Modi, Nitish & Labharthi wave: Bihar’s unbeatable formula
Bhavika Jain | Nov 17, 2025, 04:00 IST
With Modi’s national pull and Nitish’s local credibility, the NDA turned welfare delivery into its sharpest election tool...
The 2025 Bihar Assembly election has delivered one of the most decisive mandates in the state’s history, with the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) securing over 200 seats in the 243-member Assembly. This victory represents a consolidation of support for Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led alliance, surpassing even their strong performance in 2010.
Despite two decades in power, the NDA defied anti-incumbency sentiment, achieving a sweeping victory driven by a broad social coalition, high voter turnout – especially among women and youth – and a governance approach focused on welfare initiatives. In contrast, the opposition Mahagathbandhan struggled with fragmented messaging, leadership delays, and a failure to accurately gauge public concerns on issues such as migration and unemployment, hindering their ability to build momentum.
To understand what shaped this mandate and what it means for Bihar’s future, TOI+ spoke with Badri Narayan, vice-chancellor of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in Mumbai.
Edited excerpts:
In your opinion, what were the factors that worked for Nitish Kumar?
The first factor that has worked for Nitish Kumar is Narendra Modi’s trust vote. The United NDA projected stability, development, and welfare delivery as its core narrative. With Prime Minister Modi campaigning alongside Nitish Kumar, the coalition effectively combined national appeal with a strong grassroots presence. There was also a sympathy for Nitish Kumar in the minds of the voters, which only increased with the Opposition’s attacks that tried to prove him irrelevant.
Another very important factor that worked for NDA was that it managed to stitch together a bigger rainbow social coalition (comprising) Dalits and Nishads (10%), extremely backward classes (37%), forward castes (about 10%) and Kurmi/Koeri (3-5%). Together, this forms an electoral bloc which constitutes about 60% of the total population.
What were the issues with Mahagathbandhan’s campaign?
There was a lot of confusion within the Mahagathbandhan (MGB). There was a delay in projecting a united CM face; the chemistry between the alliance partners was not very good. The issues they decided to focus on backfired, be it migration or even unemployment. MGB in Bihar called migration a form of distress, highlighting poverty and suffering. This view is outdated; migration often empowers individuals, provides vital livelihood, economic relief, and dignity, improving socio-economic status. This negative political narrative misread public sentiment. Even in the case of unemployment, the Opposition could not generate enough traction in the absence of statistics that reflect their narrative. The Opposition had no continuous strategy, and they were not even able to disseminate their vision cohesively.
Another issue that they fell short of was expanding their social base; they did attempt by joining hands with smaller parties like Vikassheel Insaan Party (VIP) founder Mukesh Sahani, the Mallah community, the Indian Inclusive Party, as well as the Tanti-Paan community (listed among the EBCs). But all these attempts were very little and came very late.
The people of Bihar voted for their future with hope and aspiration and rejected the negative sentiments.
You have argued that voters in Bihar are “not fixated on caste alone”. Do the 2025 results confirm your argument that caste is now a background factor rather than the main axis of political mobilisation?
I have said repeatedly that during this election, caste was in the backdrop and the election was fought on the beneficiary status across caste and religion.
This “beneficiary consciousness” that has emerged among the people is breaking the conventional electoral categories of caste. When the link between social welfare policies and development politics gets stronger, it creates a situation where the mood of the voters is pro-incumbency. There are several examples of this phenomenon from across the world.
Nitish Kumar’s consistency in keeping this link active has resulted in the sweeping results that he has achieved. Such a sweeping result was not possible just because of the caste combination; you need a unitary force, which in this case was the rise of “beneficiary consciousness”.
What does the record voter turnout, along with a high women’s turnout, mean for Bihar?
These schemes are working because they are not only getting money, but there are policies that are being devised for the continuation of the support. For instance, if a self-help group has been formed with a monetary incentive, policies are being framed to help them market their goods. So, the whole circle is being completed. Also, the agency that women have as voters has only solidified due to the awareness that these schemes are an end result of their vote.
What are your thoughts on Prashant Kishor? What were his contributions to this election?
Prashant Kishor set a fresh political discourse and also created a special hope within the electorate, but his ideas and politics don’t have a popular base. Most of his ideas emerge from intellectual discourses, which don’t have a social base.
His issues didn’t work at the grassroots [level]. His party also lacks ideology and a robust organisational framework. In the absence of an ideology, the people working for the party are not emotionally connected. I think he has a future, and we shouldn’t write him off yet.
Has the “labharthi” identity now become a more powerful political currency than caste solidarity?
While caste remains a barometer of Bihar’s politics, it is not driving the discourse or voter mobilisation in the way it once did. Voters are not interpreting this election primarily through caste lenses. The older category of “poor” has been replaced by a more aspirational, upward-mobility-oriented beneficiary class that evaluates parties based on delivery of schemes, efficiency, and tangible gains.
So, to sum up, the “labharthi” identity has increasingly become a more influential political currency than caste solidarity. While caste continues to matter, the electorate’s aspirations, shaped by welfare schemes and beneficiary status, are now driving political mobilisation more strongly than traditional caste loyalties.
Despite two decades in power, the NDA defied anti-incumbency sentiment, achieving a sweeping victory driven by a broad social coalition, high voter turnout – especially among women and youth – and a governance approach focused on welfare initiatives. In contrast, the opposition Mahagathbandhan struggled with fragmented messaging, leadership delays, and a failure to accurately gauge public concerns on issues such as migration and unemployment, hindering their ability to build momentum.
To understand what shaped this mandate and what it means for Bihar’s future, TOI+ spoke with Badri Narayan, vice-chancellor of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) in Mumbai.
Edited excerpts:
In your opinion, what were the factors that worked for Nitish Kumar?
The first factor that has worked for Nitish Kumar is Narendra Modi’s trust vote. The United NDA projected stability, development, and welfare delivery as its core narrative. With Prime Minister Modi campaigning alongside Nitish Kumar, the coalition effectively combined national appeal with a strong grassroots presence. There was also a sympathy for Nitish Kumar in the minds of the voters, which only increased with the Opposition’s attacks that tried to prove him irrelevant.
Another very important factor that worked for NDA was that it managed to stitch together a bigger rainbow social coalition (comprising) Dalits and Nishads (10%), extremely backward classes (37%), forward castes (about 10%) and Kurmi/Koeri (3-5%). Together, this forms an electoral bloc which constitutes about 60% of the total population.
What were the issues with Mahagathbandhan’s campaign?
There was a lot of confusion within the Mahagathbandhan (MGB). There was a delay in projecting a united CM face; the chemistry between the alliance partners was not very good. The issues they decided to focus on backfired, be it migration or even unemployment. MGB in Bihar called migration a form of distress, highlighting poverty and suffering. This view is outdated; migration often empowers individuals, provides vital livelihood, economic relief, and dignity, improving socio-economic status. This negative political narrative misread public sentiment. Even in the case of unemployment, the Opposition could not generate enough traction in the absence of statistics that reflect their narrative. The Opposition had no continuous strategy, and they were not even able to disseminate their vision cohesively.
Another issue that they fell short of was expanding their social base; they did attempt by joining hands with smaller parties like Vikassheel Insaan Party (VIP) founder Mukesh Sahani, the Mallah community, the Indian Inclusive Party, as well as the Tanti-Paan community (listed among the EBCs). But all these attempts were very little and came very late.
The people of Bihar voted for their future with hope and aspiration and rejected the negative sentiments.
You have argued that voters in Bihar are “not fixated on caste alone”. Do the 2025 results confirm your argument that caste is now a background factor rather than the main axis of political mobilisation?
I have said repeatedly that during this election, caste was in the backdrop and the election was fought on the beneficiary status across caste and religion.
This “beneficiary consciousness” that has emerged among the people is breaking the conventional electoral categories of caste. When the link between social welfare policies and development politics gets stronger, it creates a situation where the mood of the voters is pro-incumbency. There are several examples of this phenomenon from across the world.
Nitish Kumar’s consistency in keeping this link active has resulted in the sweeping results that he has achieved. Such a sweeping result was not possible just because of the caste combination; you need a unitary force, which in this case was the rise of “beneficiary consciousness”.
What does the record voter turnout, along with a high women’s turnout, mean for Bihar?
These schemes are working because they are not only getting money, but there are policies that are being devised for the continuation of the support. For instance, if a self-help group has been formed with a monetary incentive, policies are being framed to help them market their goods. So, the whole circle is being completed. Also, the agency that women have as voters has only solidified due to the awareness that these schemes are an end result of their vote.
What are your thoughts on Prashant Kishor? What were his contributions to this election?
Prashant Kishor set a fresh political discourse and also created a special hope within the electorate, but his ideas and politics don’t have a popular base. Most of his ideas emerge from intellectual discourses, which don’t have a social base.
His issues didn’t work at the grassroots [level]. His party also lacks ideology and a robust organisational framework. In the absence of an ideology, the people working for the party are not emotionally connected. I think he has a future, and we shouldn’t write him off yet.
Has the “labharthi” identity now become a more powerful political currency than caste solidarity?
While caste remains a barometer of Bihar’s politics, it is not driving the discourse or voter mobilisation in the way it once did. Voters are not interpreting this election primarily through caste lenses. The older category of “poor” has been replaced by a more aspirational, upward-mobility-oriented beneficiary class that evaluates parties based on delivery of schemes, efficiency, and tangible gains.
So, to sum up, the “labharthi” identity has increasingly become a more influential political currency than caste solidarity. While caste continues to matter, the electorate’s aspirations, shaped by welfare schemes and beneficiary status, are now driving political mobilisation more strongly than traditional caste loyalties.