Voter turnout and their effects in deciding electoral outcomes has been a subject of much psephological research all over the world. In the US , a very recently published study used an instrumental variables approach to re-examine the Partisan Effects and Two-Effects Hypotheses— standard explanations for how turnout affects partisan outcomes. They also provided an empirical test of an Anti-Incumbency Hypothesis and propose a Volatility Hypothesis, which argues that high turnout produces electoral consequences that are systematically less predictable. Using county-level data from the 1948-2000 U.S. presidential elections, they concluded that support for each of these hypotheses and that previous research may have underestimated the magnitude and range of implications of variation in voter turnout.
The recent record voter turnouts in the assembly elections in 4 states and 1 union territory in the country have re-kindled this debate. In Kerala Left sympathizers have come up with the theory of the VS factor is real and in play through analysis of voting pattern distribution and concluded that it can change the outcome in the favour of the Left. This theory was brought to my notice today by one of the readers of this blog who goes by the name of BT, who provided some useful and interesting links.
So what's the VS Factor?
Plagued by back-to-back defeats starting from the Lok Sabha 2009, to the more recent local body elections, the Kerala Left, just as their West Bengal comrades were a highly demoralized lot. A spate of developments to the run up to the elections however brought them out of coma, and suddenly invigorated them to instill the Left campaign a sudden spirit of hopefulness and liveliness that surprised both political commenters and their opponents alike.
It all started with a sex scandal which has been dismissed by the courts but brought back to life when the brother-in-law of the accused, a member of the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML), a constituent of the UDF spilled the beans that he bribed a judge to get a favourable verdict for the accused. The Left government then succeeded in expanding the list of accused in the Palmolein Import case to include Oommen Chandy, the Congress Chief Minister candidate if they win. Then Kerala Congress (B) Mr. Balakrishna Pillai was convicted by the SC for 1-year rigorous imprisonment in the Edamalayar graft case for the loss caused to the state exchequer as electricity minister.
In all these developments, the VS (Achuthanandan - CM of Kerala) hand had played a big role while coming at a time the UPA government was facing flak for being corrupt; created all the right ingredients for VS to emerge with an image as a crusader against corruption. Additionally, his image really got a big boost, when he emerged a martyr when his party's central leadership wanted to deprive him of a party ticket but were forced to retract their decision, bowing to pressures from the party's rank and file in Kerala. His elevated personal stature plus his oratory skills billed him the biggest draw of the elections, even relegating Sonia and Rahul Gandhi to second best. This almost surreal image was billed by the Left as the VS Factor whose steam they expected to float back to their second stint of power. VS portraits adorned the LDF campaign material, in contrast to the images Marx , Lenin and Che in the past.
If the Left is pinning all their hope on their Chief Minister candidate, they only need to revert back to the NDA Lok Sabha experience of 2005 to find out that this is no magic formula. Vajpayee, the then BJP and NDA candidate for prime minister commanded popularity which no other individual could match, and yet the BJP and the NDA he led, trailed far below this level of popularity, to be ultimately voted out. Vajpayee was dismissed by the electorate as the right man in the wrong party. Similar could be VS Achuthanandan’s plight. Back-to-back electoral defeats from the Lok Sabha elections of 2009 to the local body polls a few months ago seems to suggest that the misrule of the Left had indeed caused great dissatisfaction among the people which when combined with the Kerala tradition of voting out the incumbent government suggests that the Left’s hope of piggybacking on the VS factor could well be a pipe dream. But this apparently has not stopped them from dreaming.
Analysis of voting pattern distribution (see table at the end of this post) threw up a discernible trend. In the Left bastions (Kunnamangalam, Nilamboor, Perinthalmanna, Paravoor, Chavara, Irinjalakkuda, Perumbavoor etc), voter turnout tended to be not only higher than 2006 Assembly elections but the incremental was higher than the winning margin e.g. Puttukad where the winning margin in 2006 was 1,349 while the incremental voter turnout in 2011 was 16,689. Whereas in the the UDF bastions (Idukki, Kottayam, Wayanad, Malappuram, Nilamboor, Perinthalmanna etc) it was the reverse e.g. Malappuram where the winning margin was 23,875, voter turnout in 2011 was considerably less than 2006.
So how do the two alliances interpret this peculiar voting pattern distribution?
The Left’s internal assessment after calculations made by the mandalam, booth, block and district committees, estimate a seat share of 75-78 seats, most of which concentrated within the six districts in Malabar, Kollam and Thiruvananthapuram districts in the south. Their rationale is that lower turnout in UDF bastions strengthen their winning chances while they do not have any logical explanation how the higher turnout will benefit them in their own strongholds.
The UDF’s internal assessment similarly made after calculations made by the mandalam, booth, block and district committees, estimate 94 seats as a realistic projection; 80 seats under their worst case scenario and over 100 seats as their best case scenario. Their rationale is best summed up by their MP and former union minister, Shashi Tharoor:
“The mood is pretty upbeat. We in the UDF are expecting a victory. Of course, we will have to wait for a month to find out. The higher the turnout the better it is for the UDF because the organizations of a communist will always come in a certain number, it is when the general non-committed, non ideological voter as we tend to win. That will be shown up in higher turn.”
So, it's the anti-incumbency factor that leads to the increase in the polling percentage. according to the UDF. What about the lower turnout affecting their bastions? The UDF here resorts to conventional wisdom - there is a wave in their favour and a section of LDF supporters have been so demoralized that they preferred staying home than vote.
So what indications we have that this could turn out true. The IUML is perhaps the most ecstatic of all UDF partners, that they will replace Kerala Congress (M) as the second largest constituent of the UDF. The party was hopeful of winning all the 12 seats it contested in Malappuram district. “It will not be a surprise if the UDF wins all the 16 seats in Malappuram,” said K.N.A. Khader, party State secretary. According to the IUML, the low voter turnout in Vengara and Tirurangadi constituencies indicated the languid state of affairs within the Left Democratic Front (LDF) in the district. “The LDF has been insipid in those constituencies,” Mr. Kunhalikutty said.
When Malappuram district registered 74.25 per cent voter turnout, the polling percentage in Vengara and Tirurangadi was 68.87 and 65.53 respectively. Tirurangadi polled the lowest number of votes followed by Vengara.
The IndiaToday post poll tend to corroborate IUML public face of ecstasy - their findings state that the Muslim vote consolidated around the UDF en bloc. If IndiaToday’s post poll holds true, then Left’s hope of piggybacking on the Jama -at e Islami, an Islamic extreme outfit’s support to 127 constituencies has come to naught.
“The mood is pretty upbeat. We in the UDF are expecting a victory. Of course, we will have to wait for a month to find out. The higher the turnout the better it is for the UDF because the organizations of a communist will always come in a certain number, it is when the general non-committed, non ideological voter as we tend to win. That will be shown up in higher turn.”
So, it's the anti-incumbency factor that leads to the increase in the polling percentage. according to the UDF. What about the lower turnout affecting their bastions? The UDF here resorts to conventional wisdom - there is a wave in their favour and a section of LDF supporters have been so demoralized that they preferred staying home than vote.
So what indications we have that this could turn out true. The IUML is perhaps the most ecstatic of all UDF partners, that they will replace Kerala Congress (M) as the second largest constituent of the UDF. The party was hopeful of winning all the 12 seats it contested in Malappuram district. “It will not be a surprise if the UDF wins all the 16 seats in Malappuram,” said K.N.A. Khader, party State secretary. According to the IUML, the low voter turnout in Vengara and Tirurangadi constituencies indicated the languid state of affairs within the Left Democratic Front (LDF) in the district. “The LDF has been insipid in those constituencies,” Mr. Kunhalikutty said.
When Malappuram district registered 74.25 per cent voter turnout, the polling percentage in Vengara and Tirurangadi was 68.87 and 65.53 respectively. Tirurangadi polled the lowest number of votes followed by Vengara.
The IndiaToday post poll tend to corroborate IUML public face of ecstasy - their findings state that the Muslim vote consolidated around the UDF en bloc. If IndiaToday’s post poll holds true, then Left’s hope of piggybacking on the Jama -at e Islami, an Islamic extreme outfit’s support to 127 constituencies has come to naught.
The Central Intelligence Bureau (IB) report in the meanwhile predicted that the UDF would be getting anywhere between 80 and 85 seats and the LDF would get anywhere between 55 and 60. This report has predicted that the difference between the Fronts will be only within 20 seats.
To have a neutral opinion I emailed a close friend who is a well known journalist from Kerala. I asked him what he made out of this peculiar voter turnout distribution. Back came his speedy reply.
“Partly, this is accounted by the Lotus blooming as indicated by the Asianet opinion polls. I suspect the Left would have resorted to mass rigging - sending cadres from UDF bastions to boost their vote shares in their own bastions. Otherwise would they be confident of getting 78 seats?. This may sound as fiction but we can validate this perception by simply checking whether UDF victory margin increased, despite lower voter turnout”
There we have it - alternative opinions. Should the VS factor exist, the Left may pull off a shock victory or failing that, reduce their margin of defeat significantly. If it doesn’t exist, then the UDF is poised to register a landslide victory. Both ways, opinion, exit and post polls maybe proved wrong. And won’t that be fun?
Courtesy: www.forumkeralam.com


















