Parliament didn’t function last week and, as of now, there are no indications that it will work next week. Elated by the Congress victory in Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh and Rajasthan, the opponents of Prime Minister Narendra Modi seem quite hell bent on ensuring that India has a lame duck government between now and the end of May 2019, when the outcome of the general election will be known. That such an approach-unless good sense prevails-is bad for democracy and bad for the country hardly warrants reiteration. But this pronouncement of disapproval apart, the disruption is also also a pointer to the fact that the Opposition today believes that the Modi government is on its last legs and is in likely to be re-elected. Whether such a view is rash, unrealistic or premature is beside the point. The reality of this impression among parties that see their future in the Treasury benches in the truncated Budget session of June 2019 is undeniable.

What, however, is equally interesting is that the triumphalism of the Congress and some regional parties hasn’t translated into a corresponding demoralisation in the ranks of the BJP. That the party was seriously jolted by the defeat in the three states, especially Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh where it has governed for the past 15 years, is obvious. There was always the expectation that these would be bitterly contested elections but there was always the belief that the party would squeak through narrowly. Instead, it has lost narrowly in Madhya Pradesh (despite securing more popular votes) and Rajasthan, and been defeated resoundingly in Chhattisgarh. However, it is the narrowness of the defeats and the belief that general elections are fought on different, national issues that gives the BJP the hope that the outcome of the electoral war is still wide open and certainly winnable.

In politics, it is always important to consider what lessons the players have drawn from an important electoral encounter. In the immediate aftermath of the counting, the media concluded that it was widespread rural distress that accounted for the BJP’s losses. This conclusion was disproportionately based on the outcome in Chhattisgarh where, it seemed, the announcement by Rahul Gandhi of a big hike in the Minimum Support Price of paddy and promise of loan waiver in the first 10 days of a new government had an electrifying impact.

Curiously, this impression of farmers voting with their feet against the BJP is not universally shared in the saffron camp. Based on their internal assessments, the party has concluded that while a section of farmers are uneasy, the mood is neither resoundingly anti-BJP or pro-Congress. There are points of worry but these can be fixed. After all, the BJP (except in Chhattisgarh) performed reasonably well and picked up rural seats from both Madhya Pradesh and even Rajasthan where there were misgivings over the style of the outgoing Chief Minister.

The BJP appears to have concluded that what made the critical difference between winning narrowly and losing narrowly was the dissatisfaction in the ranks of the party’s core support base, particularly in the urban and semi-urban areas. In caste terms this meant that the total consolidation of the upper castes, so indispensable in ensuring the victory of the party, was not fully in evidence. A significant slice of the BJP’s committed voters did not vote for the party in the Assembly elections, a fact that explains the loss of crucial urban seats where victory should have been taken for granted.

The loss of a chunk of traditional voters is attributed to three factors.

First, the party’s own feedback suggests that there is dissatisfaction over the changes brought about by the Goods and Services Tax. The disquiet is exactly the same as was witnessed in the towns of Gujarat, particularly Surat, during the Assembly election earlier in the year. But whereas that was ‘managed’ owing to the personal influence of Modi and Amit Shah, the party proved less able in Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. The Congress, on its part, has seen the opportunities that the resistance to GST has provided it and is now consciously targeting shopkeepers, traders and small businesses.

Secondly, while there is no evidence of demonetisation being a factor, there is disquiet over cash shortages. The absence of ATM infrastructure and the inadequacy of bank branches have compounded the problem.

Reforms, it would seem, play out differently in centres of policy making and the grassroots. It will be interesting to see how the government is able to address these concerns stemming from much-needed reforms.

Finally, there are specifically ‘Hindu’ concerns. It is paradoxical that while its critics have berated the BJP for Hinduising politics, a chunk of its own supporters are angry with the party for not addressing Hindu concerns sufficiently. Add to this the upper caste backlash over the stringent reiteration of the SC/ST Atrocities legislation and there is an explosive social cocktail that the party has to dilute.

Political observers would do well to digest the perceptions in the ruling party after the defeats. These may offer important clues as to which way the Modi government moves in the short period between now and the general election. My view is that the government will move decisively to address these concerns.