Predictions are always a dangerous game. But over at least two decades of watching Indian elections, I have come to believe in certain “laws” regarding voting behavior.

For example, one of my firm beliefs is that no election in one state ever influences an election in another state. So, all the talk of “momentum” in state elections is simply bogus. State elections are very strongly local. In December 2012, even as Modi mania was beginning to take off, Himachal Pradesh still went its own way and brought Congress back to power. Modi’s big third win in Gujarat did absolutely nothing for BJP fortunes in Karnataka in 2013.

And when Modi wave was picking up everywhere, BJP swept Madhya Pradesh but barely limped past the finish line in Chhattisgarh. Ultimately people do what they want for their own state; they might have some attitude changes looking at other verdicts in other states, but it does not affect their voting choices on election day.

Another law that I firmly believe in is what I like to call the “Four Year Law.” Basically voters judge a government by its first four years of work. If they are unhappy at the end of four years and anti-incumbency has set in, nothing will work against it.

Many governments have tried last minute gambits to win elections. I would be eager to know if there is a single example of these tricks working with the electorate.

The biggest example was when the Congress hurriedly announced the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh somewhere in 2013. At that time, there was genuine fear among the right wing that the Congress might get a thumbs up from the grateful people of Telangana. Big FAIL.

There were several other attempts the Congress made that could have been game changers had they come earlier in the UPA-II term. For example, the Food Security Bill. There was this big dramatic scene of a visibly unwell Sonia Gandhi, barely able to stand or speak, sustaining herself on will power on the floor of Parliament because she has the dream of a “hunger free India.”

Powerful image you have to admit. But by then it was already August of 2013, well beyond the four year limit. So no luck for the Congress there.

Things in the North East are not so well known, but I will give you an example from late 2016 and early 2017. The Congress CM of Manipur created a bunch of new districts, a strategic attempt to set the state on fire with Naga vs Meetei tribal rivalry. The state duly burned for two whole months. But the BJP still won.

The BJP itself has often been on the wrong side of the same four year law. One old example I will give you is that of Rajnath Singh, then CM of Uttar Pradesh, annoucing reservation for “extreme backwards” right before the election of 2002. People laughed it off. The BJP came third in the state election that year.

You could put Akhilesh into the same category. After four years of misrule, Mulayam and Akhilesh stage a big drama of son revolting against his father. There was big talk of how Akhilesh had set off a wave in his favor and cast away all the incumbency burden along with uncle Shivpal Yadav. For weeks, the war in the Yadav family and the praise of young rebel Akhilesh dominated the news cycle. The SP couldn’t fool anyone with their wishful thinking.

Down south, Siddaramaiah is going to fall to exactly the same four year rule. He is enthused right now, thinking that he has pulled off some sort of master stroke. There’s no question of it. Voters cannot be fooled by a decision made with one month to go before the election.

It’s over for Siddaramaiah already. If anything, this last minute decision shows his despair. He can announce any quota, or any reservation or any special status he wants now. Many governments, in their last few months of power, in desperate times have announced many such quotas. You know the Congress announced 5% reservation for Marathas just before Maharashtra polls in 2014. Nothing came of it. If anything, panicked governments that announce reservations a few days before polls have a near 100% record of losing.

The BJP so far has played the Lingayat issue exactly the way it should be played. One of the advantages of being in the opposition is that you can afford to take a vague stand on any issue. I don’t think Chandrababu Naidu ever cleared his position on the division of Andhra Pradesh, but voters forgave him for it. Because he was in the opposition.

On a side note, perhaps Naidu himself is a believer in my “four year law.” Observe how he raised the noise over special status with around 14 months to go for the election, staying just within the four year limit 🙂

The real headache for the BJP on the Lingayat issue is what happens after the election and BJP comes to power. Once again, the Congress has sowed a divide and run away, leaving the BJP to bear the brunt of the flames.