded a turnout of  66 % which is much better than the  57% turnout in the last assembly elections and even marginally better than the impressive 64 % turnout in the 2014 Lok Sabha Elections. 

In this post the intention is to analyze in greater detail the results from elections in Jharkhand and to understand what implications it has in the context of this election. The term 'past elections' needs a further elaboration here. As detailed out in the last post - even though as a state, Jharkhand has had only 2 assembly elections (2005, 2009), its first Assembly was derived from the Bihar Assembly election of 2000. Similarly as detailed earlier, the movement for a separate state in Jharkhand is an old one and the regions of south Bihar, now constituting Jharkhand have long demonstrated an electoral proclivity slightly different from the rest of Bihar. Hence the decision to go further back and include the results from assembly elections in the constituencies that now compromise Jharkhand (but before 2000 were a part of Bihar) as far back as 1977 in the analysis.  Lastly the most significant data we have is the data from the Lok Sabha election of 2014. The election commision of India provides detailed data at the Assembly constituency (and even the Polling booth) level in what is called the Form 20. This analysis also includes consolidated form 20 data from jharkhand from the 2014 elections. It may even be useful to start from here, given that it was only 6 months ago and even though national elections and state elections are different, it can tell us a few things about how Jharkhand 2014 is likely to turn out. 

In this post I will start with analyzing data from Jharkhand elections over the last 4 decades to understand what it might imply for 2014. Also i will try take a more detailed look at the  2014 form 20 data, in the context of past elections, to come up with some hypotheses on what might happen in this assembly election. To start with lets take a look at a graphical representation of vote shares and seats won over the set of 9 elections that we picked as described in the previous paragraph.

Learn About Tableau

The first thing that gets evident about the politics of this state/region from this graphic is its highly fragmented nature. Throughout elections in the last two decades much of Jharkhand has witnessed a four cornered contest between the BJP, the Congress, the Janta parties and the Jharkhand parties. Also throughout this period the multi-cornered contests have led to bitterly divided mandates. The assembly elections of 2000 was the only time that one party or formation came decisively close to a clear majority. As we saw in the last post that was the verdict that ultimately led to the creation of Jharkhand and the formation of the first BJP government with the support of the JD(U).

In terms of the leadership position in this fragmented polity this has almost exclusively belonged to the BJP through the last 4 elections, both in terms of vote shares and seat won. Bihar in 1980 was one of the first election the BJP fought as a party and ever since then its support for statehood, tribal outreach (through the vanvasi kalyan kendras) and the divisive Ram temple aggitation has brought it to the forefront of the fragmented politics of Jharkhand, a position it has largely retained. Also worth noting is that the maximum the JMM has ever achieved in terms of vote share is around 17% and the maximum number of seats it has ever won is 18.

Also the Congress and the Janta parties are forces that is evidently on the wane in this region. The Congress did bounce back marginally in 2009 on the strength of its alliance with JVM but the fact that its vote share shrunk in 2014, in spite of contesting on 10 of the 14 seats in the alliance with the JMM, seems to confirm its steady slide. Given how it stands the prospects of the Congress-Janta  alliance in this election would seem bleak but that is something we would get back to. 

Thirdly, what becomes evident is the fragmented nature of 'Jharkhandi' politics itelf. Over the years even though the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) has been the most prominent Jharkhand Regional party, there have been other Jharkhand regional parties like the All Jharkhand Students Union(AJSU) that have been around. The ones that have gained in strength most recently being the JVM (led by Marandi) and the JBSP (Madhu Kora's Party). An interesting factoid is that between the assembly elections of 2009 and the parliamentary elections of 2014, where the BJP made a decisive surge, the JVM was the only other party that registered an increase in vote share (despite the fact that it was a national election and the JVM a regional party)

Also worth mentioning is the lesser known fact that the extreme left still retains political influence in parts of Jharkhand. The CPI(ML)(L) has strongholds in Giridih, Kodarma where it routinely wins elections.

Lastly the Independents block, which has been significant block in Jharkhand,  seems to be loosing traction,  in what can only be seen as a welcome sign following the Koda years. 

With that we move on to a map collage view of the 9 elections in our consideration set. just to give an idea of who has been winning where. 

Learn About Tableau

The areas of influence of various political formations become more evident from this graphic. As we can see the JMM has been routinely winning elections in the largely tribal north eastern areas of Santhal Parganas division and southern parts of Kolhan and Ranchi Divisions. On the other hand the influence of the Janta parties has been most pronounced in the regions bordering bihar i.e. the Palamau and Hazaribagh divisions. The Congress seems to be strongest in the Ranchi and the Palamau divisions but as we saw earlier its influence even there has been on the decline. The BJP seems to be the only party which has won in divisions across the state.  This will become even more evident in the following graphic as we try to identify strongholds for various parties .i.e. based on the number of times in the last 6 elections that a party has won from a seat, the darker shade, the more the number of wins.

Learn About Tableau

This again reaffirms, that the JMM is primarily strong in the tribal areas of Santhal Parganas, Chaibasa and Ranchi Divisions. It has never won a seat in the Palamau division and large parts of the Hazaribagh and Ranchi divisions. Similarly the Janta parties (JD, RJD, JD(U) et al, are primarily strong in the palamu division and the Hazaribagh division (bordering Bihar) and has practically won nothing in the rest of the state. The congress has been traditonally strong in the Ranchi division, which has produced leaders likeformer union minister Subodh Kant Sahai, but not much else where, and even there its influence seems to be on the wane. The BJP seems to be the only party to have won consistently across the state, with major urban strongholds like Jamshedpur, Kanke and Dhanbad where it has never lost in the last 5 elections.

We finally move on to take a deeper look at the results of the 2014 lok sabha elections and using this and the context of the previous elections extrapolate what may happen in the results tomorrow. The graphic below shows Jharkhand form 20 data from the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. 

Learn About Tableau

Like much of the northern part of the country the BJP literally swept Jharkhand - winning 12 of the 14 parliamentary constituencies. The remaining two being won by the JMM in its Santhal Pargana strongholds of Rajmahal and Dumka. In Jharkhand the BJP garnered a vote share of 40%, A good lead of 17% over the closest competing coalition (Congress +JMM) which together managed to garner barely 23%.Even looking at the Assembly constituency level from Form 20 data, the BJP did quiet impressively leading in 56 of the 81 Assembly constituencies. The JMM came next leading in 9 constituencies, but considering that it contested in only 4 of the 14 Lok Sabha Constituencies (i.e 22 of the 81 Vidhan sabha constituencies) its performance is not as bad as it looks. Much like the rest of India the Congress was routed in Jharkhand leading in only 3 out of the 51 constituencies it contested. There are a few surprises in the others box as well. If the BSP can repeat its performance in Khunti LS constituency where its candidate Subodh Purty gave a stiff challenge to BJP veteran Karia Munda in the Lok Sabha polls, there is a good chance that they would open their account in Jharkhand for the first time. Geeta Kora, wife of former chief minister Madhu Koda and JBSP contestant also performed credibly in Singhbhum leading in 3 assemblies. CPI(ML)(L) led in 3 segments of the Kodarma parliamentary constituency, long considered a left stronghold.

There have been some pronounced changes in the alliance arithmetic since May 2014. The Congress and JMM which fought the lok sabha elections together are no longer allies. The remaining constituents of the UPA - Congress and RJD have now been joined by the JD(U). Meanwhile BJP has secured the support of All Jharkhand Students Union(AJSU) and the JVM has allied with the Trinamul Congress (AITC). 

Also the issues involved in a state election are very different from National elections. For starters while BJP had anti incumbency going for it 6 months ago, it may not be so in this election, the BJP having ruled (and many believe not very well) Jharkhand for close to 10 of its 14 years of existence. Secondly unlike the national election the state BJP does not have a strong leader as chief ministerial candidate. Lastly the Modi wave itself cannot sustain forever and has to wane. 

However no other party/combination seems to be well positioned to significantly counter the BJP. As we saw earlier the JMM has limitations in terms of geographical reach. In reality calling it an pan Jharkhand party could be a stretch. The Congress+RJD+JD(U) grand alliance showed its promise in the Bihar by elections, and could have been a force to reckon with, at least in the areas bordering Bihar, primarily in the Palamau and Hazaribagh divisions, but it is in the execution that this alliance has failed. In close to 10 constituencies, these parties are fighting against one another, and not surprisingly most of these 10 are in the two aforementioned divisions where they would have stood a chance had they fought together. Lastly the JVM shows promise and could be the wildcard. Marandi is still recognized as an honest leader and even in the 2014 wave election, the JVM still managed to increase its vote share, vis-a-vis 2009, when it was fighting in alliance with the Congress. The problem is that given the size of their base even a 5% jump in vote share does not make a significant dent. 

Finally, given the magnitude of the BJP's performance six months ago, and given they won almost 2/3 of the assembly constituencies against a united opposition of Congress+JMM (now fighting separately) this election is the BJP's to lose and the looking at the 2014 Lok Sabha result they should canter home to at least a simple majority. In that context the BJP's 'Mission 42' is really somewhat of an oxymoron (aren't missions meant to be aspirational, and why would someone aspire for a simple majority, when they are just coming out of an election where they won 2/3). If anything it highlights the diffidence of the BJP state leadership. Indeed the BJP getting any less than 45 seats in this election (though very unlikely) would be a damning verdict against them. 

The story of Jharkhand in numbers

The history of assertion of tribal identity in the Chhotanagpur region is an old one, dating as far back to the tribal revolts of the 18th and the 19th century. The Santhal rebellion led by the brothers Sidhu and Kanu between 1855-60 and the Birsa Munda revolt between 1895-2000 were two of the most prominent of these. In the early 20th century, the movement for tribal identity and rights took a turn towards moderate politics and a demand for the creation of a separate state of Jharkhand was first submitted to the Simon commission in 1929. The creation of the Jharkhand party under the leadership of Jaipal Singh Munda (oxford educated former captain of Olympic gold winning India hockey team) roughly around the time of India's independence was an important milestone in this movement. Under the charismatic leadership of Jaipal Singh, the Jharkhand party was able to expand its base to include a significant section of non-tribals and performed well in the first two elections (1952,1957) to the Bihar assembly, winning 32 seats each time to become the principal opposition party in Bihar. however with the state reorganization commission rejecting the demand of a separate state of Jharkhand on linguistic ground the movement lost some steam in the 60's ultimately culminating with Jaipal Singh himself defecting to the Congress and the movement splitting into several splinter groups. 

The movement for a separate state of Jharkhand was injected with a fresh energy in the late 70's with the formation of the Jharkhand Mukti Morcha under the leadership of Shibu Soren and the All Jharkhand Students Union under the leadership of Surya Singh Besra. The 80's and 90's were also characterized by an element of radicalism in the Jharkhand movement, with innumerable 'bandhs' and economic blockades. Meanwhile the BJP the new entrant to the scene also threw its weight behind the creation of a separate state, Vananchal, as it preferred to call it. 

Though the original demand had been of a 'greater Jharkhand' comprising of parts of West Bengal and Orissa, it is in Bihar that this movement created the maximum political impact. Through the 90's Laloo Yadav's JD/RJD kept doing well in the northern parts of the state, but not so well in the south where proponents of a separate state (the Jharkhand parties and the BJP) kept doing better. The elections to the Bihar Assembly between 1990 and 2000 kept throwing up fractured verdicts reflecting this chasm as can be seen in the figure below.

Learn About Tableau

When Laloo Yadav first came to power in Bihar riding on the Mandal wave in 1990 to occupy the chair that his mentor Karpuri Thakur had once did with the support of the JMM among others. Even in the elections in 1995, his party dint do too well in southern Bihar but still came close to a clear majority based on a strong performance in the north. It was in this time that  the Jharkhand Area Autonomous Committee (JAAC) under the chairmanship of Shibu Soren was formed in what some saw as a compromise formula and a step towards full statehood while others saw as a blatant sellout. 

Almost all of Bihars mineral resources and a bulk of its heavy industries was concentrated in the southern part of the state. Given that Jharkhand if formed would take with it the lions share of the states revenues there was obviously a great deal of resistance in what would remain of Bihar to the idea of a new state. 

In the assembly elections of 2000 Laloo Yadav made the bifurcation of the state a key issue and ultimately it was the the result of this election  that that sealed the case for the creation of Jharkhand. The election threw up a hung assembly and meant that ruling over divided Bihar was Laloo Yadav's  best case scenario. With a BJP government (which had long declared its support for a separate state) at the center the Bihar reorganization Act was finally passed in 2000 with the support of both the Congress and the RJD and the new state of Jharkhand was born. The graphic below shows the constitution of the first Jharkhand assembly.

Learn About Tableau

With 40 Seats and the support of independents the NDA formed the first government of Jharkhand under the leadership of Babulal Marandi. The new chief minister was widely acknowledged for is integrity, simple background as school teacher as well as the architect of various schemes to get the new state started. However one controversial move, with the Jharkhand Domicile Act, proved to be his undoing. Ostensibly created with the intent to strengthen the rights of tribals in their new homeland, the act that was perceived as against the rights of non-tribals in the state and was received with a lot of criticism and even some violence. Ultimately under pressure from alliance partners like the JD(U) Marandi was forced to quit in favor of Arjun Munda, barely 2.5 years into his term. 

Learn About Tableau

The graphic above shows the constitution of the second assembly of Jharkhand elected post the 2005 elections. The election threw up a hung assembly with the pre-election formations NDA(36) and UPA(33) running neck to neck. Shibu Soren(JMM) was invited by the governor - Syed Sibte Razi to form the government, inspite of the norm being to invite the leader of the largest pre-election formation. His government lasted a mere 10 days as he failed to garner the numbers and Arjun Munda (BJP/NDA) again became the CM with support from the block of 5 independent/other MLAs after protracted negotiations leading to plum ministerial posts for the independents. One of them Madhu Koda was appointed as Minister of Mining. 

Arjun Munda's second stint was again not meant to last - after merely a year and a half the block of independents withdrew support leading to his resignation. A ramshackle (UPA) coallition was again formed and the block of 5 independents were able to extract their pound of flesh. Madhu Koda, an independent MLA became Jharkhands 4th chief minister leading a ministry with representatives from JMM, RJD, NCP, FB and 3 indipendent MLA's with outside support from the INC.  

Barely 2 years into Madhu Koda's tenure, and after he had been asked to quit as union minister by Manmohan singh following a Dehi high court conviction, Shibu Soren made another desperate attempt for the post he had aspired for his entire life. The JMM withdrew support, Koda was forced to resign and relegated to the meaningless position of UPA while Shibu Soren became chief minister for the second time. 


Guruji (as the elder Soren is called) finally got his chair but fate had other ideas. He lost the assembly by-election in the JMM stronghold of Tamar, and having failed to enter the assembly was forced to resign barely 144 days into his second stint. The state was thrown back into presidents rule and thus ended what could arguably be called the most farcical phase in the short history of the state or so it seemed at that time, but more was to follow.

Learn About Tableau

If 2005 had thrown up a divided mandate, 2009 took it one step further. The graphic above shows the constitution of the mandate of the 2009 assembly elections. While the polity of jharkhand was trundling between 2005 to 2009 elections, Babulal Marandi had managed to keep his distance from the state BJP and the series of crises. In the 2004 elections he fought the elections from Koderma and was the only BJP contestant (among 14) to win. In 2006 he finally bit the bullet, quit the BJP and formed his own party the Jharkhand Vikas Morcha (JVM). The Congress which was desperate to repair its image after the part that it (and its appointed governor) played in the previous assembly allied with 'the clean' Babulal Marandi's JVM. The result was a 3 way contest between the BJP-JD(U), JMM and the Congress-JVM, and another hung assembly

Again Shibu Soren made a play for power and this time the BJP came in to provide support before pulling out in 5 months, leading to another 3 month period of presidential rule. The BJP and JMM then agreed to (some) power sharing agreement with Arjun Munda becoming the chief minister and Hemant Soren as deputy CM. The details of what happened next are sketchy but by some accounts, the JMM wanted a rotation in chief ministership to which the BJP did not agree. As a result the JMM pulled the plug on the BJP government and finally after another period of Presidents rule Hemant Soren again became the chief minister of Jharkhand (now with Congress support) and remains to this day.

So that is the story of the this young state. It is the story of the lust for power reducing democracy in Jharkhand to being the theatre of the absurd and nearly every principal actor in the arena is guilty of playing their part. All this while Jharkhand has remained one of the most underdeveloped states in India. Twenty one of its twenty four districts still count among the most underdeveloped in the country. One cant miss the irony that Bihar whose 'clutches' the Jharkhand movement so dearly fought to escape has done much better in the last 10 years under the stable leadership of Nitish Kumar.  Lastly the democratic process is supposed to offer hope (and a safety valve) to those living in the most wretched of conditions, but in Jharkhand its failure has only strengthened the appeal of alternatives like Naxalism.  Today almost almost the entire state is considered Naxal effected and part of the so called 'Red corridor'. 


Fourteen years ago Jharkhand embarked on a journey of statehood and it would be fair to say that if at all there is a 'failed state' in this country it is probably Jharkhand

An inverse bellwether!

As Karnataka goes into polls in a few days the country is watching. The national elections are due in barely 12 months, and maybe earlier if you ask cynics. Calling this the semi-final might be a bit of a stretch, but the importance of the elections in Karnataka cannot be underestimated. For the congress it is a great chance to to start the home stretch on a winning note. For the BJP emerging from the tangle they have got themselves into with some modicum of respect is important for them to be considered seriously as a national party.

Another round of state elections is due before that. Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Delhi and Chattisgarh will go to the polls later this year. The BJP would fancy their chances of winning at least three of those four. Everybody wants to back the winning horse and having a respectable position in Karnataka, and a winning a few more in the next round would  position them well in the coalition sweepstakes before 2014. Conversely a bad performance in Karnataka could adversely effect chances in the next round, and with few allies around anyway, push it towards a desparate 'all-in' strategy.

Karnataka results would also be watched because for some wierd coincidence, Karnataka is somewhat like an inverse bellwether of the national political scene. Karnataka for some reasons always seems to go in the opposite direction as the rest of the country is going. A point that is brought out by the following graphic illustrating the fluctuating fortunes of the main political formations in the state over the last 35 years.

Learn About Tableau

Lets start at 1978, barely a year after the Janta Party swept the Lok Sabha to give the country its first non-Congress government, the congress swept Karnataka winning more than 60% of the seats. In Indira Gandhi's darkest political hour, she fought the by-election from Chikmagalur in 1978 to get back to parliament.
Again on either side (1983 and 1985) of of Rajiv Gandhis historic 80% majority in 1984  Karnataka stayed shy of the Congress, giving the Janta party led by Ramakrishna Hegde a clear majority in 1985. Once again in 1989 when Bofors and the emergence of VP Singh forced the Congress out of power in the center, it roared back to power in karnataka with an unprecedented 4/5 majority. In 1994 while Narasimha Rao ruled in the centre Karnataka went back to the Janta Dal. 
In 1999 BJP came to power in the Center with the NDA government but Karnataka was safe with the Congress. SM Krishna completed the rare full term in office. This strange phenomenon continued in 2008 when at the heels of UPA winning a secont term in Office, the BJP stormed to power for the first time in a southern state. 

The graphic also tells a strong story about the steady growth of the BJP over the last 30 years in Karnataka. Whether the Saffron 'worm' has lost its steam just before it was about to catch up with the blue Congress one is something we will find out shortly.  Also what does come out clearly is that amidst all its highs and lows the Congress has managed to keep its vote share relatively stable in Karnataka. The growth of the BJP, though it has been nibbling at the Congress core as well has largely been at the expense of the fractious Janta family of parties..

A deeper look at the regional level is perhaps warranted to get a better understanding of the evolution of  Karnataka politics in this period. 

Karnataka-2008, How the BJP got its first southern state government

The 2008 assembly elections in Karnataka were significant for the state in a number of ways.  The following is an attempt to analyze  the 2008 assembly elections and to extrapolate implications on the 2013 if possible. As always perhaps a look at the events in lead-up to the polls is a good place to start

Leadup to 2008:

 In its short democratic history of about 60 year, Karnataka has seen as many as 21 Chief Ministers. It has been common for Chief Ministers to be unable to complete their full 5 year term, many of them falling to internal bickering in the course of their term. Devaraj Urs(in 1972) and S.M Krishna (in 1999) have been  the  only two exceptions to this. 

When elections were held in 2004 after S.M. Krishna completed his full term, the verdict was highly fractured, plunging the state into 5 years of political uncertainty.  The BJP emerged as the single largest party with 79 seats followed by Congress with 65 and JD(S) with 58.

The grand ‘betrayal’: The Congress and JD(S) formed a coalition government with Dharam Singh as the Chief Minister. The Dharam Singh government collapsed after a split engineered by Kumaraswami, who went on to become the CM of a power sharing coalition government with the BJP . The agreement was to split the remaining term 20 months each. However when Yeddyurappa’s turn came Kumaraswami refused to step aside, leading to the BJP withdrawing support reducing the government to a minority. Kumaraswami relented later, and Yeddyurappa was sworn in as chief minister  only for Kumaraswamy to pull out the rug 7 days later over some disagreements in sharing ministries leading the state into a 6 month period of presidents rule. This one month drama that played out in Bangalore in October- November 2007 created a very sorry image of the states politics. From this episode, JD(S) and  specifically DeveGowda/Kumaraswami emerged from this farce as distinct villains in public perception.

A contrast in leaderships: This was exploited to the hilt by the BJP which portrayed it as a betrayal of not just the party, but of the entire Lingayat community, and by extension northern Karnataka, by a party lead by a Vokkaliga from the south. Yeddyurappa a strong leader of the Lingayat community, was clearly and unambiguously promoted as the chief ministerial candidate by the BJP to further exploit this sense of betrayal. On the other hand the congress did not have a clear CM candidate. The last minute recall of S.M.Krishna to the state from the governorship of Maharashtra was too little too late.

Delimitation: Another important event that happened between 2004 and 2008 elections was that electoral constituency boundaries were drastically redrawn as a part of the delimitation process, to better represent the movement in populations. A full analysis of this is perhaps not appropriate for this post but there were two important outcomes from the process. Firstly, the number of urban constituencies drastically increased. For example the number of constituencies in the the two districts of the greater Bangalore region increased from 25 to 36. The second consequence was that the number of seats reserved for SC and ST candidates also increased from 35 to 51.  

Result - 2008

The Results of Karnataka-2008 marked an important transition for the BJP. In the short history of its existence the BJP has always been seen as a party of the Hindi heartland. Its leaders took great pride in their chaste Hindi, and even at the height of its popularity in 1999, when it formed the government at the center, it did not really make an impact in the vernacular periphery of the country. It was literally absent from the south, north-east and parts of the east.  By emerging as the single largest party and almost garnering a majority in Karnataka the BJP took a step towards becoming truly a national party.

Learn About Tableau

In all the BJP garnered 109 of the 224 seats, falling just 4 short of a simple majority. The congress was a distant second with 80 seats.  The BJP took this 29 seat lead over the Congress inspite  of garnering a lower vote share (~1%) than the Congress (vote shares are represented by the light grey bars in above graphic).  The BJP’s all in strategy with promoting a Lingayat as leader evidently reaped rich rewards in the Lingayat heartland of Bombay Karnataka and Central Karnataka. In both these regions the BJP secured more than twice the number of seats as both its opponents combined.

In spite of its internal bickerings the  Congress maintained a good performance in its traditional stronghold of Hyderabad Karnataka  and Mysore region, where they benifitted from the slide in the fortunes of the JD(S).

The figures from coastal Karnataka on the other hand seem to belie the image of saffron heartland and BJP bastion. Even though the BJP won the majority of seats here, once again it actually secured less votes than the congress in the region.

The same story repeated itself in the Bangalore region where BJP ended up winning 5 seats more than the BJP in spite of having a lower vote share. Both of these factoids may be pointers to poor prioritization and election management by the Congress. Overall the performance of the Congress seems to reflect the state of its leadership in the state, scattered and without focus.

Coming back to 2013, Once again the BJP seems to be going for the caste based permutation with a Lingayat at the helm. Once again the congress has not called out a clear leader.  Siddharamaiah, Mallikarjuna Kharge, Veerappa Moily, Dharam Singh, JH Patel, Oscar Fernandez and even the likes of SM Krishna, Margaret Alva and C.K Jaffer Sherief could all be in the fray. And the JD(S) again looks like being  restricted to Mysore region as a player.

However a lot has changed in 5 years. In terms of appeal as a mass leader Shettar is no Yeddyurappa. And Yeddyurappa himself is now out of the BJP forming a separate political party, the KJP. The Reddy brothers who were purportedly bankrolling the BJP are now in prison, and not just that they now have a political outfit of their own. At the least the BSR Congress is likely to erode the 8/8 that the BJP got from Bellary last time around.

Most importantly, last time around the BJP was at the receiving end of sympathy, the one that had been betrayed. This time in the eyes of many people,  it is the betrayer, of the trust that the people of the state reposed in it, having squandered a golden opportunity amidst its bickering.

Balance of Power

We talked very briefly about the post modern history, or the history of the state in the 65 years post independence/integration. Lots has happened in this time and there is no denying that the events of this period have a lot of import on  current politics and hence very important to understand. I guess it has been a bit daunting precisely because of its importance and I have been a loss about where to start from. 

Perhaps a look at the leaders who have shaped the history of the state over this period is a good place to start. Karnataka has seen a number of leaders of stature over the last 65 years. The  graphic shows the 21 chief ministers that the state has had on a map of the state based on the constituency where they built their political fortunes. The size of the circles representing the their tenure as chief minister and the shading represents the time since they were at the highest seat. (so the earlier chief ministers are shaded with a lighter hue and the more recent ones with a darker one).

Some disclaimers here, This is built out of unstructured data scraped from wikipedia, for the earlier chief ministers there is not a lot of data on their assembly constituencies. In some cases I have extrapolated from the district. Also there are others who have fought elections from multiple constituencies across regions to varying results, in such cases I have picked up one randomly. 

Learn About Tableau

The graphic seems to underscore the the much propagated political narrative of Vokkaliga-Lingayat and north-south power balance in the state. The Vokkaligas constitute about 15% of the population of the state and are concentrated in the southern parts of the state, while the northern parts of the state are dominated by the Lingayats, who constitute about 17% of the states population. The remainder is constituted of Kurubas (about 8%), Dalits (23%) Muslims (10%) Brahmins, Christians and other backward castes (27%)

Between them the Vokkaligas and the Lingayats  constitute 32% of the states population, but a much bigger share of political power in the state. Of the 19 chief ministers that the state has had till date 6 have been Vokkaligas, 8 Lingayats, 2 Brahmins and 3 belonging to other backward castes. Goes without saying that like in much of the country Dalits and Muslims remain highly under represented at the top job.

Much of the states political narrative has been shaped by this power balance. As recently as in 2007 when Yeddyurappa was dumped by Kumaraswamy and the JD(U), it was portrayed as a betrayal of not just an individual or a party but the entire Lingayat community, re-opening old festering wounds of the north. Deve Gowda's earlier  involvement in the ouster of another popular North Karnataka leader, Ramakrishna Hegde and Virendra Patils sudden sacking by Rajiv Gandhi in 1989 are a few more chapters in this narrative.

So,  like it or not, caste, still plays an important role in the politics of Karnataka, as it does in much of the country. Whether the next chief minister of the state will be a Vokkaliga, a Lingayat, or as a welcom first - Dalit/Muslim something we will have to wait and see.