The speculative analysis or analytical speculations are unable to predict the final outcome as no analyst can predict mood and response of voters. Time and again in last few elections voters have delivered unpredicted outcomes. Despite inability of the Nehru era to deliver the promises, voters had him three times. Yet Indian voters gave a severe jolt to the Congress in the fourth election by denying it power in eight states and reducing its majority in the Lok Sabha. Even Narendra Modi was able to win a clear mandate for the BJP election symbol in 2014 after its two consecutive failures.

Most political analysts bank their belief on obvious that no alternative to Narendra Modi emerged in the last four years. Efforts of the Bengal chief minister Mamta Bannerji to bring different regional parties on a single platform are not for creating alternative but merely to avoid division in the anti Modi votes. Yet the existing political situation has a parallel. In 1970, Indira Gandhi was not the most acceptable leader. On the contrary she was the least unacceptable leader. The opposition had consolidated its unity and money bags were in their service as they did not want Indira Gandhi to win. In 1969 she had clearly indicated the left swing to the Indian economy.

Yet she was able to swing voters in her favour with her promise of reducing poverty as Narendra Modi had in 2014 elections. Literacy rate in 1971 election was below half; and in 2014, it was much higher, above 80 per cent. Yet Modi was able to mesmerize young generation with his formula for rapid economic development that involved hard toil for young. Modi won the clear mandate as Indira Gandhi did in 1971. Both surprised their opponents as their opponents could not fathom impact of their non conventional formula. Both had touched innermost aspirations or expectations of larger numbers.

Yet Indira Gandhi failed six years later. She had won a decisive war in 1971 December. There was no alternative to her when she called for elections in March 1977. She was powerful for she had emergency backed authority in her hand. Still she failed because disappointed voters at her failure to deliver on her election promises did not intend to give her another opportunity.

The general belief that the emergency excesses were at the root of her defeat also does not hold water. For she did not get more than a single seat out of 339 seats in the North and East but she had bagged nearly 75 per cent seats out of 204 seats of four Southern states and also Maharashtra and Gujarat. Does it mean that emergency did not affect voters of these six states? But answer is in fact that powers gained by the emergency were utilized for structured administration in these states through additional power. It mitigated hardships. One also needs to realize that the Nav Nirman movement, though sources for inspiration were within the Congress, had debilitating impact on the Congress as the 1975 assembly polls had suggested. Yet it had won 10 of 26 seats in the 1977 elections.

Narendra Modi had impressive sway in but he could not penetrate in coastal states, except Gujarat, a state that was under his rule for fifteen years and without emergence of consolidating political force for the Other Backward classes. Tamilnadu, Andhra, Telangana, Odisha and Bengal, all four coastal states and Telangana were under the strong regional political parties. Kerala was under the coalition under the Congress. He could only dent the empire of 161 seats. Of 282 seats he gained 100 from Uttar Pradesh and Bihar and 115 seats cane out of 117 seats in seven states. He won only 65 seats from rest of India.

Mathematics of the seats for the next elections apart, the results of the 23 bye-elections to the Lok Sabha in four years clearly indicated disenchantment of voters. It may not reflect trends that would emerge in general polls, yet reality is a perceptible decline in his popularity. He has definitely hit hard to the middle class with his policy measures as well as with his sustained campaign to condemn them as most corrupt class. But greater is the disappointment of the other Backward Class and the Dalits as he failed to provide them protection against unleashed fury of the fanatics in the upper strata.

Of the programmes initiated by him for the deprived classes, no concrete results are felt by the classes for whom he initiated moves for he had side tracked the party as the political mechanism. He remained far removed not only from masses but also from his party men. No one could approach him personally with their woes. No minister could take up any issue of public importance without his approval. No minister was given credit for any proposal and everyone stood condemned for failures.

Yet there is no one who can stand up to him and challenge him. Neither on opposite side nor in his own camp anyone who can stand up. Does he have a record of actions that can please the mentors of the BJP? He had declared toilets to be his priority to the temple. He did not change and remained silent to pleas even from the Sangh chief to initiate moves for construction of the temple. It may annoy the fanatics within his camp but can it win him the classes that are not enamoured by it? He may be standing tall in media analyses but does he have the same stature among voters? It will be the decisive factor for the next election.