Articles
The AAP had nothing new to offer to the middle class, and the BJP struck their emotions with a timely income tax rebate announcement in the union budget 2025.
Delhi election results have weakened the already weak opposition. The loss of Aravind Kejriwal in his constituency shows how the electorate was determined this time. The following are the key takeaways from the Delhi elections.
1. Voters are demanding and aspirational. Political parties must reinvent their offerings and promises and can’t depend on previous years’ deliveries. Kejriwal 2.0 depended on Kejriwal 1.0, but in his 3.0 attempt, he still depended on 1.0 as 2.0 has no new deliveries. This vindicates again what happened to the BJP in the 2024 elections. The blip in BJP’s prospects in the 2024 elections is that Modi, in his 3.0 attempt, had a weak 2.0 but a very strong 1.0. This means the political parties must be prudent in crafting 2.0, and their deliveries are better than 1.0 while going for a 3.0 attempt. It would be interesting to study Mamata’s 3.0 innings in this context. Is the overall economic well-being of the state the differentiating factor here?
2. In high median per capita income states, the middle class is not against the welfare and support of the poor in society. At the same time, they are equally demanding what they get in the process. AAP’s voter base in low-income groups and classes is still not eroded much, but the middle class has voted for BJP. The AAP had nothing new to offer to the middle class, and the BJP struck their emotions with a timely income tax rebate announcement in the union budget 2025. BJP understands the connection they should have with the middle-class voters, reiterated by 2024 experience. This is going to be an exciting proposition in the coming years. Starting from the Himachal Pradesh state assembly elections in 2022, following the AAP model in Delhi, the Congress party won many states providing the same template. The middle class would be happy in 1.0, and they may give one more term in case of a robust and able leadership, but thereafter, it depends on how they reinvent and imagine the aspirations of the middle class during 2.0.
3. One cannot keep citing the fight between the state government and the Governor/LG or the Central government for the delays or inactions. This will not satisfy the voters after a point. They will start thinking about alternatives or give a strong message by choosing an alternative. Voters, mainly middle-class voters, are practical and very smart in their thinking. In the case of 1.0 to 3.0, they would decide what will protect their interests. In electoral politics, the middle class needs to be grateful to the ruling class for what they have done for them in the past; instead, they are bothered about the contemporary realities protecting their interests.
The Delhi elections presented competitive electoral politics in an Indian democracy of this age. They showed how challenging it could be for ideas and principles. It has been a contest of ten years of being apolitical to non-political to political vs. rooted political ideologies and established political practices. In the end, the thin line drawn to separate the operators was erased by the challenges in the existing political order in Indian electioneering, and the voters had their last laugh.
D Dhanuraj is the Chairman at the Centre for Public Policy Research, Kochi.
Views expressed by the authors are personal and need not reflect or represent the views of the Centre for Public Policy Research.
Dr Dhanuraj is the Chairman of CPPR. His core areas of expertise are in international relations, urbanisation, urban transport & infrastructure, education, health, livelihood, law, and election analysis. He can be contacted by email at [email protected] or on Twitter @dhanuraj.
