Indian Election Results Reaction
Although I stayed up most of the night watching the results stream in and following the chatter on Twitter and blogs, I’ll freely admit that I’m less aware of the political situation in India than of the United States (let the accusations of desh drohi begin). So feel free to take my thoughts and opinions with a grain of salt. If you notice the seat share in this results, the BJP-led NDA alliance lost more or less 10-12 seats but the Congress gained more than 50-60. Where did these gains come from? The Left, BSP, and RJD lost heavily and Congress seemed to luck out on the choices it made regarding its pre-poll alliances. Rahul Gandhi seemed to emerge like a potential leader especially in Uttar Pradesh where the fortunes of the party made a comeback after a hiatus of nearly 20 years. Naveen Patnaik leaving the NDA and Varun Gandhi’s tantrums popped BJP’s bubble so predictions of its rise to power were unrealistically optimistic.
Manmohan Singh does not actually come off as an inspirational leader but only after Indira Gandhi in 1971 has a Prime Minister been re-elected to another term. Although the victory cannot be completely attributed to him, his candidature as a Prime Minister did no harm to UPA just as Advani (or Modi) candidature did to the NDA. I continue to oppose the route Manmohan Singh will take to the Parliament (he did not contest a Lok Sabha election) but the laws allow him to be appointed to the post. The least we can expect of our politicians, ministers, and Prime Ministers however corrupt or criminal they may be, is that they be elected not selected or anointed to the Parliament. In fact, Sonia Gandhi has more of a right to be a Prime Minister given her influence and power within the Congress party than her appointee. Political skills and governing ability are two essential qualifications needed in any politician and only in this case, has one of them been optional. Given the immense trust shown by Sonia Gandhi and the Congress party in Manmohan Singh, I’m sure the Indian voters would have appreciated the same confidence in voting for their top leader.
But at the end of the day, if the Congress and NDA continue on their reforms started in 1991, I wouldn’t complain too much. The reduced power of the Left is reason enough to feel optimistic. But if the Congress feels tempted to usher in their socialist policies that have failed India post-Independence then I hope Indian voters will not be as unforgiving.
Security, I’m told does not poll well and economic development is all that Indian voters care about which if true is a disturbing thought. I feel national security is one of the primary responsibilities of a government that no private entity can or should provide. So when we claim that security is not at the top of the voter’s list of criteria for voting then they may have simply lost trust and confidence in the government to provide them with basic security and it is each man for himself. If tomorrow, there are bomb blasts in another Mumbai train then all you can do is pray that none of your friends or family were in that train because you know the government could care less because voters don’t consider it an important issue. I just wonder at what point would we deem it important to demand security rights or do we have to wait on another attack on the Parliament for the government to take our internal security seriously? I hope Manmohan Singh has a plan for his next five years if not the coming hundred days, as he promised.
Related Posts
- Indian Elections ’09 on Twitter
- Indian Elections Color Palette
- India’s Vulnerable Electronic Voting Machines



I saw one factual error and did not read rest of the post -
“only after Indira Gandhi in 1971 has a Prime Minister been re-elected to another term.”
It is “Nehru” if you mean “full term”.
1 year ago replyhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9ziq2VTkhk
I don’t mean full-term and considering Indira called the elections early, it doesn’t matter much because re-election is what matters here, full-term or not.
1 year ago reply