What’s the message of the verdicts?

To all parties: Anti-incumbency is not an iron law of nature. Incumbency can be a good thing and people will turn out in large numbers to vote for a party in government again if it is seen to have delivered.

To BJP: Party organisation and party leadership have to be in sync. In MP, the party changed almost a third of its MLAs in a repeat of Gujarat while in Delhi it did not.

In Chouhan and Raman Singh, it had two strong faces but in Delhi, it fielded V K Malhotra who was beyond his use-by date. In Rajasthan, it had a dynamic face in Vasundhara but the party tied her hands down.

Fear may not sell in the old ways with the voter anymore. The low-key Chouhan focused on bijli-sadak-paani issues even when national leaders of his own party were trying to change the subject to the arrest of Sadhvi Pragya Singh.

Modi’s rallies accusing the UPA of demoralising the Army — in the Malegaon probe — and his constant terror refrain invoked the law of diminishing returns.

To Congress: Imposing leaders from the “high command” doesn’t help. If a Central scheme — like NREGA — works well, voters tend to reward the state government which executes it.

Congress organisation in MP was in a shambles so a galaxy of leaders from Delhi could make little difference.

In Rajasthan, it won but even a Vasundhara, wracked by inner-party war, could get as many as 78 seats.

... contd.