Evolving Electoral Dynamics in India: Lessons from the Haryana and Maharashtra Assembly Elections

The recently concluded assembly elections in Haryana and Maharashtra revealed intriguing political

Pre-election sentiment indicated a likely tilt towards Congress in Haryana, while Maharashtra was expected to see a tight contest, with both alliances running neck and neck. These expectations were shaped by the General Election results, where the Congress-led alliance had outperformed the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA).

Interestingly, many media outlets, often perceived as pro-government, amplified social media narratives suggesting an edge for Congress in both states. Veteran psephologist Yogendra Yadav even predicted a "tsunami wave" for Congress in Haryana, claiming the only question was the margin of their victory. In Maharashtra, the contest appeared closer, primarily due to the fragmentation of key regional players like Shiv Sena and NCP. These splits, with their founders losing party symbols to rebel factions, left voters confused. Both factions retained their party names, distinguished only by suffixes referencing their founders, Uddhav Thackeray and Sharad Pawar.

During the General Election, this confusion was somewhat mitigated, and trends suggested an advantage for the Congress-led alliance, bolstered by regional party support. Sympathy for founders perceived as victims of these splits further strengthened their position. Conventional wisdom, which holds that voting patterns are hard to alter, seemed to favor Congress. Given the BJP-led NDA's setbacks in Uttar Pradesh during the General Election, many assumed Congress would secure victories in Haryana and Maharashtra.

However, the BJP's campaign strategy demonstrated its ability to adapt and innovate. Since 2014, the political landscape has been reshaped by social media and advanced ground-level organization. The BJP capitalized on this shift by deploying "e-workers" alongside traditional grassroots operatives, leveraging demographic data to consolidate votes. This data-driven approach informed candidate selection and messaging, ensuring alignment with voter preferences. Additionally, the BJP’s strategy of recruiting prominent opposition leaders proved influential, altering voter sentiment. Politics, much like the corporate world, has increasingly witnessed leaders switching sides, often driven by personal ambition or institutional pressures.

These elections also intersected with significant national developments. In Haryana, held alongside Jammu & Kashmir's post–Article 370 abrogation elections, the BJP emerged victorious. Yet, in Jharkhand, which voted simultaneously with Maharashtra, the BJP faltered. This raised questions about the opposition's allegations of Electronic Voting Machine (EVM) tampering.

Some speculate that EVM manipulation, if possible, might have been avoided in states like Jammu & Kashmir and Jharkhand—where stakes were lower—but potentially employed in Maharashtra and Haryana, where BJP’s interests were higher. While EVMs, like any technology, are theoretically vulnerable, strong security protocols mitigate such risks. The debate often arises from the belief that no system is entirely immune to human intervention. Ironically, the BJP itself raised concerns about EVM tampering in the past when results went against them, highlighting how these allegations emerge conveniently based on electoral outcomes.

The broader political landscape today reflects a shift from public service to self-serving motives. Politicians often act as brokers, prioritizing personal and party enrichment over public welfare. Agitations and protests frequently serve as theatrical displays, abandoned once monetary or political objectives are achieved. Regardless of party, the common denominator appears to be exploitation, whether of citizens or industrialists.

Winning elections now demands innovative narratives and adaptive strategies. For instance, Congress effectively used the themes of "constitutional danger" and government favoritism toward big industrialists during the General Election. However, such strategies cannot guarantee success in every election. For the average citizen, choosing between flawed options remains the norm, while the hope for a political awakening—where leaders prioritize the public interest—remains an elusive ideal.