Why TMC Cannot Blame SIR for Losing Bengal — The Maths Explained | The Squirrels

The Numbers Don't Lie: Why TMC Cannot Blame SIR for Losing Bengal

TMC is blaming the SIR voter roll deletions for its loss in Bengal. But the arithmetic tells a different story. Even if 75% of the 27 lakh disenfranchised voters were TMC supporters, the party would still have held a 40+ lakh vote advantage — if vote shares had remained the same. The real story is a genuine shift in voter preference, not voter deletion.

New Update

Listen to this article

0.75x1x1.5x

00:00/ 00:00

The Numbers Don't Lie: Why TMC Cannot Blame SIR for Losing Bengal

The counting is underway. BJP has crossed the majority mark. And the narrative machine has already kicked in — TMC leaders are pointing at the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, the deletion of 91 lakh names, the alleged disenfranchisement of 27 lakh voters, and calling this election stolen.

It is a powerful accusation. It deserves a serious response. So let us do what political commentary rarely does — let us do the maths.

Start with what we know from 2021.

TMC and its allies polled approximately 2.90 crore votes out of 6.03 crore total votes cast. That gave them a vote share of roughly 48 percent. BJP and allies got about 2.30 crore votes — a 38 percent share. The gap between the two was approximately 60 lakh votes. TMC did not just win. It won comfortably.

Now let us walk through 2026, one variable at a time.

Variable 1: Population growth.

Between 2021 and 2026, West Bengal's population has grown. If TMC's vote share had remained unchanged at 48 percent, and the turnout percentage had stayed the same, natural population growth alone would have pushed TMC's absolute vote count from 2.90 crore to roughly 3.04 crore.

Similarly, BJP's 2.30 crore would have grown to approximately 2.41 crore.

Before SIR, before turnout shifts — just on demographics — TMC would still have been ahead by about 63 lakh votes.

Variable 2: The SIR deletions.

Now factor in the most controversial element. The SIR exercise deleted about 91 lakh names from the voter rolls. Of these, roughly 27 lakh remain disenfranchised — their cases unresolved, their votes uncounted.

Let us be generous to TMC's argument. Assume that 75 percent of the disenfranchised 27 lakh were TMC voters. That is an assumption far more favourable to TMC than any neutral analysis would support — but let us grant it.

That gives us approximately 20 lakh TMC votes lost due to SIR.

For BJP, assume 8 to 10 percent of the disenfranchised were their voters. That is roughly 2.5 lakh votes lost.

After adjusting for SIR (using the most TMC-favourable assumptions), TMC would have dropped from 3.04 crore to about 2.84 crore. BJP would have dropped from 2.41 crore to about 2.38 crore.

TMC would still be ahead by roughly 46 lakh votes. Even after SIR.

Variable 3: The turnout surge.

Here is where the story gets interesting, and where TMC's SIR argument collapses entirely.

The 2026 election recorded a 92.47 percent turnout — the highest in Bengal's history. Compare that to 2021's approximately 82 percent. The absolute number of votes cast increased by roughly 30 lakh over what the same-turnout baseline would have predicted.

Those 30 lakh additional voters are the swing factor.

If TMC captured even 40 percent of the additional turnout, that would give it about 12 lakh extra votes. Net effect of SIR and turnout combined: TMC loses 20 lakh (SIR) but gains 12 lakh (turnout), for a net loss of 8 lakh votes. This would take TMC's tally to approximately 2.96 crore.

Now run the same calculation for BJP. If BJP captured 55 percent of the additional 30 lakh turnout — a reasonable assumption given that the turnout surge was driven partly by first-time voters, partly by mobilisation in regions where BJP campaigned aggressively — that gives BJP 16.5 lakh additional votes. Subtract the 2.5 lakh SIR loss, and BJP nets an additional 14 lakh votes, taking its total to approximately 2.55 crore.

The adjusted gap: TMC 2.96 crore versus BJP 2.55 crore. A 41 lakh vote advantage. For TMC.

Even under the most pessimistic scenario for TMC — assume the SIR impact was even larger, assume BJP captured an even higher share of the new turnout — TMC would still have been ahead by at least 30 to 40 lakh votes if vote shares had held.

This is the number that makes the SIR argument untenable.

For BJP to win Bengal — not just win seats through efficient distribution, but actually lead in a way that produces 168-plus seat leads in the trends — it cannot have happened through the deletion of 27 lakh voters alone. The arithmetic does not support it.

What it means is straightforward: there has been a genuine shift in voter preference. A significant chunk of Bengal's electorate — people who voted TMC in 2021 — have switched. Whether that switch was driven by anti-incumbency after 15 years, by the communal polarisation that both sides weaponised, by governance failures, by the recruitment scandal, by the BJP's ground-game improvement, or by some combination of all of these — that is the real conversation.

SIR is not the answer to what happened in Bengal today.

There is only one scenario where the SIR argument holds some weight: if BJP wins Bengal with a lower overall vote share than TMC but converts it into seats more efficiently through tight margins. In that case, the deletion of voters in specific constituencies — the 50 seats decided by narrow margins — could matter at the seat level even if it does not matter at the state-wide vote level.

But the current trends, as of late morning on May 4, do not suggest a narrow-margin conversion story. They suggest a wave. And waves are not manufactured by deleting voter rolls. Waves happen when people change their minds.

TMC has every right to challenge SIR in court. The legal and procedural questions are legitimate and deserve scrutiny. But the political argument — that SIR is why they are losing — does not survive contact with a calculator.

The numbers do not lie. They rarely do. The harder question, the one TMC will eventually have to answer, is not about voter rolls. It is about why, after 15 years, the voters who remained on the rolls chose someone else.The Numbers Don't Lie: Why TMC Cannot Blame SIR for Losing Bengal