Café discussions, pre-poll surveys and conventional wisdom all put him ahead in the race to Mandate 2009. We discuss five reasons why Y S Rajasekhara Reddy is being seen as the strongest incumbent to have donned poll gear in AP since the days of one-party rule in the 1970s.
Two reputed polling organizations, CSDS for CNN-IBN and Nielsen-ORG for NTV, have forecast a Congress victory in the upcoming election. That must make Y S Rajasekhara Reddy one of the few AP chief ministers to be strongly tipped to return to power. We look at five reasons why YSR is presently the frontrunner in this race.
1) Incumbency is his advantage
YSR is going into this election on the strength of a staggering array of welfare and development projects, be it the audacious Jalayagnam, the very necessary Pavala Vaddi or the stubbornly populist free power. Throughout his term, in the face of right-wing alarm, YSR never wavered in his commitment to welfarism, going to the extent of using innovative methods to raise funds for Jalayagnam.
YSR used his incumbency well where Chandrababu Naidu did not. Sticking to a rural-agrarian vision, YSR trained his focus on winning the votes of people who vote whereas Chandrababu Naidu wooed voters who do not. Where Naidu was lulled by the hosannas of the World Bank, YSR gave wide berth to the World Economic Forum.
Does welfarism win votes? If it didn’t, why is Chandrababu Naidu joining the competition, perhaps too late and with too little?
Two reputed polling organizations, CSDS for CNN-IBN and Nielsen-ORG for NTV, have forecast a Congress victory in the upcoming election. That must make Y S Rajasekhara Reddy one of the few AP chief ministers to be strongly tipped to return to power. We look at five reasons why YSR is presently the frontrunner in this race.
1) Incumbency is his advantage
YSR is going into this election on the strength of a staggering array of welfare and development projects, be it the audacious Jalayagnam, the very necessary Pavala Vaddi or the stubbornly populist free power. Throughout his term, in the face of right-wing alarm, YSR never wavered in his commitment to welfarism, going to the extent of using innovative methods to raise funds for Jalayagnam.
YSR used his incumbency well where Chandrababu Naidu did not. Sticking to a rural-agrarian vision, YSR trained his focus on winning the votes of people who vote whereas Chandrababu Naidu wooed voters who do not. Where Naidu was lulled by the hosannas of the World Bank, YSR gave wide berth to the World Economic Forum.
Does welfarism win votes? If it didn’t, why is Chandrababu Naidu joining the competition, perhaps too late and with too little?
2) The waning of naxalism in AP
Ever since the rise of the naxalites in rural AP, they have played a decisive role in unseating several incumbents – in 1989, 1994, and 2004. The naxalites have been traditionally hostile to all ruling parties irrespective of ideology, but the difference this time is that they seem to be in no position to – or perhaps reluctant – to scuttle the chances of the chief minister. The state has come a long way since the days when police-naxalite warfare was front page news. Not any more. Chandrababu Naidu suffered at the hustings in 2004 because he was menaced by the naxalites. YSR is ahead because he has no such menace to contend with.
3) The opposition is divided
This may be a surprising thing to say after the formation of the Mahakutami but the coalition partners in it really are at sixes and sevens on Telangana. One party, the TRS, is squarely separatist; another, the TDP, is half this and half that; a third, the CPM, is unapologetically against it; and the fourth, CPI, is inconsequential anyway.
Instead of going with coherence, the Mahakutami is approaching the Telangana voter with confusion in its own mind. Moreover, the TDP’s late dalliance with separatism is likely to win it no support in coastal Andhra and certainly not in Rayalaseema.
Chiranjeevi
While the Mahakutami bills itself as a united front against the Congress, it isn’t. There’s still the Praja Rajyam out on a limb out there. Chiranjeevi’s charisma may not be strong enough to generate an NTR-like wave in all of AP, but he still can split the anti-Congress vote enough to put paid to the best laid plans of the Mahakutami.
Moreover, Chiranjeevi is trying to stitch together a coalition of middle-castes, which, until now, have been traditional supporters of the TDP. Migration of such groups to a Chiranjeevi coalition can only be at the cost of the TDP. Chandrababu Naidu knows this. Therefore, his daily cussing against the Megastar.
4) YSR is the agenda-setter
Finally, it’s an electoral truism that the vote will go to that leader or party who sets the agenda. Barack Obama seized the agenda in the US election and he won it. YSR set the agenda in 2004 and he won. The UPA stole the agenda from the BJP in 2004, and they won.
But now in 2009, the TDP does not act but only reacts to what the Congress does. Until the free colour TV scheme, the TDP had only been playing catch-up politics, coming up with increments on the Congress’ poll promises and therefore being not very convincing. That’s not the elections are won.
Ever since the rise of the naxalites in rural AP, they have played a decisive role in unseating several incumbents – in 1989, 1994, and 2004. The naxalites have been traditionally hostile to all ruling parties irrespective of ideology, but the difference this time is that they seem to be in no position to – or perhaps reluctant – to scuttle the chances of the chief minister. The state has come a long way since the days when police-naxalite warfare was front page news. Not any more. Chandrababu Naidu suffered at the hustings in 2004 because he was menaced by the naxalites. YSR is ahead because he has no such menace to contend with.
3) The opposition is divided
This may be a surprising thing to say after the formation of the Mahakutami but the coalition partners in it really are at sixes and sevens on Telangana. One party, the TRS, is squarely separatist; another, the TDP, is half this and half that; a third, the CPM, is unapologetically against it; and the fourth, CPI, is inconsequential anyway.
Instead of going with coherence, the Mahakutami is approaching the Telangana voter with confusion in its own mind. Moreover, the TDP’s late dalliance with separatism is likely to win it no support in coastal Andhra and certainly not in Rayalaseema.
Chiranjeevi
While the Mahakutami bills itself as a united front against the Congress, it isn’t. There’s still the Praja Rajyam out on a limb out there. Chiranjeevi’s charisma may not be strong enough to generate an NTR-like wave in all of AP, but he still can split the anti-Congress vote enough to put paid to the best laid plans of the Mahakutami.
Moreover, Chiranjeevi is trying to stitch together a coalition of middle-castes, which, until now, have been traditional supporters of the TDP. Migration of such groups to a Chiranjeevi coalition can only be at the cost of the TDP. Chandrababu Naidu knows this. Therefore, his daily cussing against the Megastar.
4) YSR is the agenda-setter
Finally, it’s an electoral truism that the vote will go to that leader or party who sets the agenda. Barack Obama seized the agenda in the US election and he won it. YSR set the agenda in 2004 and he won. The UPA stole the agenda from the BJP in 2004, and they won.
But now in 2009, the TDP does not act but only reacts to what the Congress does. Until the free colour TV scheme, the TDP had only been playing catch-up politics, coming up with increments on the Congress’ poll promises and therefore being not very convincing. That’s not the elections are won.
The write ups on AP politics are truly interesting especially for someone who is new to electoral politics in the state
ReplyDelete