IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/indpol/v2y2014i2p137-151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The BJP’s Fragile Mandate: Modi and Vote Mobilizers in the 2014 General Elections

Author

Listed:
  • Pradeep K. Chhibber

    (Pradeep K. Chhibber, Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley, CA. E-mail: chhibber@berkeley.edu)

  • Susan L. Ostermann

    (Susan L. Ostermann, Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley, CA. E-mail: sostermann@berkeley.edu)

Abstract

It has become commonplace to attribute the BJP’s victory in the 2014 Indian general elections to Narendra Modi. In this article we unravel the Modi effect and argue that Modi’s success is tied to his ability to attract ‘vote mobilizers’—individuals who campaign for the party—to the BJP. In 2014, the BJP had more mobilizers than any other party. The BJP also had more vote mobilizers in 2014 than in 2004, while the Congress had fewer. However, these mobilizers, while capable of increasing both turnout and vote share for their chosen party, display little party loyalty or partisanship. Instead, they are drawn to a winning candidate or party. Since it is ‘winnability’ that motivates mobilizers, their support for a party is shallow and, potentially, fleeting. We conclude by claiming that the BJP’s victory is more fragile than many assume.

Suggested Citation

  • Pradeep K. Chhibber & Susan L. Ostermann, 2014. "The BJP’s Fragile Mandate: Modi and Vote Mobilizers in the 2014 General Elections," Studies in Indian Politics, , vol. 2(2), pages 137-151, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:indpol:v:2:y:2014:i:2:p:137-151
    DOI: 10.1177/2321023014551870
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2321023014551870
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2321023014551870?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerber, Alan S. & Green, Donald P., 2000. "The Effects of Canvassing, Telephone Calls, and Direct Mail on Voter Turnout: A Field Experiment," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 94(3), pages 653-663, September.
    2. Alan Gerber & Donald Green, 2000. "The effects of canvassing, direct mail, and telephone contact on voter turnout: A field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00248, The Field Experiments Website.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. León, Gianmarco, 2017. "Turnout, political preferences and information: Experimental evidence from Peru," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 56-71.
    2. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03384143, HAL.
    3. Grácio, Matilde & Vicente, Pedro C., 2021. "Information, get-out-the-vote messages, and peer influence: Causal effects on political behavior in Mozambique," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    4. Lisa M. George & Joel Waldfogel, 2006. "The New York Times and the Market for Local Newspapers," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 435-447, March.
    5. Michael Haman, 2021. "Recall Elections: A Tool of Accountability? Evidence from Peru," Revista Desarrollo y Sociedad, Universidad de los Andes,Facultad de Economía, CEDE, vol. 87(3), March.
    6. Alan Gerber & Mitchell Hoffman & John Morgan & Collin Raymond, 2020. "One in a Million: Field Experiments on Perceived Closeness of the Election and Voter Turnout," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 287-325, July.
    7. Alberto Chong & Gianmarco León‐Ciliotta & Vivian Roza & Martín Valdivia & Gabriela Vega, 2019. "Urbanization Patterns, Information Diffusion, and Female Voting in Rural Paraguay," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(2), pages 323-341, April.
    8. Yusaku Horichi & Jun Saito, 2009. "Rain, Elections and Money: The Impact of Voter Turnout on Distributive Policy Outcomes in Japan," Asia Pacific Economic Papers 379, Australia-Japan Research Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    9. Julia Cage & Edgard Dewitte, 2021. "It Takes Money to Make MPs: Evidence from 150 Years of British Campaign Spending," SciencePo Working papers hal-03384143, HAL.
    10. Laurent Bouton & Julia Cagé & Edgard Dewitte & Vincent Pons, 2021. "Small Campaign Donors," Working Papers hal-03878175, HAL.
    11. Julia Cage & Yasmine Bekkouche, 2018. "The Price of a Vote: Evidence from France, 1993-2014," Working Papers hal-03393149, HAL.
    12. Musharraf Rasool Cyan & Antonios M. Koumpias & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez, 2016. "The Effects of Media Campaigns on Individual Attitudes towards Tax Compliance; Quasi-experimental Evidence from Survey Data in Pakistan," International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1609, International Center for Public Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    13. Watanabe, Hajime & Maruyama, Takuya, 2023. "A Bayesian instrumental variable model for multinomial choice with correlated alternatives," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    14. Francesco Drago & Tommaso Nannicini & Francesco Sobbrio, 2014. "Meet the Press: How Voters and Politicians Respond to Newspaper Entry and Exit," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 159-188, July.
    15. Vincenzo Galasso & Tommaso Nannicini, 2016. "Persuasion and Gender: Experimental Evidence from Two Political Campaigns," CESifo Working Paper Series 5868, CESifo.
    16. Donald P. Green & Alan S. Gerber, 2003. "The Underprovision of Experiments in Political Science," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 589(1), pages 94-112, September.
    17. Lydia Mechtenberg & Grischa Perino & Nicolas Treich & Jean-Robert Tyran & Stephanie Wang, 2021. "Self-Signaling in Moral Voting," Discussion Papers 21-01, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    18. Bekkouche, Yasmine & Cagé, Julia & Dewitte, Edgard, 2022. "The heterogeneous price of a vote: Evidence from multiparty systems, 1993–2017," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    19. Cagé, Julia, 2017. "Media Competition, Information Provision and Political Participation: Evidence from French Local Newspapers and Elections, 1944," CEPR Discussion Papers 12198, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Kevin Arceneaux, 2005. "Using Cluster Randomized Field Experiments to Study Voting Behavior," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 601(1), pages 169-179, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:indpol:v:2:y:2014:i:2:p:137-151. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.