CSG, Lok Sabha Polls 2014 - Updated

[Type text]

LokSabhaElections2014LokSabhaElect

ions2014LokSabhaElections2014LokS

abhaElections2014LokSabhaElections

2014LokSabhaElections2014LokSabh

aElections2014LokSabhaElections201

4LokSabhaElections2014LokSabhaEle

ctions2014LokSabhaElections2014Lo

kSabhaElections2014LokSabhaElectio

ns2014LokSabhaElections2014LokSa

bhaElections2014LokSabhaElections2

014LokSabhaElections2014LokSabha

Elections2014LokSabhaElections2014

LokSabhaElections2014LokSabhaElect

ions2014LokSabhaElections2014LokS

abhaElections2014LokSabhaElections

2014LokSabhaElections2014LokSabh

cvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert

Lok Sabha Elections, 2014

An analytical study

May 2014

Khan Yasir (Data Analysis)

Bazlul Basid Chaudhry

(Data collection & organisation)

Dr. Hasan Raza

(Project Supervisor)

Central Study Group : Centre for Action Research & Planning CSG

Index

• Opening remarks... 5

• Summary of Lok Sabha Polls (Seats) 6

• Summary of Lok Sabha Polls (% of votes) 7

• Andaman & Nicobar 8

• Andhra Pradesh 10

• Arunachal Pradesh 12

• Assam 14

• Bihar 16

• Chandigarh, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh,

Punjab, and Uttarakhand 19

• Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Daman & Diu, and Goa 23

• Delhi 25

• Gujarat and Rajasthan 27

• Jammu & Kashmir 30

• Jharkhand 32

• Karnataka 34

• Kerala 36

• Lakshadweep 38

• Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh 39

• Maharashtra 40

• Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland,

Sikkim, and Tripura 44

• Odisha 51

• Puducherry 53

• Tamil Nadu 55

• Uttar Pradesh 57

• West Bengal 59

• Role of RSS in General Elections 2014 61

• Youth factor in General Elections 2014 64

• Lok Sabha polls 2014 : An Analysis (Urdu) 65

• BJP Govt: What are the challenges? (Urdu) 69

• Abbreviations 73

5

Opening remarks…

If India is too complex a phenomenon to be understood through one

document, its elections are more so. Hence, in this study we do not

claim to have come up with some path-breaking findings about 2014

Lok Sabha polls, this is just an effort to make sense of the same, and

to understand the dynamics that shaped the ultimate choice of the

voter. We have no qualms in admitting that like every human being

we have our choices and biases that may (or may not) have

influenced our inferences.

These elections were contested amidst two extremely strong

undercurrents namely anti-incumbency and Modi. The later, we

argue, was not a ‘choice’ but ‘compulsion’ for the voters. With RSS as

hand-in-glove, BJP was successful in skilfully chiselling a dream of

achche din (good days) out of the clay of Gujarat model of

development and must be given credit for the same.

It is argued that this election was fought and won on the issue of

development. This is half truth. Yes, the major chunk of monologues

that were delivered during election campaign was development-

centric but the fact that Modi and Amit Shah were at the helm of

affairs with full backing of the RSS tells another tale. The very

personality of Modi had communalised the elections and polarised

the voters. While secular and anti-BJP votes were divided, anti-

Congress and communal votes were consolidated behind Modi

leading BJP across the magical figures of 272 – no mean achievement

in itself!

Further scope in research about these elections remain in finding the

truth behind the claims of widespread rigging in elections; in

determining the actual role of AAP; and in identifying the reasons for

the shift of SC, ST and OBC votes towards BJP etc.

––––––– Khan Yasir

ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIAGENERAL ELECTION TO LOK SABHA TRENDS & RESULT 2014

Click Here for: Vidhan Sabha Trends and Result 2014

Click links below for

Partywise Constituencywise-All Candidates Constituencywise Trends

Partywise Trends & Result

Select State India

Last Updated at 4:54 PM On 17/5/2014

View vote share

ALL INDIA Result Status

Status Known For 543 out of 543 Constituencies

Party Won Leading Total

Bharatiya Janata Party 282 0 282

Communist Party of India 1 0 1

Communist Party of India (Marxist) 9 0 9

Indian National Congress 44 0 44

Nationalist Congress Party 6 0 6

Aam Aadmi Party 4 0 4

All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam 37 0 37

All India N.R. Congress 1 0 1

All India Trinamool Congress 34 0 34

All India United Democratic Front 3 0 3

Biju Janata Dal 20 0 20

Indian National Lok Dal 2 0 2

Indian Union Muslim League 2 0 2

Jammu & Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party 3 0 3

Janata Dal (Secular) 2 0 2

Janata Dal (United) 2 0 2

Jharkhand Mukti Morcha 2 0 2

Kerala Congress (M) 1 0 1

Lok Jan Shakti Party 6 0 6

Naga Peoples Front 1 0 1

National Peoples Party 1 0 1

Pattali Makkal Katchi 1 0 1

Rashtriya Janata Dal 4 0 4

Revolutionary Socialist Party 1 0 1

Samajwadi Party 5 0 5

Shiromani Akali Dal 4 0 4

Shivsena 18 0 18

Sikkim Democratic Front 1 0 1

Telangana Rashtra Samithi 11 0 11

Telugu Desam 16 0 16

All India Majlis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen 1 0 1

Apna Dal 2 0 2

Rashtriya Lok Samta Party 3 0 3

Swabhimani Paksha 1 0 1

Yuvajana Sramika Rythu Congress Party 9 0 9

Independent 3 0 3

Total 543 0 543

http://eciresults.ap.nic.in/AC/PartyWiseResult.htm

http://eciresults.ap.nic.in/PartyWiseResult.htm

http://eciresults.ap.nic.in/ConstituencyWiseU011.htm

http://eciresults.ap.nic.in/StatewiseU01.htm

7

Summary of Lok Sabha Polls

(% of votes on national basis)

Political Party % of Votes

BJP 31

INC 19.3

BSP 4.1

AITC 3.8

SP 3.4

ADMK 3.3

CPI(M) 3.2

IND 3

TDP 2.5

YSRCP 2.5

AAP 2

SS 1.9

DMK 1.7

BJD 1.7

NCP 1.6

RJD 1.3

TRS 1.2

JD(U) 1.1

CPI 0.8

JD(S) 0.7

SAD 0.7

INLD 0.5

AIUDF 0.4

LJP 0.4

DMDK 0.4

PMK 0.3

RSP 0.3

JMM 0.3

JVM 0.3

MDMK 0.3

AIFB 0.2

SWP 0.2

IUML 0.2

BLSP 0.2

CPI(ML)(L) 0.2

NPF 0.2

AD 0.1

BMUP 0.1

NOTA 1.1

8

Andaman & Nicobar

9


BJP 47.8

INC 43.7

AAP 2

IND 1.8

AITC 1.2

CPI(M) 0.9

NCP 0.6

BSP 0.6

CPI(ML)(L) 0.2

SP 0.2

NOTA 0.8

Analysis

1. Only one constituency, 15 candidates contested.

2. Real contest between INC (83,157 votes) & BJP (90,969 votes).

3. BJP won with the difference of only 7,812 votes.

4. One of the consistent failures of UPA in these elections is its not being

able to develop understanding with its own allies. Here too this

phenomenon is at work as INC, NCP, SP and BSP etc all contested this

seat without any understanding. Though, mathematically, all their

votes too are no match against the BJP’s but it does have an effect on

overall performance of the UPA.

10

Andhra Pradesh

11


TDP 29.1

YSRCP 28.9

TRS 13.9

INC 11.5

BJP 8.5

IND 2

AIMIM 1.4

BSP 0.8

JaSPA 0.4

CPI 0.4

PPOI 0.4

CPI(M) 0.3

LSP 0.3

AAP 0.2

WPI 0.2

NOTA 0.7

Analysis

1. 42 constituencies.

2. INC came crashing from 31 seats in 2009 to 2 seats.

3. BJP got 3, in 2009 it was nil.

4. AIMIM retained its single seat.

5. Main beneficiaries were TDP (16 seats), TRS (11 seats), and YSRCP (9 seats)

6. Sharp polarisation of votes along Telengana lines is noted.

12

Arunachal Pradesh

13


BJP 46.1

INC 41.2

PPA 7.9

AITC 1.5

NCP 1

AAP 0.6

IND 0.4

LB 0.2

NOTA 1.1

Analysis

1. 2 constituencies, one each won by INC & BJP.

2. Contest mainly between INC & BJP.

3. BJP won Arunachal West by 41,738 votes while INC won Arunachal East by 12, 478 votes

indicating tough fight.

14

Assam

15


BJP 36.5

INC 29.6

AIUDF 14.8

IND 9.5

AGP 3.5

BOPF 2.2

AITC 0.7

CPI(M) 0.4

CPI(ML)(L) 0.3

SUCI 0.3

CPI 0.2

AAP 0.2

SP 0.2

NOTA 1

Analysis


2. INC won 3 seats (6 in 2009).

3. BJP won 7 seats (4 in 2009).

4. AGP that won a seat last time scored nil.

5. Badruddeen Ajmal won Dhubri by a huge margin of 2,29,730 votes indicating

appreciation for his works and goodwill in the public. Thus AIUDF increased its tally from

1 in 2009 to 3 seats this time.

6. The division of votes between AIUDF and INC in areas where share of Muslim population

is significant but not decisive on its own played a crucial role in BJP’s gain. Most visible

example of this phenomenon is Nowgong where BJP won with 4,94,146 votes while INC

and AIUDF got 3,50,587 and 3,14,012 votes respectively.

7. If some kind of political understanding could have been developed between INC and

AIUDF then results could have been different even in Mangaldoi (BJP: 4,86,357 votes;

INC: 4,63,473 votes; AIUDF: 74,710).

8. Naba Kumar Sarania, a former militant, contested independently and won by the

highest margin from Kokhrajhar.

16

Bihar

17


BJP 29.4

RJD 20.1

JD(U) 15.8

INC 8.4

LJP 6.4

IND 4.3

BLSP 3

BSP 2.1

CPI(ML)(L) 1.3

NCP 1.2

CPI 1.2

AAP 0.9

JMM 0.5

SS 0.4

BMUP 0.4

CPI(M) 0.3

SP 0.3

SJPR 0.2

NOTA 1.6

Analysis


2. BJP captured 22, increasing its tally from 12 in 2009.

3. JDU is crushed, came down heavily from 20 in 2009 to 2, this is despite appreciable work

in terms of welfare and infrastructure development. Separation from NDA on the issue

of Modi’s leadership proved to be suicidal politically for JDU.

4. RJD’s tally unchanged i.e. 4 however wife & daughter of Lalu Prasad Yadav i.e. Rabri Devi

and Misa Bharti lost.

5. Meira Kumar of INC and Shahnawaz Husain of BJP lost.

6. Newly formed RLSP based on the ideology of socialism won 3 seats entering in alliance

with NDA. This shows how accommodative NDA has been in these elections.

7. On the other hand UPA was not able to contain its allies for example LJP led by Ram

Vilas Paswan who joined NDA in February 2014, a few months before the elections.

8. LJP that couldn’t win a single seat last time won 6 riding on the Modi wave.

9. Shift of LJP at the crucial hour had not only affected Bihar but India as a whole as

significant share of Dalit votes were bagged by the NDA in general and BJP in particular.

10. Yadavs, the traditional vote-bank of RJD, too shifted in significant numbers towards BJP.

This shift is more spectacular where RJD has fielded Muslim candidates.

18

11. Backward and ST youths went with BJP instead of RJD and JD(U) especially where the

later parties fielded Muslim candidates.

12. Maulana Asrarul Haq of INC won from Kishanganj. This was mainly due to sacrifice of

Akhtarul Iman of JD(U) or else there was every chance of BJP’s Dr. Jaiswal to inflict a

surprise victory. According to the reports Jaiswal was able to capture even 10% Muslim

votes and would have won if Akhtarul Iman had contested and divided the votes.

13. What Akhtarul Iman averted in Kishanganj happened in Madhubani. In the contest

between RJD (3,37,505) and BJP (3,58,040 votes), later won as Ghulam Ghous of JD(U)

bagged 56,392 crucial votes.

19

Chandigarh


BJP 42.2

INC 26.8

AAP 24

BSP 3.5

IND 1.9

CPI(ML)(L) 0.4

IVD 0.1

NOTA 0.7

Haryana

20


BJP 34.7

INLD 24.4

INC 22.9

HJCBL 6.6

BSP 4.6

AAP 4.2

IND 1.7

CPI 0.2

CPI(M) 0.2

NOTA 0.3

Himachal Pradesh


BJP 53.3

INC 40.7

AAP 2

IND 0.9

CPI(M) 0.8

BSP 0.7

SP 0.3

SS 0.2

NOTA 0.9

21

Punjab


BJP 53.3

INC 40.7

AAP 2

IND 0.9

CPI(M) 0.8

BSP 0.7

SP 0.3

SS 0.2

NOTA 0.9

Uttarakhand

22


BJP 55.3

INC 34

IND 1.7

AAP 1.5

SP 0.4

CPI(ML)(L) 0.3

CPI(M) 0.1

CPI 0.1

NOTA 1.1

Analysis

1. Total 33 constituencies. 13 in Punjab, 10 in Haryana, 4 in Himachal Pradesh, 5 in

Uttarakhand and 1 of Union Territory Chandigarh.

2. Chandigarh – BJP won emphatically claiming 42.2% votes. Pawan Kumar Bansal (INC)

lost.

3. Punjab – INC restricted to 3 (8 in 2009) with a vote share of 33%.

4. Punjab – BJP won 2 seats (1 in 2009) with a vote share of only 8.7%, Arun Jaitley lost

from Amritsar by a huge margin.

5. Punjab – SAD’s tally unchanged on 4.

6. Punjab – AAP gained 4 seats.

7. Haryana – BJP 7 out of 10 seats (were 0 in 2009).

8. Haryana – INC from 9 in 2009 to 1.

9. Haryana – INLD polled 24.4% of votes, won 2 seats (from 0 in 2009, 2004 & 1999).

10. Haryana – communal polarisation of votes went in favour of BJP as Jats voted

overwhelmingly in favour of BJP in the background of Muzaffarnagar riots. The

sustained efforts of RSS in communalising Jats, it seems, has finally borne fruits.

11. Himachal Pradesh – BJP won all the 4 seats (3 in 2009) claiming 53.3% votes.

12. Uttarakhand – clean sweep of BJP here too, INC had done the same in 2009.

23

Dadra & Nagar Haveli


BJP 48.9

INC 45.1

IND 1.7

NCP 1

BSP 0.6

AAP 0.4

SS 0.2

BMUP 0.2

JDU 0.1

NOTA 1.8

Daman & Diu

24


BJP 53.8

INC 43.3

AAP 0.8

BSP 0.6

NOTA 1.5

Goa


BJP 53.4

INC 36.6

AAP 3.3

IND 2.1

AITC 1.5

CPI 1.2

SJP(R) 0.4

NOTA 1.2

Analysis

1. Total 4 constituencies. 1 each in Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu and 2 in Goa.

2. Clean sweep of BJP in all four constituencies polling 48.9%, 53.8% and 53.4% of votes

respectively.

3. All these constituencies except South Goa were also won by BJP in 2009.

25

Delhi

26


BJP 46.4

AAP 32.9

INC 15.1

IND 3.2

BSP 1.2

NOTA 1.5

Analysis


2. Clean sweep by BJP a complete reversal from 2009 when INC did the same.

3. Huge disappointment for INC and AAP.

4. Clear case of division of votes between INC and AAP leading to BJP victories.

5. AAP were the runners up in all the seats followed by INC. It seemed that after

commendable performance in Assembly polls AAP took Delhi lightly concentrating more

on Varansi and Punjab leading to the debacle in Delhi. Besides, the groundwork of RSS in

favour of BJP has also affected AAP. Another reason of AAP’s failure is its

unceremonious resignation that has not got down well with the voters.

27

Gujarat


BJP 59.1

INC 32.9

IND 2.1

AAP 1.2

BSP 0.9

NCP 0.9

JD(U) 0.4

BMUP 0.2

NOTA 1.8

28

Rajasthan

29


BJP 54.9

INC 30.4

IND 6.7

BSP 2.3

NPP 1.2

AAP 1

NUZP 0.5

CPI(M) 0.3

CPI 0.3

BMUP 0.1

BYS 0.1

NOTA 1.2

Analysis

1. Total 51 constituencies. 26 in Gujarat & 25 in Rajasthan.

2. Clean sweep of BJP in both states. Polled 59.1% & 54.9% of votes respectively.

3. Gujarat model of development, despite all its lacunas, mesmerised people even in

Gujarat. Some analysts think that it is not development but communal agenda that is

the reason behind the success of BJP especially in Gujarat.

4. INC won 11 seats from Gujarat and 20 seats from Rajasthan in 2009. Scored big zero in

both the states this time. Stalwarts like Sachin Pilot lost too.

30

Jammu & Kashmir

31


BJP 32.4

INC 22.9

PDP 20.5

NC 11.1

IND 6.3

JPC 2

BSP 1.5

JKNPP 1.2

SP 0.2

AAP 0.2

SDP 0.2

GaAP 0.2

NOTA 0.9

Analysis


2. INC and NC couldn’t win a single seat. They won 2 & 3 seats respectively in 2009. Even

Farooq Abdullah lost from Srinagar.

3. BJP won 3 seats from 0 last time with a whopping 32.4% of votes.

4. PDP won remaining 3 seats.

5. Results are clear indication that people are not happy with Omar Abdullah’s

government. National Conference polled only 11% votes behind BJP, INC (22.9%) and

PDP (20.5%).

6. Results of J&K also highlight the fact that Muslim parties have not developed the

political sense to keep their differences at bay and develop some electoral

understanding to fight the bigger enemy. Lack of any such understanding was crucial in

BJP’s gain of 3 seats.

32

Jharkhand

33


BJP 40.7

INC 13.3

JVM 12.1

JMM 9.3

AJSUP 3.7

IND 3.3

CPI(ML)(L) 2.5

AITC 2.2

JBSP 1.7

RJD 1.6

JKP 1.6

BSP 1.1

MCO 0.8

AAP 0.7

JD(U) 0.7

CPI 0.6

CPI(M) 0.5

SP 0.4

JDP 0.3

BMUP 0.3

RADP 0.3

AIFB 0.3

IUML 0.2

NOTA 1.5

Analysis


2. BJP increased its tally of 8 seats in 2009 to 12 seats.

3. JMM won remaining 2 seats as in 2009.

4. Muslim votes crucial in the victory of JMM from Dumka and Rajmahal. In both these

constituencies Muslims are in sizeable chunk, the reason that Muslim votes didn’t get

divided is the fact that these constituencies are reserved for STs.

5. The saga of division of votes played a significant role here as well. In Lohardaga BJP’s

Sudarshan Bhagat (2,26,666 votes) defeated Rameshwar Oraon of INC (2,20,177 votes)

as a significant chunk of votes (i.e. 1,18,355) were polled in favour of Chamra Linda of

AITC. A ground level study of who is going to defeat BJP lacked resulting in confusion nd

thereby victory of a veteran RSS activist.

6. Such confusion and division of votes is also noted in Giridih where JMM lost to BJP by

40,313 votes and Godda where INC lost to BJP by 60,682 votes.

7. JVM performed well getting 12.1% votes but failed to capture a seat.

34

Karnataka

35


BJP 43

INC 40.8

JD(S) 11

IND 1.6

BSP 0.9

AAP 0.8

NOTA 0.8

Analysis


2. BJP won 17 as compared to 19 in 2009. Perhaps Karnataka is the only state where the

tally of BJP has declined however marginally.

3. INC won 9 as compared to 6 in 2009.

4. JDS won 2 as compared to 3 in 2009.

5. If vote percentages are taken into account this is one of the most closely contested state

with BJP and INC getting 43 and 40.8% of votes respectively.

36

Kerala

37


INC 31.1

CPI(M) 29.6

IND 11.4

BJP 10.3

CPI 7.6

IUML 4.5

KEC(M) 2.4

RSP 2.3

SJD 1.7

JD(S) 1.7

SDPI 1.5

AAP 1.4

BSP 0.4

WPI 0.4

RSP(B) 0.2

NOTA 1.2

Analysis


2. INC declined to 8 from 13 seats in 2009, still largest party in the state both in terms of

seats & votes.

3. CPI won 1 (0 in 2009) and CPI(M) won 5 (4 in 2009). Kerala is the only remaining left

bastion in India after the fall of the left in West Bengal this time.

4. IUML retained its 2 seats but its vote share declined by half percent (from 5.07% to

4.5%)

5. BJP despite attaining 10.3% of votes couldn’t get a seat. No Modi magic in this state as

in rest of India.

6. SDPI is emerging as a political force to reckon with. In contrast WPI’s performance is

dismal except in Mallapuram where it polled around 29,216 votes (5th

position) but here

too SDPI bagged 47,853 votes. Whether WPI needs to compete with SDPI or develop an

understanding with the same is a question that needs dispassionate analysis.

38

Lakshadweep


NCP 50.1

INC 46.6

SP 1.1

CPI(M) 1.1

BJP 0.4

CPI 0.4

NOTA 0.3

Analysis

1. Single constituency. 6 candidates, all Muslims, contested.

2. Main contest between NCP & INC.

3. NCP won with a marginal difference of 1,535 votes.

39

Madhya Pradesh

40


BJP 54

INC 34.9

BSP 3.8

IND 1.9

AAP 1.2

SP 0.7

GGP 0.6

CPI 0.3

NOTA 1.3

Chhattisgarh

41


BJP 48.7

INC 38.4

IND 4.2

BSP 2.4

AAP 1.9

GGP 0.8

APoI 0.6

CPI 0.5

CSM 0.2

SP 0.2

NOTA 1.8

Analysis

1. Total 40 constituencies. 29 in Madhya Pradesh & 11 in Chhattisgarh.

2. BJP swept both the states with 27/29 seats (54% votes) and 10/11 seats (48.7% votes)

respectively.

3. INC could only muster 1 seat in Chhattisgarh despite being polled 38.4% votes and 2

seats in Madhya Pradesh with 34.9% votes.

42

Maharashtra

43


BJP 27.3

SS 20.6

INC 18.1

NCP 16.1

IND 3.3

BSP 2.6

SWP 2.3

AAP 2.2

MNS 1.5

PWPI 1

RSPS 0.9

BBM 0.7

BVA 0.6

BMUP 0.4

CPI(M) 0.4

RPI 0.2

SP 0.2

RPI(A) 0.1

NOTA 0.9

Analysis


2. INC drastically declined from 17 in 2009 to 2. Sushil Kumar Shinde, Sanjay Nirupam,

Milind Deora, Priya Dutt and several other stalwarts lost their seats.

3. NCP declined from 8 in 2009 to 4.

4. BJP increased its tally from 9 in 2009 to 23 emerging as the strongest party in the state.

5. SS too gained momentum by acquiring 18 seats as compared to 11 in 2009. Riding high

on this success SS is planning to project Party Supremo Uddhav Thackeray as the next

CM.

6. Biggest disappointment was the dismal performance of MNS led by Raj Thackeray that

failed to win a single seat, even their vote share was a miserable 1.5%. However, despite

this failure, it is difficult to write out Raj from Maharashtra’s politics.

7. Sharp polarisation of votes along communal lines is noted.

44

Manipur


INC 41.7

NPF 19.9

CPI 14

BJP 11.9

NCP 4.4

AITC 3.7

IND 0.3

AAP 0.5

MDPF 0.1

NOTA 0.5

45

Meghalaya


INC 37.9

NPEP 22.2

IND 16.8

UDP 9.9

BJP 8.9

AAP 0.8

CPI 0.7

NOTA 2.8

46

Mizoram


INC 48.16

IND 47.2

AAP 2.7

NOTA 1.5

47

Nagaland


NPF 68.7

INC 30.1

SP(I) 0.9

NOTA 0.3

48

Sikkim


SDF 53

SKM 39.5

BJP 2.4

INC 2.3

AAP 0.8

AITC 0.6

NOTA 1.4

49

Tripura


CPI(M) 64

INC 15.2

AITC 9.6

BJP 5.7

IPFT 1.9

50

IND 0.9

AAP 0.5

TPGC 0.4

CPI(ML)(L) 0.4

SUCI 0.4

AMB 0.3

JMBP 0.3

NOTA 1.2

Analysis


2. Manipur – INC won both the seats claiming 41.7% votes, BJP is nowhere in the picture

with a dismal 11% votes.

3. Meghalaya – INC and NPP won a seat each.

4. Mizoram – INC won a closely contested election against R.R. Royte who stood

independent and was defeated only by 6,154 votes.

5. Nagaland – NPF won with a whopping 68.7% of votes.

6. Sikkim – SDF won. The main contest was between SDF and SKM

7. Tripura – CPI(M) registered two massive victories in Tripura acquiring 64% votes.

8. Issues and concerns are visibly different from the so-called mainland of the nation.

51

Odisha

52


BJD 44.1

INC 26

BJP 21.5

IND 1.5

BSP 0.1

JMM 0.8

AOP 0.7

AAP 0.7

CPI 0.3

API 0.2

OJM 0.2

CPI(M) 0.2

AITC 0.1

NOTA 1.5

Analysis


2. Here BJP was nil in 2009 but won a single seat this time around.

3. All the other seats were captured by BJD as compared to 14 in 2009.

4. INC completely routed, it had won 6 seats in 2009.

5. Assembly elections too were held simultaneously in Odisha and BJD won for the fourth

consecutive term 117/147 Assembly seats. The key to success of Naveen Patnaik and his

BJD is his pro-poor schemes, improved transportation & communication network and a

transparent administration.

53

Puducherry


AINRC 34.6

INC 26.3

ADMK 17.9

DMK 8.2

IND 3.6

54

PMK 3.6

CPI 1.7

AAP 1.1

BSP 0.3

NOTA 0.3

Analysis

1. Single constituency, 30 candidates contested.

2. Formed in 2011 AINRC defeated INC by 60,854 votes.

3. In 2009 this seat was won by INC.

55

Tamil Nadu

56


ADMK 44.3

DM 23.6

BJP 5.5

DMK 5.1

PMK 4.4

INC 4.3

MDMK 3.5

IND 2.1

VCK 1.5

PT 0.66

CPI(M) 0.5

CPI 0.5

IUML 0.5

AAP 0.5

BSP 0.4

NOTA 1.4

Analysis


2. ADMK increased its tally phenomenally from just 9 in 2009 to 37 with 44.3% of vote

share.

3. BJP bettered its tally of 0 in 2009 by acquiring a single seat this time. (5.5% votes)

4. DMK (18 seats in 2009) and INC (8 seats in 2009) are totally routed. This is despite the

fact that DMK has acquired 23.6% of the total votes polled.

57

Uttar Pradesh

58


BJP 42.3

SP 22.2

INC 7.5

IND 1.7

AAP 1

AD 1

RLD 0.9

PECP 0.6

QED 0.4

BMUP 0.2

CPI 0.2

NOTA 0.7

Analysis


2. Greatest surprises were in store in Uttar Pradesh where BJP acquired 71/80 seats with

42.7% of votes. It increased its tally from a pathetic show of 10 seats in 2009.

3. INC managed just 2 seats as its tally declined all the way from 21 it had acquired in 2009.

The 2 seats are that of Amethi & Rae Bareilly from where Rahul Gandhi and Sonia

Gandhi contested.

4. SP that emerged largest party with 23 seats in 2009 was restricted to just 5 seats. 2

among these 5 seats are won by Mulayam Singh himself.

5. The elephant size zero that BSP scored in the state in comparison to 20 in 2009 is one of

the biggest upsets of 2014 Lok Sabha polls. This clearly indicates a shift in a major chunk

of Dalit and Bahujan votes away from BSP towards BJP. Decline of SP also indicates the

similar pattern in Yadav and other OBC castes.

6. BJP in general and Modi in particular had targeted UP for some special attention for

quite some time. Modi had even appointed his close aide Amit Shah as In Charge of

BJP’s election campaign in UP. Modi even contested from Varansi and won by a huge

margin.

7. One important reason in the gigantic victory of BJP is bifurcation of Muslim and other

anti-communal and secular votes in four pieces i.e. SP, BSP, INC, and AAP. While anti-BJP

vote were thus divided, Hindu votes were consolidated behind Modi leaving all the four

opposing forces in the lurch. This phenomenon is especially notable in Aaonla, Bareilly,

Barabanki, Bulandshahr, Meerut, Moradabad, Rampur, Saharanpur, Sambhal, and

Varansi etc.

59

West Bengal

60


AITC 39.3

CPI(M) 22.7

BJP 16.8

INC 9.6

RSP 2.4

CPI 2.3

AIFB 2.1

IND 0.9

SUCI 0.7

BSP 0.5

AIUDF 0.2

NOTA 1.1

Analysis


2. BJP won 2 (1 in 2009), CPI(M) won 2 (9 in 2009), and INC won 4 (6 in 2009).

3. AITC emerged as the biggest success with 34 seats (19 in 2009).

4. The decision not to have a pre-poll alliance with AITC proved fatal for INC.

5. The decisive victory of Mamta Bannerjee’s AITC is a cause of great concern for the left

especially CPI(M). The popular verdict is a clear indicator that for the youths,

communism and revolutionary politics is not as appealing as it was a generation ago.

6. West Bengal too is one of those rare states where Modi magic did not work despite the

fact that magicians like P.C. Sorcar Jr. contested on the BJP ticket and lost.

61

Role of RSS in Lok Sabha Elections 2014

Based on his field study of UP and newspaper reports, Badri Narayan in his article “Modi’s

Modus Operandi in the 2014 Elections” published in EPW May 17, summarises the role of RSS in

the recently concluded Lok Sabha Elections. According to him, “various arms of the Sangh

Parivar, the RSS itself, the BJP cadre and a team of technically-equipped workers, ‘the blue

brigade’” had been working “round the clock for the success of Narendra Modi’s personality-

oriented campaign.”

He highlights the following points.

• The role of RSS in providing perspective and structure for the entire campaign of the BJP

in 2014 Lok Sabha Elections has not been duly emphasised or researched.

• BJP is the political wing of RSS. RSS claims that it would never work for a political party.

But ever since the candidature of Narendra Modi was announced, the RSS had taken

over the entire organisational activities of electing and projecting Narendra Modi into its

own hands.

• The difference between the words and deeds of the RSS can be grasped by the public

statement of Mohan Bhagwat, the chief of RSS, who said in Bangalore that projecting

Narendra Modi is not their agenda. In Bhagwat’s opinion “their agenda is to bring issues

in front of the people. Since the RSS is not a political party we have our own limitations.”

• Nearly one lakh RSS group leaders and six lakh swayamsevaks from 42,000 units spread

across the country were working full time to ensure the BJP’s victory. A high level team

of Sangh leaders has set up a control room in Varanasi from where it kept an eye on all

the party workers round the clock. The team was being led by Amit Shah, Narendra

Modi’s right hand man, assisted by Anil Bansal, a top RSS leader.

• One of the methods of campaigning adopted by the RSS was to visit remote villages

using carriages termed “Namorath”. According to reports, nearly 400 such carriages had

been gathered and they have been used (or at least targeted) to reach a majority of

villages in UP, Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh. These carriages are inscribed with

large portraits of Narendra Modi and go about campaigning with loud advertisement

jingles promoting him. The carriages halt at road crossings and chaupals screening films

and entertaining crowds.

• Volunteers of the RSS have also spread out to many villages to engage in aggressive

door-to-door campaigning.

• The RSS has also instructed volunteers to keep tabs on BJP workers and other people to

prevent anti-party activities. Sangh sources say that the volunteers and workers of RSS

have been provided video cameras so that they can record the activities of leaders and

workers of BJP who are under suspicion.

62

• The RSS was engaged in collecting feedback on the impact of Narendra Modi’s speeches

during his electoral rallies prior to the 2014 elections. In November 2013, Badri Narayan

visited Bahraich with a research team to study a rally organised by the BJP and

addressed by Narendra Modi. As the rally ended, a group of 50 people started taking

feedback from the audience about Narendra Modi’s speech by questioning them in their

local language. They were asking questions like “How did you like Modiji’s speech? What

is your opinion on what he said about Muslim terrorists? He has also challenged the

‘Muslim mafi a’ of this region. What is your opinion about it?” Through these and

several such questions they were trying to obtain feedback from different people by

adopting different styles of questioning about Modi’s speech. Some of them had audio

tapes in their hands while some were just interacting orally. It appeared that their aim

was to understand the reaction of Hindus to the aggressive speech challenging “Muslim

terrorists” which later went on to address Muslims in general, besides to seek the

opinion of the people in the audience about Modi’s plans for development. (It should be

noted that this speech was delivered just days after the bomb blast that took place

during his Patna rally). Similar feedback gathering volunteers were noticed at other

rallies and they later found to be going to RSS office together.

• They were also seen to be interacting with the common people at tea stalls who did not

necessarily come to the rally.

• One local RSS volunteer at the condition of anonymity told the researchers that a group

of local volunteers of RSS collect information about the impact of the main issues of

Modi’s speech from the listeners at the rally. This information was then presented at

rally review meetings held at the local RSS office. The main issues that emerge from the

reactions of the common people are then presented at the RSS shakhas held in big cities

and towns. This feedback is then taken to the top brass of the RSS. Through these

shakhas, Narendra Modi’s image was recreated and disseminated. Alongside, insights

were gathered for Modi’s future speeches and the mobilisational strategies of the BJP

were then chalked out.

• In the context of the 2014 elections, Modi’s speeches are considered the most infl

uential and effective mobilisational tool of BJP, which is why so much importance is

being given to organising his rallies and then gauging the impact of his speeches.

• Both the RSS and BJP had formed booth management committees at the ground level

across villages and small towns. The committees formed by RSS comprised of 10 to 20

highly empowered volunteers depending on the place and its situation. For example if a

place was dominated by dalits and backward castes, the committee members are

selected from within their communities.

• In order to reach out to women, the RSS has trained women leaders and supporters of

BJP with whom they were constantly in touch.

63

• If any household is found to be unsatisfied with Modi’s persona or the politics he

represents, they softly try to convince it about the positive aspects of Modi’s rule and

his “leadership”.

• The most important task of the committee members was to ensure that the people, to

whom this outreach was extended, were brought to vote in the respective booths on

election days. The organising team of the RSS which was supervising Narendra Modi’s

electioneering had adopted a very strict attitude and the volunteers who fail to reach

the selected families in and around the booth were held accountable by the members.

• A team of highly skilled professionals had spread out across the districts and cities of UP

with the mission of keeping a watch on the local teams working in each district to

campaign for Modi and to report directly to Amit Shah. Since the trademark dress code

of the team is a blue kurta and blue jeans this team is known as the “blue brigade”.

Most of the members of this team are graduates in professional courses from reputed

colleges and universities both in India and in the United States.

• Using technological tools and know-how, this set of technical professionals are

masterminding various aspects of campaigns such as the “Chai pe Charcha”

(conversations over “tea”, either in physical locations or internet chats), Modi 3D rallies

(featuring holographic technology enabling “simulcasting” of Narendra Modi’s rallies),

etc.

• This team, has been divided into two-member units which have been sent to each Lok

Sabha constituency. These units have been entrusted with the task of judging the

activities of the local teams and where the local teams are not very effi cient, the

members of the technical team themselves form campaign teams. The technical team

members regularly update the central unit of Modi’s team about their activities.

• This team functions independently of the district and city committees of BJP but is in

touch with all the candidates of BJP, has contact numbers of the officers of booth

management committees. It is reported the technical team has changed nearly two

dozen booth committees.

• The technical team monitors the needs of the local candidates and the input is sent to

the central team, which provides the necessary support to the local BJP candidates. This

team also works in coordination with the RSS and they exchange information and inputs

to form strategies for electoral mobilisation.

64

Youth factor

in General Elections 2014

In his meeting with Convener CSG on 30 May, Hilal Ahmed of

CSDS has underscored the youth factor in determining the

electoral sweep in the favour of BJP. He argued that ironically

youth of the nation have identified themselves with the high

profile campaign of BJP centring upon the strong image of

Modi and his rhetoric of development. In this regard role of

new social media and its effective utilisation by saffron forces

cannot be ignored.

Some of the important points noted by Sanjay Kumar,

Director CSDS, on youth factor influencing polls 2014

mentioned in his opinion-article “Higher turnout in youth

vote” (The Hindu, 28 May) are as follows:

• These elections witnessed much higher participation

of first-time voters compared to past elections.

• Though all the first-time voters didn’t go in favour of

BJP but even a marginal shift in the votes of first-

time voters in its favour was enough to help the

party register an impressive victory because first-

time voters were in large numbers in most

constituencies.

• In some States, the BJP seemed to have more votes

among ‘other young voters’ (23-25 years of age) or

among middle-aged voters.

• Compared to the average national turnout of 66.6

per cent, the turnout among first-time voters (18-22

years) and ‘other young voters’ was 68 per cent. It

should be noted that the turnout among young

voters has always been lower compared to the

average national turnout.

• The turnout among first-time voters was much

higher than the average turnout in Chhattisgarh,

Delhi, Gujarat, Haryana, Jharkhand, Punjab and

Rajasthan.

]mÔirˆmä 4444111100002222YYYYââââ:::: ]ÞjíêoÞj^ñsì^ám^‰†

)8ZÝe~Ze°Ô£((]ÔŠ‹-Eg;(

/ge$»ÈHì?Z¤/Zk‚Š}ÐÎZw6,Š*½~Zq-Z£Z[™Z1YñÂ�áh+â}Ð¾â}‚ÅZÒe$ZkÎZw»q-Š

�Z[LZ$óÅßg]~Š}ÏX�Z[Š¶zZßV~àe$7,"zZá¶CÐá™Ñ%zZà™Ï6,Z¶g7,_ƒñ),gÍVJ-X

ßv�áïƒVÐXt�Z[9ìc*ßZkcÐsÃt|›ì/ge$ZzgZN!*]»aàŠZð»‚BìXŠ*ÅƒÐ(,~/ge$BñYäzZáyz*y~ZN!*]Ãð5!*]7�XñcÐá™ßuœJ-ZN!*]»Zq-ÑpÐ„Ÿì�Ë§b¾~7W@*XZN!*]ÅÒ]Ô0*gkVÅc]ÔZyzZgzV»c[1�Šw»µ‰‰‰ZkÚø~Zq-¬xWŠòÔ�L(„ó»**xheÐ¬ÚLn~ó»ZŸ†™**7ÈmÔZ¤/zzêZmÌìÂ!*ÇZÏ§b‰u»Ãð1úZ@*gg;ƒX4102YâÆßuœZN!*]~Zz6,ÒyÅˆ�áh+„Ãð|$+àƒÔCÙZN[Å§btZN!*]ÌZ0+ðVÆWk~Ë»äÅˆlÆáZŠs¸X0øhtìŒV»äÌÂ

ÐX�OçßvZq-!*gZq-Z0+ñÃWiâD�ÂŠzu~!*gŠzu}ÃXZzg-VtŸYg~gLìX¸ƒVðh~ŠzgCÙZu!gzÆ‚B

T}7ƒVZÌgZÚÃ~

61B#»XÃ"ñ~ÐZOgåZÏŠyßuœÅÓx345BVÆ}ò»Zýƒ**åX}òWñÔÃðƒÂÃð;gZXZN[Æö~

;gÛAÂÐgSìX�;g@*ìz{;gÅLf)ŠZg~óJw™@*ìÔLúZxÆŸóÃt™@*ìZzgx[Z%sÅ™Ï6,Ö™Ó#ÖÅN*8-r~

'wƒY@*ìÔ‚B„‚BZÐZOgƒ@*ìZN!*]ÆZŒö»@*z{ZK;gÃÛA~$+wnXí!*]ƒg„¶61B#ÃWäzZá…VÅÔ7gZzc*¬Ð„!Z8ÆÌÇg;åXtzc*4002YâZzgZq-uJ-9002Yâ~ßU*"$ƒ[å1Wy“J-?LZ[Å!*góZkÆÓxZ0+Zi}9U*"$ƒñZzgLñŠ~u»góÆ“W»gZ3™sƒŠHXyz*y~4891Yâ~gZæÇ0+SÅ»ôöÆˆÐW`J-ZyM

‚ßV~ËÌ0*gKäZLŠx6,ßuœ~272ÆYŠzðWñ}Ã7gZåX!Z8äZk!*gtÌ™Š3c*XŠgZÝtZN!}òZk!*]ÆÌ1�úZxÆñÅZq-Z•ƒCìXGypgæÔbk5ÿ

IG¾g°}ÔÝxÑWiZŠÔt0*�ÔðÔ÷Z

¾gÔ*öZJÔx$Š¥Ô?3,z�Ô|6,‚ŠzgâÔZZâÁÔ7y¾g&4hÿ EEÔ6,c*Š]ÔgZ`@ÔÏ8�ÙÔ#y"5Ò1¹éEGGãÔ47)Z+Ï8(Ô

Ãgzt†Zv)D»Ð÷(‰¥ƒñ!*ivzVÅ“ZÏ!*]ÅâiìXúZx-8Z}ÆZkŠk‚!Šz§Ó#Ö~WñŠyÆN*ßVÔ(,fƒðµðZzgZyƒ6,eZŠzik,ZWÅ{ñÙZzg"rÐßW`¸X�áh+¸zzìWiZŠ~ÆˆÐá™Z[J-t»ôöÅƒÐic*Š{Ñou;gìXZkÐI8991Yâ~411�»ôö»yZ[F,+bCÙ{åÔZk!*gÂ»ôöÒVÅ;s6~Ì7¯0*ðXÓ#ÖÂÓ#Ößuœ~x[Z%sÆ7gÅu»g~wÌfˆZkÆnÌÀBV»Šk‚ªÁZiÁ45�e’‰Xz°}™Æ(YäzZßV»¸Zxƒ@*ìX!*]Z¤/›âVÅ™,ÂZyÆzzIV»z„�ƒZ�WiZŠyz*y~W`J-ƒ@*Wc*ìXzZgZJ-~›yÃðeàÅ(ÏÕi

¯ä~**»xgì˜VÐ3,ggñŠ~ÃŠðw"ðY$Ë¶Xª]Å!*]ìñŠ~Æ!*W.Þ24ZyzZg9}¸XUgZ»g~ätW~

Â¢zgŠ3ð›zzIVÅ„gz1ÆnzZgZÐZ$7±}pZkW~6,ZZgZñ»‚BŠ}™0*ã¢Šc*XZZgZñÅç{¤/Š~Zzg»áŠ®zVÅŠZ*3i!*ViŠ¬x�Z,ñµ6,ùZyÅY$Ë¶ñŠ~ÆÜsZy6,úZx»ZEyƒYìX´ºÆ›7gZyäÌ(Ï0*gkVÐZkçA6,Ãð„zï7ÅñŠ~ÆÜs-8Z}»ÜsZq-ZyzZg9ZƒX»ôöÔ��ZŠ~0*gKZzg!Zö8XñŠ~Ã©häÆnyZy~W‰XZz6,ÐZgz0+²-?çGE-ZwÌñ�Š¸X-V�°zzIVÆegzV{äh#¤/ä»ZOx

ƒŠHXZk£x6,zzIVÅ„Ãgz1Æn›¡VÃZLîg6,Õi%A$™ãe’¶XzZgZ~ñŠ~ÆÜsƒÐ¢oZyzZg²-?çGE-Zw¸Zzgt!*]ZN!}òÐÌzZãƒ_ìXp›yŒVÌau‰X)®)ZsòyäqÑ]Å4,Z•ÃŠÙ

ƒñZ¤/²-?çGE-ZwÅ×e$»ê1Â9.3šï EGGfYyä:YäÁiF›ë»jZ!ŠïƒñZZgZñÅ×e$™eZàXGg~ÂtÌWc*ì›yZZgZñÅ×e$™,Zk¼»:òÌËäzZgZ~Š}eZÑå�zZvZD›âVJ-àc*71!Z8ÆèzVJ-¢zgàc*ŠH&yzƒVÃŠ3Š3™ZzgñŠ~ÆÜs›âVÆGz£ZŠÐegZegZ™ZrVäñŠ~Ænzz^âfX

!*]ÜszZgZÅ7ì–gzg)04‚~›W!*Š~(Ô%ZŠW!*Š)64‚~›W!*Š~(ÔgZàg)15‚~›W!*Š~(Zzgi)07‚~›W!*Š~(~Ì!Z8ÆÝ§ÅÜsZzgÜsZq-zzg„Zzgz{ìzzIVÅ„XWâ!Ô',~Ô!*g{×Ô÷JZzg—à˜V›W!*Š~22Ð04‚~ÆŠgxyìZq-uJ-¸¹ãŠCÙZðˆXtzzIVÅ„„¶i~&ÑÄ¢DÙZgzz^0*äÆ!*z�ŠbZ°Ý',tÜs0*õDÙZgzzIVÐ;g‰XzZãgìDÐÉX�`0*gKÆFZ°ÝÃÌŠzÑÄ!*zyDÙZgzz^A�X¸qwgZàg»g;˜V!Z8ÆeZË{CwI&ÑÄZVzyDÙZgzz^0*™»%Zyƒñz��ZŠ~0*gKÆZ£{y&ÑÄ]DÙZgzz^qÝ™Æ;g‰X»ôöÆâZ[»òZzgÉX�`ÆZº@äù¦îg6,ŠzÑÄ?DÙZgzz^qÝGX¼ŠWiZŠZyzZgzVäDÙZgŠzDÙZgÆZz‰ÐzzIVÃyZ[HX–gzg~RiZŠ¸ÇVª»ôöÆ/Zy&Š)egÑÄ‚]DÙZgzz^(Zzg��ZŠ~0*gKÆ�áŠZy&Š)!*zyDÙZgzz^(

Æ×}~!Z8ÆgZŠ0*w)egÑÄ,DÙZgzz^(WgZxÐÛA‰X%ZŠW!*Š~!Z8Æuz÷¾gäegÑÄÏDÙZgzz^qÝ™Æ»x!Šg`ÅXZyÆ��ZŠ~0*gKÆZöKŒ)&ÑÄ*â}DÙZgzz^(ÔÉX�`0*gKÆqY©[)Zq-ÑÄ‚JDÙZgzz^(Ô50*gKÆZ

+B542.çEEGEJG·²Ãy)æDÙZgzz^(Ô»ôöÅHâg!*â)Z/DÙZgzz^(Ô%Z−+Ô‡¬ÝÔ;ZDwZzg:Yä

ÃyÃy9ZåÔZzgZvYäYV9Zå?!Z8Ã�ä~Â›âVäZW¥/|~ÌÃðŸ7gh~¶˜VÐ!Z8Ægâ»-$c*Šz)ŠzÑÄd-@.ç

GXGDÙZgzz^(ÆÜs��ZŠ~0*gKÆ4_5ìIÔ!Zö8Æ�á{¬Ý²s£z)à)ŠzÑÄàjDÙZgzz^(Zzg»ôöÆZq-°ŠZyzZgÆ´z{gZ»tfYÃ±Æòœg¬%g�áŠ~)¾{DÙZgzz^(Ìn7-™yZy~W‰XÑz¬CgD**]~gâ»-$„WÐ^gì1íƒð5ìI)&ÑÄe:DÙZgzz^(¼›yÂ¼c*ŠzzzIVÅ¯6,!*syÛA„‰X!Z8ä282BV6,ÛAqÝÅìXZkxZ�y»x!6,ÜsZgzy745Ðö EGHZzg�á~Zi@Å“ÆŠz$+úŠZr�X!Z8Åt

ÛA©àÛA7ìX!Z8ä|Z]ÔgZ1yÔZF,ZôÔø^6,Š÷ÔZzgŠ‹~Î‚»x!Šg`ÅìXZF,6,Š÷ÅZÏ~ÐZ¾ÔæX6,Š÷ÅZû~Ð*KÔÄgôÅaŠ{~Ð!*g{Ô™**S-ÅZVK~Ð,{Ô·gÅe:~Ð!*KÔCÙc*:ÅŠk~

Ð‚]ÔZzg§VòÅb~Ð&ÒqÝÅ�XZâx»x!6,Z¤/!Z8äÜsŠ‹~Gg{ÑÄgz9Æî/Yh}�

ÂH',ZHì?Z#ZIãZzgZeZãW\Æ‚BƒVÂZq-yÐÆŠZNY+$Ä#”�ÔZkÐW\ÃH¢8ŠbXZk»x!Æœº3,ggñŠ~6,Igus#ÖÆYwÜs±(+ZVZzgzc*„7ÉâZiÑpZzg',ZuZz!*âÌ',‚gì�Xë�Ëiâä~

Z%Mä|Z]YŠZ]ÆÚø~3,ggñŠ~Ãzm,ZŠ¶ÐZïg™Šc*åZyÆ;BpyÐgfƒñ�ÔZkZ$äZyÆ;BZzgŠZðÐpyÆz{ŠÆ�áh+ŠðeZá�Ô°ÂZz!*âä¯y6,yZ%O©]6,„zïÆ‚B‚BñŠ~Ãzm,ZŠ¶ZzgZ%MWä»Šú]**)ÌŠ}eZÑXËð−äIñ6,�áh+sÉŠc*ìLLñŠ~ÅÛACCìZq-|ZCZ%M»zm,ZqÝ™äÆnHH™Yì!óó!Z8Æ´z{ZN!}òŸšYÅF,%w»ôö)43�(ÔZÉÓ45éGGÅZ}WðZ}e~Z*Æ)73�(ÔœdŠw)02�(ÔÀ

Š10*gK)61�(Zzgì#)81�(ÆnpÙ»xÑñXz�»ôöÆ´z{X0*gkV6,§»NhIN*ìZy~âc*zCÅÉX�`0*gKZzggZ`V™}ÅZ*Z+Zö‡.Þf™��ßuœ~ZC3@*Å%~Ì**»xg„�X��ZŠ~0*gK)5�(ZzgZ+Ï8)6

�(»bCÙ{Ìù¦îg6,â-kÁ„g;XZq-¿~»ôöZzgZkÅqò0*gkVäìÅ3ðì²»ôö#³0*gkVÅ0WðìXz,ZN!*]~tª]Z0»x!ÔTÆúšµWgZöZö»)%ð;BìÔH!Z8ÃgZkWñÏ?tZq-Z(ÎZwìT»�Z[z‰ÜpŠŠ}ÇX°ZÒwÂZÚI»°ìZ#!Z8Æ7gZyÛAÆðgÐ!*CÙWNÐÂZ7ZknÆÎZÑ]W;ñÃWN

Ð:Ó#Ö~Ãy�áïƒÇ?¾R6,�áïƒÇ?Z+e~Z}ZŠ»HƒÇ?ZezZãZzg�ÙˆVÃù�rc*YñÇ?»ŸÆZN[~ñŠ~Å−Ïc*!Z8Åc*WgZöZöÅ?yzÂÆZ¤}»ÎfùƒÇ?Z¤/¯gUƒÇÂe-}ÆZ¤}»HƒÇ?Z¤/ZÐñyHY@*ìÂWgZöZöÃH�Z[Šc*YñÇ?z){z){XÎZwÂtÌZëì=IñŠ~H!Z8Ã‚Bá™½~»x[ƒVÐ?Q!Z8~

ñŠ~Æ#³¹�ÔZN!}òZ7¼ŠâVÆn{ñl™Mh�1åÆn7XZezZãäÂ61B#„ÃÈŠc*åt»x!!Z8ÅìñŠ~Å7X!*]Â¹©àìpŠh+ÒÓCgppzZáY…�ZezZãZÝ~HIe{gì�Xz,÷}ˆ[ÐZezZãÅ!*]ßìXZk»x!ÆúñŠ~„»;BÔcÔŠârÉƒ¼ì)ÜsÙAŠzuzVÅì(XñŠ~„Zq-Z(n{ì�ZLÔ

»g**ñVÅzzÐWgZöZöÆn‡.ÞJwìÔZK,ÅzzÐ!Z8ÆnÌÔZKZŠZƒVÅzzÐúZxÆnÌZzgZK

0*ÎVÅzzÐuâtŠZgzVÆnÌXz,ñŠ~ä‚~eñ�ìc*7tZq-dc»ñçqìT»ŒVñµ7pZk

Z$ätU*"$™Šc*ì3,ggñŠ~pZ[&~¢zgâCÙìX|Z]ÅF,¹ÆâewÃÔT~"ˆ[{ñVÅ¶K0+„pŠZgz0+²-?çGE-Zw

äÅ¶Ô-V»x!Æ‚BzzR,zVÆu745ë FFGŠbZq-Z(»g**)ì&ûFÅ@*gõ~}ZÖpÐ–YñÇXZkñµ6,oƒìyz*ã/ge$»ÌZq-−‚Y,{á1YñXyz*yZq-0*gúã/ge$ìXZ%MZzg',¤6Å§bŒVŠz

gZò (Multiparty system) )�ÂxgZò7ìXyz*y»�`Zq-s~�`ìÅ<å XEZZÏÐ_“gnpƒñŒVM)�ÂxìXXtìøgZZN!Âxøg}s~�`Åg¬e$7™@*É*Û†0*†Š7†Ä6,FFz{Âxì�Šz)�Âx~„4îg6,»x™YìXZkÄ~TZyzZgÃƒÐic*Š{zz^X�z{»x[ƒY@*ìQeìZÐù¦îg6,Škc*ä‚zz^„YV:qÝƒñƒVXZN!*]ÆZ,Ä~zz„ƒäÆÔxƒäÆÔŸùƒäÆZk**](,|YD�XzzIVZzgZyzZgzVÅ

ƒ@*ìT (Proportional System of Representation) yh+z*Ûz|#(,fìXZkÆ!*W.ÞZq-ÄpÐƒúÒÏ»Âx~Ë0*gKÃqÝ”{zz^ZzgÒV»Úƒ½ã',Z',ƒ@*ìXVwÆîg6,qÝ”{zzIVÆÚƒÆZ±gÐÉX�`0*gKä!

Z8Zzg»ôöÆŠZ£xqÝHì)-8~ÂZkÆzzIV»‚äì(ptyz*yÆZZN!Âx»]gìßuœ~!Single Zö8Zq-ÌÜqÝ™äÐ‡Üg„ìXZÏ¼»Zq-ŠzuZ�ŠwÂx�yz*yÆÚø~ñizVF,ìz{

ìT~Zq-„ÃLÆnzzR,F,ÁZ±gÐzz^ŠêìXZzgZq-ZyzZgÃ»x!Æn¢zg~ì transferable vote system

ZÐù¦îg6,k‚ÐiZZ+zz^�XZk§bÆ§TZN[~z{ZyzZgÉƒ™WNÐ�ù¦îg6,úZxÆnic*Š{‡.ÞJwƒVÐX¢zg]Zk!*]ÅìëZkoÆf)ŠZgà~ƒäÆ**ðZyèo6,ÎvZzgoÆZN!ÄÃ4¯ä~ZCgzwZŠZ™,X

4102YâÆZN!*]~šµ¸gCd0*gKÅÛAƒðìp°ZßZµt¸g�dÅ;gìXZkZ$~Z(¹¼ƒZ�7ƒ**e’åXZ¶gZ]Ôg‚bÔKz~ÔZzgÎzc*Åyh+z*Ûz|#Ðá™0CƒVÆZq-Šzu}ÅfZ»]6,gUçZk~�áï�XZkK~Z$

z‰)ïZŠZg}Å»g™ŠÏ6,ÌFÎZD¶KyÑ�XZ#Ö�á{»ßÍVÃZN!*]~YŠZ]Æ$+áÆnZ‚**ÔZk6,Z$zÅY+$Ð0*È~ÔpQ6,ZuZgîg6,Z#Ö�á{Æç°**óÃJw™Æ0*È~ZV¢8ÔQZq-Šzu~g~~Z#Ö�á{»ZW¥/|ÃWÞ

¥/|IZzgZk6,Z$zÆ»âV6,�VJ-:g-ÂÜsZ$zÅ**Z‹)c*ƒ?(ÅZq-ÎVwìXZ+„¼ŠL!Vó»œzgZ$zÐñŠ~Æe~ÌƒZZ#Z$ÆŠy!Z8äZCšgYg~HÔZ#Z$ÆŠyñŠ~äzc*Ðæ[HÔZzgZ#Z$ÐZq-ŠyIñŠ~ä-k[6,ZKzi+-Yg~™ZN!Ÿ$)î E0ZÜtÅ?Üszgi~Åz){z){XuÂtìN*

'.øJ

WsZ&+c*ÅZq-g7g^Æ_.W‚x~Zq-Z+zzãáÌ0*ðˆ�Üs!Z8Ãzz^Šî¶Ô»ôöÆZq-‘7gä)T»**xñŒÛZ¶gä71(ZkK~ZN!0VÆ‚BCYhÆ}.�á]ÌªCÙG¸XZkáÃÂ�áh+$+wŠc*ŠHpZ$z»t§i¿ŠN™Z¤/Ãð‚Š{ßbtgZñ‡ì™áZN!}ò~!Z8Å@*g]ìzzã0VÅËL}tó»³ìÂ>Zk~Zkœg}»H]gƒÇ?

([email protected])

eoq1µouÓçÚkV2n×ßr‹Òn^an6[J]Ò9†uŠà…•^

).²ÔÏZöY(

ÎÛ,ßuœ»îsZN!u)ZzgZk»³øg}‚tìXZN[~»x!»¡Zzg@*`7ÙÅgÌÌ(,~ŠðxÐoðˆZzgZq-(ÏÓ�á»ƒZXZ[CÙWŠò�fgZÏÌ(ÏÎú1úg‚rìz{/W‚ã™Yì�tZN[Z(Ï0*gkVÆŠgxy¡0*ŒZzg

6,z¤/ZxÆ�ÛtÅãCŠ6,±ZYäzZÑZN[7åZzg:ZMZgÅtÃZq-(Ï0*gKÐŠzu~(Ï0*gKÅ§s/g~¿ÆË~ƒäzZàÅÓ#Ö~zZfzik,ZW¶ NDA ÃìXtp~Z\ÒÆˆ7791YÅp~Å§b7ìXtZkÐÌZìZ#9991Y~

¸XZMZgÅtp~ŠgZÝñ'Ô‚zg™ÔŠ7ZgZzgÍßZÆÆpZ1VÆyzgZ»Å§sZq-@*g]–DìXWiZŠ~Æz‰ÜwÆyz*yÆaFpZ[¶‰¸XQy~Zq-pZ[ñ5VäŠ¬ÔŠzuZpZ[Î]Òh4ð IHVäXZe™äÌZq-pZ[Š¬ÔÇ0+SY»ÌZq-ö7åÔñÑ**WiZŠäÌWiZŠyz*yÅZq-¦k,¯ð¶XZk§bëÈMh��ÎÛ,ßuœÆZN[Æ}ò~yzgZ»zZŠ

TÅãCŠ�R¸è6,ìÔZkÅ»x!Å§stZq-êÁ–DìÔTÅŠZÌ!*¹ìXZzgZÏÆ‚Bz{‚g}pZ[X»Zz6,f™HŠHZkÆIUÔ)äÅŠZ*yÌìX

�Zq-:Z¤/÷Zt‹t9ìÂZk»x³tì�øg}‚t�ƒÐª½Zzgêf$ìz{t�Zk¦gè6,dWÅYñZzg12z,œ~~].h+yz*y»Zq-*pZ[Š¬ZzgŠ3c*YñXZq-Z(pZ[�Zq-WiZŠyz*yÅZ¸ñVÔ¤/zƒVZzg�RZ»ÇVÅ/g~ZjV»‚BŠ}nXT~ƒßvï™g8-½ÃXtZkz‰Ü»Íc*ƒÐ(,Z½ìZzgZÏÆ‚B�°yz*yÔ

Ç0+S»ö7ÔÎ]Òk5ë IHðyWsÎ‚ÌÔ×�ZyZzg×‚yÆÈ}ÔñŠ~ZzgZAñŠ~ZzgZk§bÅŠzu~�ZzgZ˜²øg}a

Z[ic*Š{ÆZzg6,z•}ÆZkŠzg~»gWæ7ƒ$ËXtpZ[HƒZzg].h+F,(Ïi!*y~Zk»ZšrùHYñÔtëƒÆaZq-(,Z

ÎZwìXÃÒƒãe’�Zk6pZ[~ZsxÆWÃ¹¦gÔzkZÅ:ö XÅù]Zzgyz*yÅ@*g]gzZc*]ÔƒÅR÷ƒX�Šz:ZN!(„Åt»x!ÜsZq-$©�î EG

0ÃÔZq-„ÔZq-ÃbÔZzgZq-pZ[Å»x!7ìÉZq-±Ô)(Ï”.$zgu

ZzgZkÅŠg†V�ápVÅZÓ].z4»³ìXyzgZ»zZŠÆD',ŠZgzVä¡ZN!(„Å{q~Zzg™A$!*i~»ö„7|ÉZ,VäW×W×oÅZOò�-VÔ]Æf~%Zœ/Zzg}.#Ö»Æ"ÑgZŠZg}‡ì™Æ�Yi0+Ï~Z½¦Zð6,ï)

Æfg)$xZzgŠg™Šc*XyzgZ»zZŠÆayzƒVÆZ MYTH 1X@*g]Zzg�RzZu]Ã66|xz™yzf†ÃZL

4]ÔfZ]',ZŠg-VZzgWŠ~zZÏ6~yz6»ZˆkŠÑ™Zq-�R¸xƒä»ZˆkaZ™Šc*ZzgŠzu~§s›¸xZzgZkÅZsò�d$ÃF,hóƒVÐŠÚ»Zq-iZztÃ¬x™Šc*XZ,VäúZò

&:)4è XG`NXøZ,Z3iCDgìTÐ½ÔÈUZzg<™1¢Å7g~wƒYñXZ,Vä(,}àzVÔZz‰ŠgZÆàzVZzgŠW!*Š-V~CÙR6,4Z�ÛZŠÅš»gÅZzgQy~¤/z\7gkaZ

KXZLZk7g}.$zguÅ]»g™ŠÏÃYhZzg6,npÌgìXZ,VäZ+]qÝ™à¶�Z#Î*Ç0+Szik,ZW“WzZà‰ÂZ¤/pt»ôö0*gK»XåpZ,VäÛzã±Zzgyz*ã±ÅcÃC™»ôöÃZk!*]6,6g™Šc*å�Î*zik,ZW:FX

ÎŠzu~(Ï0*g‹VZko~�QyÅƒÐ(,~$zg~¸ì�Qy»‚gZŠZƒ@Zzg‚g~'g]'ZÅ5½o-ö GIE(„Æ�h]ƒJ-

özŠìXZ’Z~»ôöÆ0*kúZò}.#ÖÆaOg¸Xñ5VäÌúZò_5À¡çEY

lÆaZŠZg}‡ì™gÇp!*syƒ™ÏZzg”wZMZgÆZgŠ¤/ŠƒäzZàQVáÔÂh�hÔ‚i!*iÔŠZƒ@ÆDgƒ‰Zzg�`ÆZ0+g�œ�Zðƒ@*ìz{QyÆ;BÐÀ_`ŠH;Zk§b�Y]QyÅ1C{7g„XZ¤/øgZt‹t9ìÂøgZŠzuZêf$Zzg½tì�ë)Z

Å5½o-ö GIE(„»�}.#Ö»ZzgZÃÆjZáÐ^ð LLwÎ‚Ì~Zq-(,ZZð¯CìÔZkÆa»xÑzq™,ZzgCÙgc*„~‚7k,K)PZÑ(XZ*X8XZ)'gZ»ZZzgW0+OZ6,Š÷(-XZ*XZp)Ägô(Å§i6,¤/ZkgzFCwÐZq-�YZzg(Ï.$zgu9Z™,T~CÙÝZzg',ZŠg~Æ-BÅËqÃF,ßŠ~YñÔT~Ÿ»ÂxØgZðƒZzgyZy¿~»x™äzZá',z‰ÜêáÃXNzwÆ**x6,!*ÑðÄ»ÃðZÈx:HYñTÐZyÅ»g™ŠÏOW,ƒZzgŸZzg¿ÆŠgxy‹aZƒ@*gìXTÐ66”)baZƒD��!*syyZy»gÃŠ−w¯Šï�X

�&:ZkÐ¬ÎÓ‘WCg„�z{ãCŠ~îg6,�YãCŠ6,‡ì(Ï0*g‹V‰XTÅ¸]»u*)±úZx(¶XZk§bÅÓáV»$+Ü0*õŠk‚w~W‚yƒ@*ìXYV�úZx»qC$zgƒ@*ìZzg Uns t ruc tu red Mass )

1Æ�ZMZg~WäYä»ŸYg~gLìXgZæÇ0+S»ZMZg~W**TqŠP»³åZkÅÃð0*GZgãCŠ: incumbency

¶Xpf!Xw~ñ5VÅÓ#ÖÆ´z{yz*y~ÃðÓ#ÖÌZ+7WðTÅ]»ZÝu*Zk»±OgƒÔ��Y]

Æf~%Zœ/6,¬Ð‡*ƒXZ+Ó#ÖÃ0*õŠk‚w~U**¹„ÂìSîA$Z#zc*ÆZkŠzg~úZòñeÃNzw~g

¹W‚yìX¢oOgÅãCŠ6,qÝƒäzZÑZMZgLz0*GZgƒ@*ìZka�Ó#ÖZzgªŠ]ÅR6,a‰ÓxZz¦ñhVÃúZxÆ»yJ-uÍÙÆ‚BàäzZÑOgCÙz‰Üñ�ŠgLì�úZxÆZgÃLÌ%œ/Æa‰ŸÆÜsYä7ŠêìXWiZŠyz*y~t«ŠiƒZì�%œ/~Ó#ÖÅ16,Zq-Z+Og{WgkH,cZzgZkÅf~�áðñ�Š��úZxÐŒÛd$�XZzgZk

OgZzgªŠ])ñŠ~(ÆŠgxyåëW°ªñŠ~ÅfZ]ZzgZkÅ,ZzgZk»(Ï™ŠZgÔ|Z]ÆrîÅwÐZkÅ»g™ŠÏÔƒï™WgZöZöÅWàc*ßYÔZkÅpZéÔWgizƒVZzgÕƒV»ƒYIH%:0ˆìZzg¸zzì�ZezZãZzgZk§bÆŠzu}7gzVÃÃZ0+Zi™ä~ZÐŠk,7ÐXZ¤/÷Zt‹t9ìÂøgZŠZêf$tì�WŠ~!*±VÔŠpVÔ?0+{',ZŠg-VZzg³V~

Z,Vä�ZCZW,zgÎc(,Jc*ìZÐz{L™äZzg6ZðÏäÅÃÒ™,ÐZzgZ(™ä~Ó#ÖÅ¤‰ÜZyÆnçzyz

æŠÇgU*"$ƒÏX¢zg]Zk!*]Åì�Zy4]ÃëÌN*g�™Æ7g~ÕiÆ‚BŠú]»¶K:¯NZzgZZfZ]ÆyzƒV»�ìZyÃÂhäÅÃÒ™,XZsxZzg›âVÆe~�ß�V»kQÇŠc*ŠHìZkÃ™s™,XZk»xÆa…ZL Myth

gzZî§iŠú]Ð?Ø™¼6%Zœ/»ZÈx™**ƒÇX…R,Zªg^aZXk^ÔÎ=WnÔWnÃgZ½g^aÔWnÃg‘ðe-}‰ZŠZg}].h+§i6,Å%ƒVÐZzgZkÆfg)»ñVÃZ�xŠbƒÇX

�eg:t9ì�%œ/Å0*gúãÓ#Ö6,(,}ÑƒHÆ‚B!Z8ZMZg~WðìÔZzgtÌ9ì�ZkÅ16,oÆîwz²n~;ƒZ�Y�R}.#Ö»Æ.$zguÐzZhZy»OgìXpZyƒÆ!*z�ŠFgc*2V~ZÌZyÅaZz6,Zz6,Ðƒð

ìZzgZyÆ£«Å�Šzu~�Y'�Zy~ZÌŠxn!*¹ìX}W‚xÔXwÔ·gÔº[ÔŠ‹Zzg†[ÅFgc*ZXtgc*Z',uZMZg]ª!Z8»Zq-(,Z$zgU�Zzg��YZzg(Ï'ZyÃ$zg™**eS�ZyÆa°ZÒwZq-ôp·Ç{�XZ¤/÷Z‹t

9ìÂaåêf$tì�tôp·Ç{Ì}!Z8Æ;ðV~:¬YñXøgZ»xtì�ëZ(Ëqw~Ì:ƒäŠ,Zzgt»x›èIZzg�Y)ÈZLgzZî§jÐZ�x7Š}‰ÉP6»xZ¿Š~ù]Æ‚B6§hVÐ™äƒVÐX}

Æ´z{›(Ï7gZyÔ›ZŠZgzVZzgZIVÆu',Z{�ÔZyÆ‚BSàÜg¿Yñ NDA Zy´V~�›(Ï)È�c*

ZzgZLZLŠZ],}~g{™I»Zq-»ð!54-+êGEG6,z¤/Zx¯c*YñÔT6,¿ŠgWæÆaZq-ÃWge~VwƒXtwWwZ&+c*R6,:ƒÉ

gc*4R6,„ƒXZ¤/ëZ+ÃWge~Vw¯ä~»x[ƒñÂë�áh+W‚xÔXwÔ·g™**S-ZzgZk§bÅgc*Z˜V›yÁÐÁŠk‚�Ôz;V»x[Š/™Mh�XZ%˜V›âVÅ®ZŠÁìÔz;VZq-Šzu}§iÅÃWge~Vw¯ðY$Ëì‰Zzh3Zzg

Æ÷}~:`YñXZka�Z¤/p7gyÉ#ÖÐ!Z8zZá NDA @*ï**ez@*�ZyÅÓáV»(ÏziyË@*g]%µ~

ZMZg~Wñ�ÔpZ¹gZäœZzggc*„Åu»gzVÅWÒ{Æ%Zi~¬zyÅ¢zg]7,$ËìX�0*õ:qD0*gúãZ$~�-Z°ZŠzÑgWñ�ZkÐtZ0+Zi{ƒ@*ì�½ãâ°œ›âVäÌ!Z8Ãzz^Šc*

ìXñ�Š{Ó#ÖÅÃÒƒÏ�T§bZkäŠpV~ZzgWÏ!*±V~(,}eä6,}.#Ö»Æfg)ZCYw;c*ìZÏ§bz{¾d$Zzg?0+{´VÆ›âVÆZ0+gQyÃgzKÔ½Zzg´`Æ**x6,ZLZ¤}ÆaûZg™}XZ¤/uz}HYñÂ¥xƒÇ�Z,Vät»xÑzq™Šc*ìX¢zg]Zk!*]Åì�›?0+{´V~{mîgÐŠW!*Š~~Zsx»��RÅgìZkÅF,šMÅYñZzgZk~K»�™ŠZgƒYìÔZkÃZEwHYñXŠ´æZgkÆ�ZW,Z]�ÔQyÃÌZEwHYñXZ;gzVÅ�gÎâ]�ÔZy

ƒÃZsò�d$Æ�ÛzrZzgŠ´½aZ™ä»fg=¯c*YñX›âVÆZ0+g!Z8ZzgWgZöZö»»xŠz¥V6,ƒÇXZq-úZxÅR6,ZzgZq-ªŠ]ÅR6,XZyÅÃÒƒÏ�›âVÆZ0+g!hÓÀöãCŠzVZzgZŠZgzVÅ�î¹gSìZzgTÐ´‡ðZzg£òªŠ'”ZCgS�Zy~ËZq-Å1C„ZzgæŠ™ÆÔÓ#ÖÅZŠVÐZyÃÃZ+{à™ZyÃëâZ¯1YñZzgz{WÒ{qxÆ6.3ð XEZ›âVÅ

',ÎV~CÙ(Ï0*gK›âV 65 §bÃ\xÆ6.3ð XEZ›y‡Z++»gKYNX÷ZZ0+Zi{tì�Zk~z{»x[ƒVÐXYV�*¸

~ZLZßßVÅgzÝ~Z+£òÔ´‡ðZzggc*47g’Q¸gä~»x[g„ìXZkÅzzÜstì�›yzz^JÅ(„~¤/ëg�XZzgQyÅ�F,ªŠ]',z™0*�™CìX',z™0*�Å¡]tì�z{úZx~].z47™CÉR,i+-2Å§bñwÂwZzgyh+z�Ûz|#Æz‰Üyh+äZzg&zZáÐZq-gZ2Zg™ä~'g]gBbìX›âV~�ßvt»x™D�ZyÅ'g]¸

ì�z{ZCt½xúZx~¯ñgnp��ZMZgJ-Qy»gÎc¹¢oìZzgZMZgÃz{½z.ŠÑD��úZxÐZy»g‡.ÞZEyìXz{ZÏ‡.ÞZOŠZzg‡.ÞgÎcƒäÆ™ŠZgÃCÙñî6,ZEw™D�XZ¤/÷Zt‹t9ìÂ…!Z8Ã›úZxZzg›ªŠ]~ÐZk§bÆ©]‡ì™äÆñZµ»™äÅ¢zg]ìX�`~�›7g’ìZkÃá™úZò].z4Ñzq™**ecZzg

›úZxÆZ0+gCÙR6,Z½¦ŸheÅF,šM™ãecXZkÆaZ¤/gZV$IZÎgÂÅF,šMÃãCŠ¯™›úZx~ZR6,¤/z\ú

ŠbYNÂZkÆfg)ŠÑàzZà(„Ã¹uJ-ÁHYYìXøg}‚t/gËÅªŠ]ÅCÙR6,›ú™**ZyÆgzZîZ½¦ÄÃL™**ZzgZÜ¹¸]ÅF,šM™**¹¢zg~ìX›âVÆ(ÏÅgÅF,šMÆa¢zg~ì�QyÅ!3F,šMƒX!*<mŠzUƒVÐZyÅ(Ï™¹zZãZzg¢ƒCìXZq-t�z{ZkoÆWiZŠà~�ZzgZ#Ö0Æbz�XZkaÜsyz*ãƒäÅwÐyz*yÅÓ#Ö~{ŠZg~Å].z4ZyÅ(ÏÕi»Àz7ìÉZ#Ö0ÆZq-�ÛŠƒäÅwÐÌQyÅÑ•Zk~¢zg~ìZzgZkaÜsà~£t6,WZzgZkÅ!*ic*Ä6,»gk,:ƒVÉÕãZzgçÙyÅc~ÔD+Û�ÆWŠZ[~ÔÛzyyÅ0*Œzä™Dz‰ÜZzgoÆÓxZëhV~z{ZsxÅgzÝ~c~zBXaèt»xW‚y7ìXtÜsÒyŠ¶Ô›5V~ŒÛZgŠZŠ,0*k™äZzgû{™äÐ7ƒYÉZkÆa…0*ŒZSm,»Z(%œ/‡ì™**ƒÇ˜VëZ,ZdŠâr

¦™Ã˜Vz{',ZŠgZÈzíÆ‚BÕãZzgçÙ0*ŒÅR6,c~záÃX

�b:ñ�Š{',uZMZgÓ#ÖÅÃÒtƒÏ�›âVÆ(ÂxÃ�ÛÎŠ{Zzg**»g{ŒÛZgŠ}™7g}Âx½»=Z™yHYñXZzgŠv SEZ Zz‡sÅYGZŠÆe~$+áãZzg$+ZOò»*ŠzgÑzq™ÆZkÃZgHYñXG*yZzgZz‡sÅi}Ãe-}Æ**x6,

ZŠVÆ�As~á1YñX›âVÆ6,‘Ñ~Šƒ}Šƒ}Z¸Z2Æ·äÐŠ4Z0+Zi~ÅYñXZÏ§b›âVÃ(ÔçÑCZzgçÙR6,Šy/Šy$zg™äÅÃÒÅYñÏXZkn¢zg]ì�Zkõf6,6,‘Ñ1geÆZ0+gãCŠ~p~Ñ™ZkÃgc*4

R6,ÌÃuZzgdwHYñX2½ÆyZy~7g}y*y~�(ZŠZg}»x™gì�ZyÆgŠzÃtÆOñQyÃÇßg]qwZzg½»£™äÆÑë¯c*YñZzgWiZŠ~ÆˆŠ½Æ)bÃi™äÆaŠ(Ã±‡ì™äÅT§bœ�ÃÒÅ¶ZÏ§b½Æõf6,œ�ÃÒÅYñXZÚ9cgKêf$Æ**x6,7,ñ‘Ô½c*CÔ2gZzgj,qâ�ZâVÅñŠnZzgŠc

Æ‚BŠzu}**ñVÐ£tZKã APCR ¤/Š~Æ**x6,5‚i/gWÆic*Š{Zk**]�XZke~£¾ZKãÅŠzu~¡VÔ

ÅF,šMZzgi].z4».$zgu9ZHYñ2Zke~âCÙ+‡âyÆfg)úZx~‡âã™aZ™äÆnî`ðYñ@*�›úZx£tZKãÅ].z4~½7gzánZzg£tZKãÅ±Zð±äzZáŠvZ�ÛZŠÆ‚Bï™±Zð±nX

�‚]:@*gõÆ_¬Ðè¸ì�yz*yÅ(Ï0*gkV~I^Y^»¿Yg~g;ìXOç�YZ»sÅ’q-Ð“WzZà(Ï0*g‹VÌW`F”V~Ëƒ_�X´‡ð0*gkVÆZ0+gÌZMZgYÆˆ¤/z{È~ZzgI^Y^»¿Yg~ì

ÐV´‡ð0*g‹V�X-8~âc*zCZzg5ìIÅ0*g‹VÌZCZCZq-@*g]™ŠZgZŠZ™_ AJSUP Zzg JVM ÔJMM XÄgô~

�X»ôöÆ´z{¸´‡ð0*g‹V!Z8Ææ£.Þ0*gúãZN!*]~9~ƒð‰ZzgWäzZágc*4ZN[~Ì¸�°BäzZà0*g‹V!*ëŠ„z¤/âVƒDƒñ!Z8Ãgz1»Šú~™,ÏXZ¤/÷ZZ0+Zi{9ìÂÎZwZÞì�t(Ï0*g‹VZKñ�Š{ßg�w

Æ‚BH!Z8Ã°ZßZµgzuÃÏ?Zke~¬xWŠò0*gK»Sà_·¢zg~ìX@*�ëZy´‡ð0*gkVZzg¬xWŠò0*gKÐçn™DƒñZKF,¶]99‡ìgÄÃZzgËZq-§s:ÌYNX

WgZöZöZzg!Z8~Zq-Z(¡Šƒ}Šƒ}aZƒŠHìZzgWÒ{ñŠ~ÆZgŠ¤/Š�âjw¯c*Yg;ìZkÐÂµÅYCì�Z,ßÍVÅ',uZMZgÓ#ÖÐŠzg~(,fYñÏXZkUÐg*zmÅZq-5gzZe$Zzg_¬ZzgïÅZq-5Õ‡ì™ãec

@*�t¤/z{øg}»xWnX

Wy~Zq-!*]zZã™**¢zg~ì�yz*y~¾qw/g~gzZe$¢ƒCYg„ìZzgZk»'×{yz*ã¸xÃZ\ÒÆˆ

„ï[ìX/ge$»Zq-(,ZÃZ+{tƒ@*ì�Zk~¾qw»x™ä»Zq-ñµZzgZð!*¹gLìX]ZzgZMZgÃeìÃð�ÛŠÔÃð0*gKc*ÃðIÑHÌ%6™**eìpZk~/g~±Zð±äÅRö!*¹gSìXøgZZÝXtì�ëWiZŠ~ÆˆåË:Ë(Ï0*gKÆ–g}Æ¬Š~ƒ‰�Zzgtøg~ƒÐ(,~(Ï$zg~ìX».ŒÅt�0*Œ¨ù¦›âVäZ(g™g¿ìÔt9z‰Ü

]á]Ö×äŸmÇn† ì�$+sƒñqÑ]~Zk0*ŒÃ8$+wŠc*YñZzgZLW\6,ÔZKZ½ÎZzgZKZZãZzgZÜ¹¸]6,½z‚HYñXÅtKg]6,¢™ÆZKqªÃpŠ$+%Å§s6ZŠZx™**ecXZ¤/ëZLW\6,½z.™Dƒñ Ú³^e³ÏçÝujomÇn†æ]Ú^e^ÞËŠãÜ

ñzÕÆ‚B»x™DgìÂZvÅæŠZzg¾]Ì�áïqwgìÏZzgZ+qª~øgZwgz×Zzg@*[**uƒÇZzgëZkoÅyz

F,¹~ÌíZ#Ö»9gzwZŠZ™ÃÐX

73

Abbreviations:

AAP – Aam Aadmi Party

ADMK – All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam

AGP – Asom Gana Parishad

AIFB – All India Forward Block

AIMIM – All India Majlis e Ittehadul Muslimeen

AINRC – All India N.R. Congress

AITC – All India Trinamool Congress

AIUDF – All India United Democratic Front

AJSUP – AJSU Party

AOP – Aama Odisha Party

API – Ambedkarite Party of India

BBM – Bharipa Bahujan Mahasangh

BJD – Biju Janata Dal

BJP – Bhartiya Janata Party

BLSP – (Not Available)

BMUP – Bahujan Mukti Party

BOPF – Bodoland Peoples Front

BSP – Bahujan Samaj Party

BVA – Bahujan Vikas Aaghadi

BYS – Bharatiya Yuva Shakti

CPI – Communist Party of India

CPI(M) – Communist Party of India (Marxist)

CPI(ML)(L) – Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation

CSM – Chhattisgarh Swabhiman Manch

DMDK – Desiya Murpokku Dravida Kazhagam

DMK – Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam

GaAP – Gareeb Aadmi Party

GGP – Gondwana Ganatantra Party

HJCBL – Haryana Janhit Congress (BL)

INC – Indian National Congress

IND – Independent

INLD – Indian National Lok Dal

IUML – Indian Union Muslim League

IVD – Inqalab Vikas Dal

JaSPA – Jai Samaikyandhra Party

JBSP – Jai Bharat Samanta Party

JDP – Jharkhand Disom Party

JDS – Janata Dal (Secular)

JDU – Janata Dal (United)

JKNPP – Jammu & Kashmir National Panthers Party

JKP – Jharkhand Party

JMM – Jharkhand Mukti Morcha

74

JPC – Jammu & Kashmir People Conference

JVM – Jharkhand Vikas Morcha

KEC(M) – Kerala Congress (Mani)

LB – Lok Bharati

LJP – Lok Jan Shakti Party

LSP – Lok Satta Party

MCO – Marxist Co-ordination Committee

MDMK – Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam

MDPC – Manipur Democratic Peoples's Front

MNS – Maharashtra Navnirman Sena

NC – Jammu & Kashmir National Conference

NCP – Nationalist Congress Party

NOTA – None Of The Above

NPEP – National Peoples Party

NPF – Naga Peoples Front

NUZP – National Unionist Zamindara Party

OBC – Other Backward Class

OJM – Odisha Jan Morcha

PDP – Jammu & Kashmir Peoples Democratic Party

PECP – Peace Party of India

PMK – Pattali Makkal Katchi

PPA – Peoples Party of Arunachal

PPOI – Pyramid Party of India

PT – Puthiya Tamilagam

PWPI – Peasants & Workers Party of India

QED – Quami Ekta Dal

RADP – Rashtriya Deshaj Party

RJD – Rashtriya Janata Dal

RLD – Rashtriya Lok Dal

RLSP – Rashtriya Lok Samta Party

RPI – Republican Party of India

RPI(A) – Republican Party of India (Athvale)

RSP – Revolutionary Socialist Party of Kerala

RSP(B) – Revolutionary Socialist Party of Kerala (Bolshevik)

RSPS – Rashtriya Samaj Paksha

RSS – Rashtriya Swayemsevak Sangh

SAD – Shiromani Akali Dal

SC – Scheduled Castes

SDF – Sikkim Democratic Front

SDP – Socialistic Democratic Party

SDPI – Social Democratic Party of India

SJD – Socialist Janata (Democratic)

SJPR – Samajwadi Janata Party (Rashtriya)

SKM – Sikkim Krantikari Morcha

75

SP – Samajwadi Party

SP(I) – Socialist Party (India)

SS – Shiv Sena

ST – Scheduled Tribes

SUCI – Socialist Unity Centre of India

SWP – Swabhimani Paksha

TDP – Telugu Desam Party

TRS – Telengana Rashtra Samiti

UDP – United Democratic Party

VCK – Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi

WPI – Welfare Party of India

YSRCP – Yuvajana Sramika Raithu Congress Party

Note:

• All the data used in this study has been taken from the site of Election Commission of India.

http://eciresults.ap.nic.in/

• All the maps are used from the site www.mapsofindia.com.

• This study is intended for private circulation only, no commercial use or copyright violation is

intended.

CSG, Lok Sabha Polls 2014 - Updated

Documents

Transcript of CSG, Lok Sabha Polls 2014 - Updated