Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 73,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'catslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 73,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'catslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Code Context


        trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);

    }
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.'
$stackFrame = (int) 1
$trace = [
	(int) 0 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php',
		'line' => (int) 2421,
		'function' => 'deprecationWarning',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.'
		]
	],
	(int) 1 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
		'line' => (int) 74,
		'function' => 'offsetGet',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
		]
	],
	(int) 2 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php',
		'line' => (int) 610,
		'function' => 'printArticle',
		'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 3 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 120,
		'function' => 'invokeAction',
		'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller',
		'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	],
	(int) 4 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php',
		'line' => (int) 94,
		'function' => '_invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 5 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php',
		'line' => (int) 235,
		'function' => 'dispatch',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 6 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication',
		'object' => object(App\Application) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 7 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 162,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 8 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 9 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 88,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 10 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 11 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php',
		'line' => (int) 96,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 12 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 65,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware',
		'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 13 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php',
		'line' => (int) 51,
		'function' => '__invoke',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 14 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php',
		'line' => (int) 98,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => [
			(int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {},
			(int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {},
			(int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}
		]
	],
	(int) 15 => [
		'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php',
		'line' => (int) 39,
		'function' => 'run',
		'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server',
		'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {},
		'type' => '->',
		'args' => []
	]
]
$frame = [
	'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php',
	'line' => (int) 74,
	'function' => 'offsetGet',
	'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest',
	'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {
		trustProxy => false
		[protected] params => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _environment => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504/print'
		[protected] base => ''
		[protected] webroot => '/'
		[protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504/print'
		[protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] _input => null
		[protected] _detectors => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] _detectorCache => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {}
		[protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {}
		[protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {}
		[protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] emulatedAttributes => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
		[protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]]
		[protected] protocol => null
		[protected] requestTarget => null
		[private] deprecatedProperties => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	},
	'type' => '->',
	'args' => [
		(int) 0 => 'artileslug'
	]
]
deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311
Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421
App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74
Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98

Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Code Context
            if (Configure::read('debug')) {

                trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);

            } else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6811a990c382f-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6811a990c382f-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6811a990c382f-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4413,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/font&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 26 November, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bihar-surprise-Biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-/articleshow/6991340.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4504,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4413,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Governance&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;font &gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;font &gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4413,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/font&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 26 November, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bihar-surprise-Biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-/articleshow/6991340.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4504,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 4413
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Governance&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;font &gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;font &gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <font ><br /></font><div align="justify"><font >The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.</font><br /><br /><font >The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.</font><br /><br /><font >However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA's victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.</font><br /><br /><font >How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.</font><br /><br /><font >What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad's RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.</font><br /><br /><font >As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.</font><br /><br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$maxBufferLength = (int) 8192
$file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php'
$line = (int) 853
$message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Code Context
            $response->getStatusCode(),

            ($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')

        ));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6811a990c382f-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6811a990c382f-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6811a990c382f-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4413,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/font&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 26 November, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bihar-surprise-Biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-/articleshow/6991340.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4504,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4413,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Governance&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;font &gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;font &gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4413,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/font&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 26 November, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bihar-surprise-Biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-/articleshow/6991340.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4504,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 4413
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Governance&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;font &gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;font &gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <font ><br /></font><div align="justify"><font >The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.</font><br /><br /><font >The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.</font><br /><br /><font >However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA's victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.</font><br /><br /><font >How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.</font><br /><br /><font >What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad's RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.</font><br /><br /><font >As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.</font><br /><br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$reasonPhrase = 'OK'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
Code Context
                    $value

                ), $first);

                $first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) {

	'status' => (int) 200,
	'contentType' => 'text/html',
	'headers' => [
		'Content-Type' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		]
	],
	'file' => null,
	'fileRange' => [],
	'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {},
	'cacheDirectives' => [],
	'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
    <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr6811a990c382f-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr6811a990c382f-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr6811a990c382f-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">&gt;
</span></span></code>
<span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&lt;link&nbsp;rel="canonical"&nbsp;href="<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">);&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>/<span style="color: #0000BB">&lt;?php&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">echo&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-&gt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?&gt;</span>.html"/&gt;
</span></code></span>
<code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB">&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #007700">&lt;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta&nbsp;http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type"&nbsp;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html;&nbsp;charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/&gt;
</span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr6811a990c382f-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = &#039;/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp&#039;
$dataForView = [
	&#039;article_current&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4413,
		&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;,
		&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/font&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
		&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 26 November, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bihar-surprise-Biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-/articleshow/6991340.cms&#039;,
		&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
		&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
		&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
		&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504&#039;,
		&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
		&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
		&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4504,
		&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
		&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
		&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [[maximum depth reached]],
		&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;
	
	},
	&#039;articleid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4413,
	&#039;metaTitle&#039; =&gt; &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;,
	&#039;metaKeywords&#039; =&gt; &#039;Governance&#039;,
	&#039;metaDesc&#039; =&gt; &#039;


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?...&#039;,
	&#039;disp&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;font &gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;font &gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;English&#039;,
	&#039;SITE_URL&#039; =&gt; &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;,
	&#039;site_title&#039; =&gt; &#039;im4change&#039;,
	&#039;adminprix&#039; =&gt; &#039;admin&#039;
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	&#039;id&#039; =&gt; (int) 4413,
	&#039;title&#039; =&gt; &#039;Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;,
	&#039;subheading&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;description&#039; =&gt; &#039;&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/font&gt;
&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;font face=&quot;arial,helvetica,sans-serif&quot; size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&#039;,
	&#039;credit_writer&#039; =&gt; &#039;The Times of India, 26 November, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bihar-surprise-Biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-/articleshow/6991340.cms&#039;,
	&#039;article_img&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;article_img_thumb&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;status&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;show_on_home&#039; =&gt; (int) 1,
	&#039;lang&#039; =&gt; &#039;EN&#039;,
	&#039;category_id&#039; =&gt; (int) 16,
	&#039;tag_keyword&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;seo_url&#039; =&gt; &#039;bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504&#039;,
	&#039;meta_title&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_keywords&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;meta_description&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;noindex&#039; =&gt; (int) 0,
	&#039;publish_date&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	&#039;most_visit_section_id&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;article_big_img&#039; =&gt; null,
	&#039;liveid&#039; =&gt; (int) 4504,
	&#039;created&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;modified&#039; =&gt; object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	&#039;edate&#039; =&gt; &#039;&#039;,
	&#039;tags&#039; =&gt; [
		(int) 0 =&gt; object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	&#039;category&#039; =&gt; object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	&#039;[new]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[accessible]&#039; =&gt; [
		&#039;*&#039; =&gt; true,
		&#039;id&#039; =&gt; false
	],
	&#039;[dirty]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[original]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[virtual]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[hasErrors]&#039; =&gt; false,
	&#039;[errors]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[invalid]&#039; =&gt; [],
	&#039;[repository]&#039; =&gt; &#039;Articles&#039;

}
$articleid = (int) 4413
$metaTitle = &#039;LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes&#039;
$metaKeywords = &#039;Governance&#039;
$metaDesc = &#039;


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?...&#039;
$disp = &#039;&lt;font &gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;div align=&quot;justify&quot;&gt;&lt;font &gt;The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp;amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA&#039;s victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad&#039;s RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;font &gt;As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&#039;
$lang = &#039;English&#039;
$SITE_URL = &#039;https://im4change.in/&#039;
$site_title = &#039;im4change&#039;
$adminprix = &#039;admin&#039;</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504.html"/>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
    <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"
          media="all"/>
    <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes | Im4change.org</title>
    <meta name="description" content="


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?..."/>
    <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script>
    <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script>
    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">

        $(document).ready(function () {
            var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem
            var pic_real_width, pic_real_height;
            $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues
                .attr("src", $(img).attr("src"))
                .load(function () {
                    pic_real_width = this.width;   // Note: $(this).width() will not
                    pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images.
                });
        });
    </script>
    <style type="text/css">
        @media screen {
            div.divFooter {
                display: block;
            }
        }

        @media print {
            .printbutton {
                display: none !important;
            }
        }
    </style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center">
    <tr>
        <td class="top_bg">
            <div class="divFooter">
                <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0"
                     alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/>
            </div>

        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td id="topspace">&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr id="topspace">
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td width="100%">
            <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal">
                <strong>Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes</strong></h1>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3">
                <font ><br /></font><div align="justify"><font >The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.</font><br /><br /><font >The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.</font><br /><br /><font >However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA's victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.</font><br /><br /><font >How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.</font><br /><br /><font >What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad's RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.</font><br /><br /><font >As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.</font><br /><br /></div>               </font>
        </td>
    </tr>
    <tr>
        <td>&nbsp;</td>
    </tr>

    <tr>
        <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;">
            <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page "
                         onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form>
        </td>
    </tr>
</table></body>
</html>'

}
$cookies = []
$values = [
	(int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
]
$name = 'Content-Type'
$first = true
$value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'
header - [internal], line ??
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181
Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55
Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141
[main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39

<head>

    <link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>

    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>

$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp'
$dataForView = [
	'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

		'id' => (int) 4413,
		'title' => 'Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes',
		'subheading' => '',
		'description' => '<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3"><br />
</font>
<div align="justify">
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA's victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad's RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.</font><br />
<br />
</div>',
		'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 26 November, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bihar-surprise-Biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-/articleshow/6991340.cms',
		'article_img' => '',
		'article_img_thumb' => '',
		'status' => (int) 1,
		'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
		'lang' => 'EN',
		'category_id' => (int) 16,
		'tag_keyword' => '',
		'seo_url' => 'bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504',
		'meta_title' => null,
		'meta_keywords' => null,
		'meta_description' => null,
		'noindex' => (int) 0,
		'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
		'most_visit_section_id' => null,
		'article_big_img' => null,
		'liveid' => (int) 4504,
		'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
		'edate' => '',
		'tags' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
		'[new]' => false,
		'[accessible]' => [
			[maximum depth reached]
		],
		'[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[hasErrors]' => false,
		'[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]],
		'[repository]' => 'Articles'
	
	},
	'articleid' => (int) 4413,
	'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes',
	'metaKeywords' => 'Governance',
	'metaDesc' => '


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?...',
	'disp' => '<font ><br /></font><div align="justify"><font >The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.</font><br /><br /><font >The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.</font><br /><br /><font >However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA's victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.</font><br /><br /><font >How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.</font><br /><br /><font >What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad's RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.</font><br /><br /><font >As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.</font><br /><br /></div>',
	'lang' => 'English',
	'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/',
	'site_title' => 'im4change',
	'adminprix' => 'admin'
]
$article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) {

	'id' => (int) 4413,
	'title' => 'Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes',
	'subheading' => '',
	'description' => '<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3"><br />
</font>
<div align="justify">
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA's victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad's RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.</font><br />
<br />
<font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3">As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.</font><br />
<br />
</div>',
	'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 26 November, 2010, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Bihar-surprise-Biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-/articleshow/6991340.cms',
	'article_img' => '',
	'article_img_thumb' => '',
	'status' => (int) 1,
	'show_on_home' => (int) 1,
	'lang' => 'EN',
	'category_id' => (int) 16,
	'tag_keyword' => '',
	'seo_url' => 'bihar-surprise-biggest-landslide-with-smallest-share-of-votes-4504',
	'meta_title' => null,
	'meta_keywords' => null,
	'meta_description' => null,
	'noindex' => (int) 0,
	'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {},
	'most_visit_section_id' => null,
	'article_big_img' => null,
	'liveid' => (int) 4504,
	'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {},
	'edate' => '',
	'tags' => [
		(int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}
	],
	'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {},
	'[new]' => false,
	'[accessible]' => [
		'*' => true,
		'id' => false
	],
	'[dirty]' => [],
	'[original]' => [],
	'[virtual]' => [],
	'[hasErrors]' => false,
	'[errors]' => [],
	'[invalid]' => [],
	'[repository]' => 'Articles'

}
$articleid = (int) 4413
$metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes'
$metaKeywords = 'Governance'
$metaDesc = '


The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.

Why should this be unusual?...'
$disp = '<font ><br /></font><div align="justify"><font >The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares.</font><br /><br /><font >The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu &amp; Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls.</font><br /><br /><font >However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast.</font><br /><br /><font >Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA's victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats.</font><br /><br /><font >How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats.</font><br /><br /><font >What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad's RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes.</font><br /><br /><font >As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.</font><br /><br /></div>'
$lang = 'English'
$SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/'
$site_title = 'im4change'
$adminprix = 'admin'

include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8
Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413
Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374
Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927
Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885
Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126
Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94
Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96
Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65
Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51

Bihar surprise: Biggest landslide with smallest share of votes

The Nitish Kumar-led JD(U)-BJP alliance has won more than four-fifths of the Bihar assembly seats, but there is one unusual aspect to this landslide. The alliance got a little less than two-fifths of the votes cast. Why should this be unusual? Check out the accompanying chart and you will find that other wins of similar magnitude in terms of seats have invariably been the result of substantially larger vote shares. The comparisons with Sikkim or Tripura may seem misplaced given the much smaller size of these states. Similarly, the 1987 Jammu & Kashmir elections, which the National Conference and Congress fought as an alliance may seem an unfair yardstick given the doubts about the fairness of those polls. However, even in a larger state like West Bengal, the massive verdict in favour of the Left Front government in 2006 was based on a vote share of nearly 50%. Similarly, when Rajiv Gandhi won a landslide in 1984 riding the crest of the sympathy wave generated by the assassination of Indira Gandhi, the Congress polled almost half of all votes cast. Both these landslides have been dwarfed by the NDA's victory in the Bihar assembly polls, where the ruling combine won an astounding 85% of all the seats. How is this possible with a vote share of under 40%? To put the apparent surge in favour of the Nitish-led alliance in perspective, its vote share in the latest elections was barely 2.9% higher than in the 2005 assembly polls, up from 36.2% to 39.1%. Creditable as it is for an incumbent government, that is hardly the kind of swing that would normally deliver such a huge swing in terms of seats. What really made the difference was the complete collapse of the major opposition alliance. In 2005, that consisted of Lalu Prasad's RJD, the Congress, CPM and NCP. Between them, these four parties had polled 31.1% of the votes, just 5% less than the JD(U)-BJP combine. This time round, the main opposition alliance was the RJD-LJP combine, which together polled only 25.6% of the votes. As a result, the gap between the NDA and its biggest rival went from 5.1% in 2005 to 13.5% in the latest elections. Much of this was a result of a drastic decline in the votes of both the RJD, down from 23.5% to 18.6%, and the LJP, from 11.1% to 6.7%. In short, the swing against the Lalu-led alliance was much sharper than the swing in favour of the Nitish-led one and that is what caused the landslide.