New Delhi, India – An impressive electoral victory unfolded on Saturday as an alliance spearheaded by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) decisively captured the elections in Maharashtra, India’s second-largest state. This victory comes as a significant rebound for the BJP, which experienced a stunning five-month setback during parliamentary elections, where it struggled against a formidable opposition.
Maharashtra, distinguished by its bustling capital Mumbai, stands as India’s economic titan, boasting an impressive gross domestic product of $510 billion. This figure surpasses that of any other Indian state and even eclipses the economic output of prominent global economies such as Norway and South Africa.
In a remarkable show of strength, the BJP-led coalition secured more than 230 of the 288 seats available in the state legislative assembly. Modi’s BJP alone triumphed in 132 seats, thereby granting the prime minister unfettered control over this crucial economic stronghold.
This substantial electoral victory signals a dramatic turnaround in Maharashtra, a state historically vital to India’s political landscape. Just five months prior, in June’s Lok Sabha elections, the BJP alliance faced a severe defeat at the hands of the opposition, whereby they managed to capture a meager 17 out of the 48 parliamentary seats. The Congress party, alongside its allies, claimed victory in 30 seats, marking a concerning trend for the ruling party.
In stark contrast, Saturday’s results left the opposition nursing its wounds. Although the Congress-led coalition succeeded in the tribal-dominated Jharkhand state after the BJP executed a vigorous anti-Muslim campaign, their performance in Maharashtra was lackluster, with the Congress only managing to secure 16 seats.
“[The] Congress failed to consolidate its position, squandering the momentum gained during the parliamentary elections,” remarked Sandeep Shastri, a political scientist affiliated with the Delhi-based Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS). “There is a significant disconnect between the party’s leadership and the grassroots.”
Despite the BJP’s remarkable success in Maharashtra, analysts suggest that the party’s win cannot merely be attributed to religious polarization. In fact, the party’s anti-Muslim rhetoric in Jharkhand may have backfired, leading to unexpected consequences.
Strategically, the BJP shifted the focus from Modi—whose visage has dominated party campaigns for over a decade—to prioritize local issues that resonate more with the electorate.
More women, less Modi
Maharashtra, with its population exceeding 125 million—almost double that of the United Kingdom—was a critical disappointment for the BJP following their loss in the parliamentary elections earlier this year. However, just five months later, the BJP delivered its strongest performance to date in the state election, while the Congress—historically entrenched in Maharashtra—suffered its most significant electoral losses.
Both the BJP and Congress formed pre-election coalitions with regional parties. Yet, the BJP emerged victorious in a staggering 132 out of the 149 seats it contended, marking an impressive success rate of 89 percent. Conversely, the Congress managed to win a mere 16 out of 101 contested seats, reflecting a dismal win rate of just 16 percent. The legislative assembly of Maharashtra consists of a total of 288 seats, with a majority requiring 145.
“The BJP demonstrated greater focus and effectively managed its coalition compared to the Congress,” Shastri noted. “In contrast, the opposition camp appeared divided, prioritizing power-sharing negotiations rather than cohesive campaign strategies.”
Analysts have commended the remarkable turnaround of the incumbent BJP-led “Mahayuti” alliance, attributing it to its strong emphasis on female-centric welfare initiatives. Notably, the “Laadki Bahin Yojna” is a noteworthy cash transfer scheme that allocates 1,500 rupees ($18) monthly to women aged 21-65.
A survey conducted by CSDS in October unveiled that a striking seven in 10 respondents reported direct benefits from the scheme. The government estimates that the scheme encompasses roughly 23.4 million beneficiaries within a state that is home to 46 million female voters.
“Our strategy involved downplaying Modi’s prominence in this election and instead, focusing on local issues by supporting candidates who resonate with the community,” revealed a politically-savvy strategist hired by the BJP for the Maharashtra polls, who wished to remain anonymous.
Additionally, the BJP leveraged support from its ideological foundation, the Sangh Parivar, an umbrella organization comprising a multitude of ultra-Hindu-nationalist groups.
“The Sangh network organized thousands of grassroots meetings with women and influential leaders, employing a door-to-door outreach strategy throughout Maharashtra,” stated Sriraj Nair, a senior spokesperson for the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), which operates under the Sangh umbrella.
“We are a robust cadre-based organization with a presence in every village. Our collective efforts were pivotal in recovering from the electoral losses the BJP experienced in the national elections,” Nair elaborated.
Shastri concurred, asserting that Sangh organizations ran “well-oiled campaigns” that played a “crucial role” in propelling the BJP’s electoral success.
Where polarisation backfired
The BJP, however, faced defeat in Jharkhand, home to 32 million people.
In Jharkhand, the ruling Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM)-led government successfully implemented a women-centric cash transfer initiative, granting 1,000 rupees ($12) monthly to women aged 18-25, thereby reaching nearly 5.2 million women in the lead-up to the polls. The state is comprised of 12.8 million female voters.
“At a glance, it appears that the incumbent government’s welfare initiatives in both states significantly contributed to the electoral victories of ideologically opposing parties,” Rahul Verma, a fellow at the Centre for Policy Research (CPR), observed. “However, this only partially explains the dynamic, as numerous factors played a role.”
In January, national investigative authorities arrested Jharkhand’s chief minister Hemant Soren, widely recognized as a leading figure among India’s tribal leaders, on corruption allegations. Soren has consistently denied the charges, asserting that they signify a politically motivated vendetta against him by the BJP.
After being released on bail following six months of incarceration, he campaigned vigorously before the elections. Now, he is poised to reclaim the position of chief minister, following his alliance’s majority win in the state elections.
The JMM-led alliance garnered substantial support from the state’s tribal communities, which constitute 26 percent of the population, as well as 14.5 percent of Muslim voters. Meanwhile, the BJP recruited Himanta Biswa Sarma, a polarizing Hindu nationalist figure from northeastern India, to spearhead its campaign in Jharkhand. The BJP’s campaign employed divisive rhetoric portraying Muslims as “Bangladeshis” and “Rohingya outsiders,” even launching an Islamophobic advertisement that had to be withdrawn on election authority orders.
“The campaign’s spread of hatred proved counterproductive,” noted Minakshi Munda, an assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Kolhan in Jharkhand, indicating that the tribal communities perceived the BJP as “outsiders.”
Voting patterns suggested that Jharkhand’s tribal communities sought to “exclude the BJP from power … to preserve the [state’s] tribal identity,” Munda elaborated.
Verma agreed, stating that the BJP’s campaign inadvertently united voters behind the JMM-led coalition.
A decimated Congress
Simultaneously, the Congress party finds itself in turmoil following the recent election results—this follows earlier disappointments in two other elections held in Haryana and Indian-administered Kashmir.
The current situation suggests that the Congress is grappling with “formulating a strategy for its revival,” according to Verma.
Both Verma and Shastri characterized the Congress’s approach as “piggybacking” on its regional allies to counter the BJP. However, as its own standing diminishes, “the Congress now finds it increasingly challenging to negotiate effectively with these regional parties,” Verma added.
With two crucial states, Delhi and Bihar, slated for elections in the near future, the political landscape has shifted significantly since earlier this year.
The BJP has rebounded, emerging from losses in the parliamentary elections with renewed vigor, while the once-rising opposition finds itself once again scrambling for relevance.
What were the key demographic factors that contributed to the BJP’s victory in Maharashtra compared to their defeat in Jharkhand?
**Interviewer:** Thank you for joining us today to discuss the recent electoral outcomes in India, particularly in Maharashtra and Jharkhand. Could you begin by summarizing the notable wins and losses for the BJP in these states?
**Guest:** Thank you for having me. The BJP experienced a significant electoral rebound in Maharashtra, winning over 230 of the 288 seats in the state legislative assembly, with the BJP itself securing 132 seats. This victory is crucial, especially since just five months prior, they faced a serious defeat in the parliamentary elections. Conversely, in Jharkhand, the BJP faced defeat, largely influenced by the successful women-centric welfare initiatives of the incumbent Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) government, which reached millions of women voters.
**Interviewer:** What specific strategies did the BJP employ in Maharashtra that contributed to their victory?
**Guest:** The BJP shifted its strategy from showcasing Prime Minister Modi to focusing more on local issues that resonated with voters. They implemented female-centric welfare initiatives, such as the “Laadki Bahin Yojna,” which provided monthly cash transfers to women. This approach was pivotal, especially since a recent survey indicated that a significant portion of the electorate directly benefitted from these programs. Additionally, the organization leveraged grassroots campaigns through the Sangh Parivar, which maintained a strong presence in local communities.
**Interviewer:** So, it seems women’s issues were a focal point. Can you elaborate on that?
**Guest:** Absolutely. In Maharashtra, women voters form a considerable demographic, and initiatives aimed at them not only attracted their support but also showcased the ruling party’s commitment to addressing their needs. The success of the ”Laadki Bahin Yojna” in drawing support exemplifies how welfare schemes can effectively mobilize voter bases. In contrast, in Jharkhand, the JMM’s cash transfer program for younger women became a decisive factor in their victory, indicating that addressing women’s issues resonates across various voter demographics.
**Interviewer:** It sounds like welfare schemes played a crucial role in both states. What about the BJP’s campaign tactics in Jharkhand? Why did those backfire?
**Guest:** The BJP’s campaign in Jharkhand led by Himanta Biswa Sarma—who is a polarizing figure—focused on religious nationalism, particularly anti-Muslim rhetoric. This strategy alienated significant portions of the electorate, particularly tribal communities and Muslim voters, who collectively constitute a substantial voting bloc. The JMM capitalized on this by presenting itself as a more inclusive alternative, promoting their welfare initiatives that directly benefitted these groups.
**Interviewer:** Lastly, what are the broader implications of these elections for the future of Indian politics?
**Guest:** These elections illustrate the complexities of voter dynamics in India. The contrasting fates of the BJP in Maharashtra versus Jharkhand demonstrate that welfare initiatives and local issues can have profound impacts on electoral outcomes. While the BJP remains a formidable political force, especially with their successes in Maharashtra, the defeats in Jharkhand signal that ideological polarization may not always yield victories. Moving forward, parties will need to carefully balance their national narratives with local needs to maintain their electoral advantages.