While the communal polarization ensured by Narendra Modi did pay huge dividends to him in mopping up such an overwhelming victory, it was also some very clever seat distribution strategy which also played a significant role in staving away the anti-incumbency factor for the BJP.

Narendra Modi's masterstroke, it now can be seen, was in denying tickets to nearly 50 sitting MLAs, which was then seen as a gamble. The gamble seems to have worked very well, as out of the about 50 seats where the sitting MLAs were denied tickets, 34 of the replaced candidates have won. While many of the sitting MLAs who were denied tickets either sulked or sat at home and some even rebelled and fought elections, all this had no impact on the final outcome, if one goes by the results.

Modi managed to sell to the central high command the need for replacing these candidates, and more importantly, he even sold it to the people. His explanation that no one can take the seat for granted and as if it is their birthright, went well with the masses, as many ordinary voters were heard repeating it, when asked about the denial of tickets to the sitting BJP MLAs. It also meant that whatever anti-incumbency the sitting MLA faced was erased.

This followed by 59 among the remaining 75 and odd-sitting MLAs who were given tickets, winning the seat again, also has contributed to Modi winning with such comfortable numbers. Even among the remaining 32 seats, where BJP was in opposition, Modi managed to swing it in his favour by changing the candidates who had lost the last election, and bringing in new candidates in 20 of them. So in fact, his gambit to change candidates in almost half of the 182 constituencies, yielded huge dividends.

On the other hand, Congress stuck to its sitting MLAs by re-nominating 46 of its 51 sitting MLAs. And only 17 managed to win. The need for changing candidates cannot be underlined more, when it is seen that out of the 59 candidates who have won from Congress, 23 are those who were chosen after denying tickets to last election's losing candidates.

While this strategy of Modi to change nearly half of its existing candidates yielded great results, what damaged Congress badly was its performance in Saurashtra. Its complete dependence on the BJP rebels led by Keshubhai Patel, who had promised to bring them the Patel and koli votes, turned out to be a complete disaster. They not only did not bring in these votes, they even drove away the kshatriyas votes, which otherwise would have come to them, in significant numbers.

The Congress strategy to revive the KHAM (Kshatriyas, harijan, adivasi, muslim) combination, which in the eighties had kept them in power, was however unsuccessful, because of the confusion it created, by aligning with the Patels in Saurashtra.

Central Gujarat---45 seats
---------------------------
BJP--- 18( 39 in 2002)
Cong---24 (6 )
Others----3( 0)

North Gujarat—53
-------------------------
BJP----38( 35 in 2002)
Cong---13( 16 )
Others—1 ( 2)