State elections: What is happening?

-
Recent state election results talk less about any wave and more about the framework of the Indian democracy. In the representative parliamentary democracy, seat numbers matter more. Therefore it becomes important to distribute vote share to maximize the winning seats. In Rajasthan, the winning party wins more seats by managing the vote shares.


Graph no.1: Year wise difference between seat share and the vote share of parties winning seats in Rajasthan (Data sources: Election Commission of India)

All small parties hold more vote share but fail to convert it into seats. That shows the importance of the small parties in regional parties. Managing the vote share of small share will definitely help the big state as well as national parties to win more seats.

Graph no.2: Year wise difference between seat share and the vote share of BJP and Congress in Rajasthan (Data sources: Election Commission of India)

Congress party managed the vote share well in 1998, 2008 and 2018. Remember in these years, Congress has formed the government.
On the other hand, BJP managed the vote share fairly in 2003 and 2013. In these years, BJP formed the government.
This shows the importance of the formation of the constituencies for election. If constituencies are formed where the votes are concentrated then it will help the concerned party to manage the vote share easily. This also points out the voter registration in particular constituency. 

Graph no.3: Vote share in Rajasthan (Data source: Election Commission of India)

The vote share of BJP in 2013 was very high. This can be viewed as the impact of the Modi wave. Except for 2013, the vote share of BJP and Congress is almost the same. The government forming party manage these vote share pretty well and that’s why the difference in the seats is generated.

For Madhya Pradesh, recent election result shows that parties are managing their vote share very well. 

Graph no.4: Year wise difference between seat share and the vote share of parties winning seats in Madhya Pradesh (Data sources: Election Commission of India)

The difference is reducing a for National big parties but for small parties, it still negative which means small parties are unable to convert the vote share into the seat share.



Graph no.5: Year wise difference between seat share and vote share of BJP and Congress in Madhya Pradesh (Data sources: Election Commission of India)

In 1998, Congress formed the government in Madhya Pradesh. In 1998 the difference between seat share and vote share is positive and more than the BJP but after 1998, it became negative in 2003 and 2008 while the difference is positive for BJP. And in 2018, the difference is more positive for Congress. It means Madhya Pradesh, BJP managed their vote share extremely well. The difference between seat share and vote share is very high in 2003 and 2008. Again the party which manage the vote share properly forms the government.


 Graph no.5: Vote share in Madhya Pradesh (Data source: Election Commission of India)

It is true that the vote share of BJP in Madhya Pradesh is really high in 2003 and 2008 and 2013. But the difference in the seat share and vote share is also high. The high vote share is converted into the higher seat share. This shows that the BJP had really good control in Madhya Pradesh. But recent election result tells that the control of BJP over the Madhya Pradesh is declined rapidly.


Graph no.7: The disproportional index shows the degree of divergence of seats from the vote shares in Rajasthan. (Data source: Author uses the date from Election Commission of India to calculate the disproportional index)

\
Graph no.8: The disproportional index shows the degree of divergence of seats from the vote shares in Madhya Pradesh. (Data source: Author uses the date from Election Commission of India to calculate the disproportional index).

This indicator lies between 0 and 1. If it is 0 then vote share is completely converted into the seat share But if it is one then it shows that even it is a democracy, the political system is behaving like the autocracy.
This indicator is actually reducing for both states that mean the difference between vote share and seat share for winning parties is declining which shows that the winning parties are gradually managing their vote share properly.The parties which are unable to win the seats or are winning few seats are not able to manage their vote shares. 
Therefore now for national and big parties if they want to be there in power, they can’t ignore the vote share of the small parties because the small parties are unable to manage their vote share. Capturing their vote share or diverting their vote share will definitely help the parties. `

टिप्पण्या

टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा

या ब्लॉगवरील लोकप्रिय पोस्ट

My Experience with hallucinations and schizophrenia-like-symptoms

-
इमेज
I have been experiencing the schizophrenia-like-symptoms for the last 4-5 years While I was in Pune, these symptoms, including hallucinations, became more intense. And then struggle for survival of the fittest started which was transformative that has shaped my perspective on life, instilled resilience within me, and granted me valuable insights into the complexities of the human mind. From the initial confusion and fear to embracing self-acceptance and finding purpose, my experience has been a remarkable exploration of personal growth and self-discovery. My encounter with this phenomenon commenced with a tumultuous prelude of confusion and disarray. It all started with hallucinations, where I would see a young child, around 4 to 5 years old, begging for food. These hallucinations triggered strange and intrusive thoughts, distorting my perception of reality and causing intense paranoia. Soon after, I began hearing voices that made it increasingly difficult to differentiate between wh
अधिक वाचा

Geographic Dispersion of votes and income dynamics behind Congress-BJP seats

-
इमेज
The recent state assembly elections in India provides a deep insight into the evolving political landscape particularly about First Past The Post (FPTP) electoral system. Under the FPTP system, the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins the election which can fail to translate popular votes into proportional representation, resulting in votes that don't always carry the weight they should. This discrepancy arises due to the winner-takes-all approach, where the candidate with the most votes in a particular constituency win, irrespective of whether they secure an absolute majority or not. As a consequence, a candidate can win a seat by only having a plurality of votes (more than any other single candidate but not necessarily a majority of all votes cast), while the votes cast for other candidates essentially go unrepresented. This leads to a scenario where a significant portion of the population might not see their voices reflected in the government they get, creating w
अधिक वाचा

Reevaluating Economic Ambitions: Deciphering the Flawed Proportions of the 5 trillion Dollar Economy

-
इमेज
Economists advocating for economic growth put forth two crucial arguments. First, they posit that growth possesses a trickle-down mechanism whereby even if the benefits of growth initially accrue to the upper echelons of income, they ultimately extend to the impoverished segments of society. Second, in instances where this trickle-down process fails to materialize, the surplus generated from economic growth can be equitably reallocated through welfare initiatives. An exemplar of such a welfare scheme is the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), which was enacted in 2006. During this period, India experienced a period of robust economic expansion. However, this prompts the question of whether the government should solely target a specific income threshold. In the 2000s, the governmental objectives were not confined to attaining a predetermined income level but were instead oriented towards cultivating sustainable and balanced economic growth that concurrent
अधिक वाचा