The Flawed Formula: Why Traditional Election Strategies Fall Short

A political party's primary goal is to secure a comfortable majority in order to form the government. To achieve this, they typically gauge the mood of the people through their political experience, and define their election strategy, create manifesto, set narratives etc. Of late, the trend of conducting sample surveys has emerged as a way to gauge the public sentiment. For the outreach they organize large-scale campaigns, use print, electronic and social media to push their propaganda. These are common practices followed by all political parties. In essence, parties take a macro approach, a generic route for the entire state or nation. The problem with this approach is that while it may appear comprehensive, it's often ineffective. Because even the opposition parties follow same techniques, with only variation in messaging, and maybe a little bit of difference in tactics. This leads to a lack of competitive differentiation, ultimately diminishing their ability to gain a distinct advantage over one another. Similarly, even individual candidates use same techniques in their effort to secure the constituencies they contest. However, the techniques of other opponents in the fray largely remain same, and therefore, the outcomes remain uncertain.

The ultimate objective of winning elections through current practices rarely yields the desired results. In the end, voters cast their ballots based on personal conviction-whether rational, emotional, or a combination of both. The results are then tallied, and the actual outcome, which often diverges significantly from the expectations. This is a coarse method, essential but often far from desired goal. It is a high-risk methodology with many variables that are not adequately addressed to win election.