I have followed and written about elections for the last 30 years. I have had my glorious successes (Lalu Yadav’s win in 2015, Narendra Modi’s win in 2019) and inglorious failures (Hillary Clinton’s loss in 2016 and the BJP’s “loss” in 2024). But never before has a forecast so deeply conflicted me.
This week I toured West Bengal (along with other self-confessed election junkies led by Ruchir Sharma), and my most enjoyable moment was a visit to Presidency College, now Presidency University. But that is getting ahead of the story. Throughout my career, I have put a larger emphasis on economic variables for forecasting. Term it the consistency of little minds or any such rejection phrase, but the fact remains that welfare improvement (proxied by state GDP per capita) remains by far the best predictor of winning elections.
As far as economic fortunes go, no one deserves the fate of West Bengal. The culturally rich state was also rich in wealth and industry. Its per capita income (relative to all India) was 113.8 in 1950, which slipped to 90.3 per cent in 1976, the year before the Marxist revolution — an annual decline of 0.9 per cent per annum. Relative income in 2010 was 80.8 per cent; a CPM degradation at -0.3 per cent per annum. However, the worst came with Mamata Banerjee’s arrival — the decline in the last 13 years (2011-2024) accelerated to -1 per cent per annum. Today, per capita income in West Bengal is just 70.3 per cent of the average big-state income. On another occasion, we will compare this decline to other worst-performing states in India and countries in the world. For the moment, note that this macro income performance is the worst India has seen for any state.
But first, the phrase of the century, in India and across the world, nari shakti. The overwhelming evidence is that the nari shakti vote in West Bengal was particularly ill-timed and ill-thought. Why? Because the BJP is fighting Banerjee, the undisputed king and queen of nari shakti. Just look at the electoral evidence. This is an area where Banerjee has done particularly well. In the 2021 Assembly elections, the BJP fielded 57 women candidates, and only won five (8.8 per cent) won. Banerjee’s party — the All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) – fielded seven fewer female candidates than the BJP, but AITC women won 80 per cent (40) of the contested seats.
Preliminary analysis of all election data shows that Trinamool consistently leads all major parties in women’s representation. It is a moot question whether nari shakti among politicians translates into higher nari shakti among the people. It likely does. Parenthetically, what Banerjee has done is what is recommended for all political parties in India — allow for greater representation of women in political arenas at all levels of governance. That is true nari shakti rather than one forced through yet another reservation.
Improvements in female labour force participation (FLFPR) is normally a healthy sign for an economy. But it can be a double-edged indicator. Poverty also induces a higher participation rate, and as we have seen, West Bengal has consistently become poorer. With that caveat, West Bengal FLFPR rates show a healthy increase. For 15-64 year olds, weekly status, the FLFPR increased from 21.7 per cent in 2011-12 to 35.3 per cent in 2024-5. This increase of 14 percentage points (ppt) is average, not exceptional. In Assam, the increase was 26 ppt, Bihar 18 ppt, Jammu and Kashmir 21 ppt, Odisha and Madhya Pradesh 17 ppt.
If Banerjee wins this election, she will join a very rare group of politicians. A politician winning four-plus consecutive state elections as chief minister has happened in two large states — West Bengal and Odisha — making it one of the rarest achievements in Indian electoral history. No chief minister in other major states like UP, Maharashtra, Bihar, Tamil Nadu, or Madhya Pradesh has achieved this, as those states have consistently seen alternating governments. Incidentally, the statistical record suggests that if Banerjee wins in 2026, she will likely win in 2031.
The reason for my conflicted thinking should be abundantly clear — this is a close election. Or was? A record turn-out helps the challenger, but the discontent induced by the SIR could also help the incumbent. All things considered, in the beginning of the week I believed Banerjee would win, by heavily reduced margins. Now, with this greater-than-90 per cent turnout (where else besides Russia does one obtain such turnout?) and economic determinants winning, the accelerated record pace of de-development in West Bengal under Banerjee suggests that the BJP will likely hold the edge. But beware, in a close two-way election, small differences in aggregate vote share can mean a larger than thin victory.
If the BJP wins, the question will be, can it win the economy? Private investment has worsened considerably under the BJP (at a record pace). Aggregate investment has been held at 32 per cent due to high public investment. Investments and growth need to increase by a lot for Viksit Bharat to be credible. A further downside to a BJP win is that the already complacent party will become further entrenched in satisfaction. A good upside will be if the BJP learns to introspect on all aspects of its 12-year reign. Along with the Bengal economy, India can also recover to be on the path of Viksit Bharat.
Bhalla is chairperson of the Technical Expert Group for the first official Household Income Survey for India. Views are personal