The bottom line is reel-making can be a creative outlet or a side hustle, not a full-fledged job, sustainable professions involve skill development, steady income, and accountability
At a rally in Samastipur in poll-bound Bihar, Prime Minister Narendra Modi tried to strike a familiar chord with the crowd when he said, “1 GB data aaj ek cup chai se bhi sasta hai… aur yeh chaiwala ne hi kar dikhaya.” He went on to add that the youth of Bihar were benefiting from cheap data — “making reels, showing their creativity, and earning from it.” The remark quickly went viral, drawing applause from supporters and criticism from those who wondered if making reels can really be called a profession.
Modi’s statement may have meant to highlight India’s affordable internet revolution and the opportunities it brings, social-media content creation, it cannot be equated with a stable profession. Most creators do not earn a consistent income, and the platforms themselves control visibility and monetization through unpredictable algorithms. For every influencer earning online, there are thousands of young users chasing views without security, benefits, or long-term prospects.
Digital access may have changed India’s social fabric, but is data really so cheap?
Observers say PM Modi’s “reel economy” remark portrays his characteristic campaign style — a blend of symbolism, optimism, and political messaging. PM Modi may have been highlighting digital opportunity — but in Bihar, which consistently ranks among the states with the highest youth unemployment and migration rates, lakhs of young people leave every year to work as labourers or daily wage earners in other states. Besides, the number of young people who actually earn a livelihood from content creation is small compared to the millions seeking steady jobs. Calling it an “opportunity” is oversimplifying a far more serious issue — joblessness, skill gaps, and lack of industry in Bihar, they add.
Supporters argue that Modi was celebrating affordable data as empowerment, not claiming that reel-making is a replacement for traditional employment. In his larger narrative, technology represents possibility — the idea that even a villager with a smartphone can dream big.
Perception matters in politics, and the jury is out.
The BJP itself has fielded no Muslim candidates in the 101 seats it is contesting, while the NDA has just around five candidates from the community.
Photo: Asaduddin Owaisi social media
In Bihar’s vibrant political mosaic, democracy is not just about casting votes but also about castes, communities, and their aspirations—and the question of representation. The Mahagathbandhan’s decision not to announce a Muslim deputy chief ministerial candidate has become a focal point of political debate in a state where Muslims make up nearly 18 percent of the electorate. The coalition’s chief ministerial face Tejashwi Yadav has hinted that the possibility of a Muslim deputy chief minister remains open, the ambiguity has given a political opportunity to its rivals.
The alliance, comprising the RJD, Congress, Left parties, and the Vikassheel Insaan Party (VIP), has fielded 255 candidates, with around 56 percent from backward or extremely backward communities. This includes a significant number of Yadav and Muslim candidates. The choice of VIP leader Mukesh Sahani as the deputy CM face is seen as a bid to woo the extremely backward castes (EBCs), who form roughly 36 percent of Bihar’s population—the state’s largest social group.
However, the move has drawn sharp criticism from the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), which accused the RJD-Congress combine of sidelining Muslims. Whether the absence of a Muslim face in a key position will dent the alliance’s prospects—given its traditional reliance on the ‘M-Y’ (Muslim-Yadav) equation—remains to be seen. For now, rivals are seizing the opportunity, with Asaduddin Owaisi’s AIMIM leading the charge and demanding stronger Muslim representation.
The AIMIM has been vocal in its challenge to the Mahagathbandhan’s silence on Muslim leadership, seeking to tap into a sense of political neglect among Muslim voters who feel sidelined despite their numerical strength and long participation in Bihar’s democratic politics. Owaisi’s decision to field candidates in 32 constituencies—particularly in Seemanchal and Mithilanchal—is a strategic push to consolidate Muslim political assertion in the regions.
The AIMIM’s earlier breakthrough—winning five assembly seats in the 2020 elections, all from Seemanchal—showed that its influence is tangible and growing. For the Mahagathbandhan, this serves as both a warning and a reminder: in Bihar’s shifting political landscape, no community can be taken for granted, and voices long unheard are finding new platforms.
BJP leader Syed Shahnawaz Hussain called the Mahagathbandhan’s move a “mahabhool” (mega blunder), claiming it has alienated the traditional M-Y vote base. “Their M-Y now stands for Mukesh Sahani–Tejashwi Yadav,” he quipped. The BJP itself has fielded no Muslim candidates in the 101 seats it is contesting, while the NDA has just around five candidates from the community.
Slams BJP over migration and Chhath trains; says Bihar doesn’t need such data where parents see their sons only on mobile screens
In poll-bound Bihar, the political battle is also a war of slogans — and symbols. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, addressing a rally on Friday, tore into the RJD-Congress-Left Mahagathbandhan, declaring that the people of Bihar will not allow the return of “jungle raj”.
In a symbolic flourish, Modi urged the crowd to switch on their mobile flashlights. As thousands of beams lit up the evening sky, he smiled and quipped, “When there’s already so much light, what’s the need for a lantern?”—a jibe at the RJD’s iconic election symbol.
Pivoting to his government’s digital achievements, Modi hailed the data revolution, saying that “1 GB of data now costs less than a cup of tea,” which this ‘chaiwallah’, meaning him, as provided to people. He claimed affordable internet had unleashed Bihar’s youth, empowering them to create and earn through reels, videos, and online ventures—a sign, he said, of a “new, aspirational Bihar” shaped by the NDA’s policies.
But Prashant Kishor, founder of the Jan Suraaj Party, wasn’t impressed. A day later he turned Modi’s words against him with a stinging line saying “Modi ji, data nahi, beta wapas chahiye.”
Kishor accused the BJP of celebrating digital progress while ignoring Bihar’s painful migration story. “We don’t need free data,” he said, “we need jobs so that our sons don’t have to board Chhath special trains to Delhi and Mumbai.” Kishor added, “Bihar doesn’t want such data where old parents are forced to see their sons only on mobile phones.”
Urging voters to “vote for their own children this time,” Kishor said Bihar doesn’t want just connectivity, but connection; not only data plans, but a plan for dignity and homegrown opportunity.
White House ballroom renovation has sparked legal storm, political fireworks, personal slugfest between presidential children
Photo: courtesy White House website
U.S. President Donald Trump is again at the centre of a controversy — this time over the demolition of the White House’s East Wing to make way for a lavish ballroom. The $300 million project, which Trump says is privately funded, has drawn both legal and political backlash.
A Virginia couple has reportedly filed an emergency motion in a federal court seeking to halt construction, arguing that the plan violates federal preservation and planning laws.
Earlier this week, Trump announced that construction was already underway, calling it a long-overdue modernization of the historic residence.
“For more than 150 years, every President has dreamt about having a Ballroom at the White House to accommodate people for grand parties, State Visits, etc. I am honored to be the first President to finally get this much-needed project underway — with zero cost to the American Taxpayer!
“The White House Ballroom is being privately funded by many generous Patriots, Great American Companies, and, yours truly. This Ballroom will be happily used for Generations to come!” he wrote on social media, drawing backlash from Democrats, who accused Trump of damaging the historic White House. The Trump administration says that renovations and modernisations are a normal part of White House upkeep.
Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt defended the decision, noting that previous presidents also made renovations, and even recalled Barack Obama’s complaint about hosting state dinners in outdoor tents due to limited indoor space. Meanwhile, rumours that the new space would be named “The President Donald J. Trump Ballroom” are also being trashed by the administration.
Meanwhile, the controversy also took a personal turn when former President Bill Clinton’s Chelsea Clinton condemned the project, calling it “an attack on heritage, democracy, and the rule of law.” “The erasure of the East Wing isn’t just about marble or plaster — it’s about President Trump again taking a wrecking ball to our heritage, while targeting our democracy, and the rule-of-law,” she wrote on social media. In response, Donald Trump Jr. reignited old political controversy and invoked her father’s infidelity scandal involving former White House intern Monica Lewinsky. “Lol, your parents tried stealing furniture and silverware from the White House,” Trump Jr. alleged, also writing, “And let’s not talk about the intern. Sit this one out.”
From PM Modi to Rahul Gandhi to Tejashwi Yadav to Nitish Kumar, everyone is invoking his name and ideals, but who really carries Karpoori Thakur’s legacy
Photo: courtesy MHA website
As the political landscape heats up in Bihar, the legacy of the late Karpoori Thakur has become a powerful tool being used by almost every major politician, from Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Congress leader Rahul Gandhi to Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and Mahagathbandhan CM face Tejashwi Yadav. But as the ideals of this iconic socialist leader are invoked, the question is who truly carries Karpoori Thakur’s legacy, and is it about honouring his ideals or simply leveraging his name for political gains/votes?
Prime Minister Modi paid tribute to Karpoori Thakur on his 101st birth anniversary, visiting his birthplace in Karpurigram, Bihar. In his speech, Modi spoke about how Thakur’s social justice work had paved the way for people like himself and Nitish Kumar—both of whom come from humble, backward castes—to rise in politics. The PM even recalled that his government had the “good fortune” to confer the Bharat Ratna, India’s highest civilian award, on Thakur the previous year. This recognition was long championed by regional leaders like Lalu Prasad Yadav and Nitish Kumar, who had pushed for the honour for years.
Thakur, who served as Bihar’s Chief Minister twice in the 1970s, earned the title of “jannayak”—leader of the people—for his unwavering support of the backward castes. Coming from ‘Nai’ (barber) caste himself, Thakur implemented significant reforms like removing English as a compulsory subject for matriculation exams, introducing alcohol prohibition, and prioritizing jobs for unemployed engineers in state contracts. His actions often challenged the status quo, especially in a state where political power was traditionally concentrated in the hands of upper-caste elites.
Karpoori Thakur also mentored several future political leaders, including Lalu Prasad Yadav and Ram Vilas Paswan, both of whom went on to become prominent figures from the Yadav and Dalit communities, respectively. Thakur’s contribution to social justice and empowerment of the backward classes is undeniable but till 2024 when he was awarded Bharat Ratna ahead of Bihar elections in 2025 there was not much talk about either him or his work.
The Congress questioned the sincerity of those invoking Thakur’s name. Ahead of Modi’s visit, Congress leaders reminded the public of the historical context: when Karpoori Thakur introduced OBC reservations it was Jan Sangh that helped topple his government. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh pointed out the contradictions in Modi’s position, highlighting that the BJP had once opposed Thakur’s policies and even subjected him to harsh criticism. He also accused Modi of being complicit in weakening Bihar’s 65% reservation law for backward classes, pointing out that his government had refused to support caste-based census efforts or safeguard the state’s reservation laws.
In poll-bound Bihar, Karpoori Thakur’s name has become a symbol of social justice and backward caste empowerment, but the question remains—are politicians truly following in his footsteps, or are they simply cashing in on his legacy for electoral gains?
Prime Minister Narendra Modi, during a rally in Samastipur, Bihar, on Friday, asserted that the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), under the leadership of Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, will break all previous electoral records in the upcoming Bihar Assembly elections. The Prime Minister also took a jibe at the opposition INDIA bloc, claiming it was led by “people out on bail.”
“Bihar is now an attractive investment destination. I foresee a future where every district will be teeming with startups driven by local youth,” PM Modi said.
The Prime Minister further added, “Bihar will keep the ‘jungle raj’ at bay and vote for good governance. ‘Nayi raftaar se chalega Bihar, phir jab aayegi NDA sarkar’ (Bihar’s growth will accelerate once the NDA returns to power). The RJD and Congress indulged in scams; their leaders are out on bail, and now they are trying to usurp the ‘Jannayak’ title of Bharat Ratna Karpoori Thakur.”
RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav, who is heading the INDIA alliance for the Bihar Assembly elections, on Thursday took a swipe at the NDA, stating, “Nitish Kumar is facing injustice. There has been no announcement regarding Nitish Kumar as the NDA’s Chief Ministerial candidate. We want to ask Amit Shah: You declared Nitish Kumar as the Chief Ministerial face in every election before this, so why not this time? This will be Nitish Kumar’s last election. Amit Shah has already made this clear.”
The fact is BJP leaders have refrained from officially projecting Nitish Kumar as the NDA’s Chief Ministerial candidate, asserting that the decision will be made by elected MLAs after the elections. Political analysts suggest that the BJP’s reluctance to make a formal announcement is driven by several factors. These include the party’s desire to maintain strategic flexibility, internal ambitions to increase its influence in Bihar, and concerns over Nitish Kumar’s declining popularity and health. By avoiding a public commitment, the BJP maintains leverage within the alliance and avoids alienating its cadre, some of whom feel the party should assert its own leadership in the state. The ambiguity also allows the BJP to keep post-poll options open.
“One of course is health issues, plus the BJP has been trying to expand its footprint in Bihar and openly endorsing Nitish Kumar is not something that may be liked by cadres or dedicated voters. Some in the BJP, particularly within the state unit, might be eyeing a greater role and could be interested in promoting their own leaders as potential CM candidates. By not committing to Nitish Kumar, the BJP can keep its internal factions happy and avoid sidelining emerging leaders,” say those aware of the ground situation in the key state.
Whether Bihar’s young voters can overcome the state’s deep-rooted social, political, and economic divides to deliver a surprise outcome in the ensuing Assembly polls, or if it will be the same old story again? A report by Vibha Sharma
Bihar is a land of paradox. Historically, it was the cradle of learning—home to ancient Nalanda and Vikramshila universities—attracting scholars from across Asia. Today, it continues to produce some of India’s brightest minds—top IAS officers, bureaucrats, journalists, and professionals who excel nationally and internationally—despite the education system of the country’s “intellectual capital” being in shambles. Bihar remains among India’s poorest states, plagued by unemployment, migration, and weak governance.
For decades, the state’s decline has been shaped by political opportunism. Successive leaders—from Lalu Prasad Yadav’s populist patronage to Nitish Kumar’s moral posturing—thrived because national parties like Congress and BJP allowed them to. The Congress abandoned Bihar to caste-based and regional politics and BJP treated it as a coalition playground, prioritising electoral arithmetic over governance—a political culture of survival politics where systemic corruption flourished and development took a backseat.
Today, Bihar’s politics revolves around poverty, migration, moral governance, and electoral freebies—cash transfers to women and youth, pensions for the elderly, and free rations to secure votes besides measures like the liquor ban—which do little to foster real economic transformation. Despite decades-long rule of an apparently popular Chief Minister, Nitish Kumar, the state remains caught between symbolic reforms and persistent economic failure, with jobs, industry, and scarce opportunities.
The race to the 243-member Bihar Assembly is close with no alliance clearly dominating across all metrics. In one of the surveys ahead of the elections, backed by Congress and Left parties, RJD’s Tejashwi Yadav is leading as the preferred CM choice, while in another, the ruling JD(U)-BJP combine seems set to retain power with LJP’s Chirag Paswan making modest gains. In yet another survey, founder of newbie Jan Suraaj Party is said to be on a roll.
While politicians focus on managing poverty with freebies, cash doles and rations to win elections rather than eradicating it, the land of historical brilliance and immense human potential is struggling to provide basic livelihoods, forcing millions to migrate. Bihar’s paradox is clear—a state of exceptional talent trapped by structural neglect and political compromise.
The Irony
There are several examples of things that are wrong, consider this most evident: When Nitish Kumar announced total prohibition in April 2016, it was hailed as a bold social reform. The Chief Minister framed it as a moral and economic corrective—meant to curb domestic violence, restore household savings, and empower women. On paper, the ban is a perfect success story in gender justice.
Data gives this claim some weight. According to some studies, weekly alcohol use in Bihar fell to among the lowest in India and also prevented lakhs of domestic abuse cases. In countless villages, women testify that their husbands now come home sober, bringing groceries instead of quarrels. In this sense, the ban reconfigured power within families and gave women tangible relief.
But beneath the surface lie the deep cracks. The ban has cost Bihar dearly—financially and administratively—with the state forfeiting thousands of crores annually in excise revenue, money that could have funded roads, schools, or hospitals. Meanwhile, a parallel black market for liquor flourished, with smuggling networks from Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal keeping the state wet despite official dryness.
The irony is that while trying to prevent alcohol-related harm, Bihar spawned a thriving underground economy of bootleggers, police corruption, and fatal hooch tragedies. Dozens die every year from spurious liquor. Enforcement is heavy-handed and uneven—poor men from Dalit and backward communities are disproportionately jailed, while wealthier citizens procure alcohol discreetly.
Bihar’s prohibition experiment is well-intentioned, symbolically grand but operationally broken—and that may be the case with most populist schemes to woo voters.
Political strategist-turned-politician Prashant Kishor has turned this into a campaign issue. Kishor calls the prohibition policy a “sham,” arguing it has neither reformed society nor strengthened the state and has promised to repeal the ban “within an hour of coming to power.”
Migration —The Escape Economy
This is just one aspect of the Bihar story. A poor education system, lack of opportunities, and migration make it a state whose most consistent export has been its people. According to recent estimates, around 74.5 lakh Biharis live outside the state—a staggering figure that reveals the limits of local opportunity.
Migration in Bihar is both a safety valve and a symptom. It is a safety valve because remittances sustain rural households, fund education, and drive local consumption and a symptom because it exposes structural failures that push people out—inadequate education system, unemployment, land fragmentation, low industrialisation, and frequent floods.
Migration data mirrors Bihar’s inequalities. It is highest in regions hit by ecological fragility and economic neglect. Educated youth migrate by choice while the poor and landless by compulsion. General and upper castes dominate skilled and formal-sector migration, while backward castes, Dalits, and Muslims form the bulk of seasonal, informal, and insecure migrants.
The economic cost of this exodus is immense. Bihar loses not just labour but voters—large-scale migration has distorted electoral rolls, with entire families missing during revisions. The Special Intensive Revision (SIR) exercise recently triggered controversy when thousands of names, particularly from Seemanchal’s Muslim-majority districts, were deleted. Allegations of disenfranchisement—whether by error or design—have turned migration into a democratic crisis.
Schemes launched during the Covid pandemic to reintegrate returning migrants were short-term patches, migrants came home but jobs did not. Once travel reopened, most left again. Migration in Bihar is no longer a temporary response—it is an embedded feature of its political economy, and every departing worker and every genuine voter missing is an indictment of the state’s inability to provide livelihood security.
Behind the migration tide lies Bihar’s youth bulge—its greatest potential and deepest liability. Over 60% of the population is under 35, but the job market is stagnant, and aspirations far outpace opportunities. Government recruitment drives are sporadic, often mired in paper leaks and procedural corruption. The education system, weakened by absentee teachers and political interference, fails to equip students for the private sector. The result is a generation disillusioned with both education and governance.
In urban centres like Patna, coaching institutes and exam centres are crowded with hopefuls preparing for government jobs that may never materialise. For many, migration to Delhi, Surat, or Gulf countries feels less like ambition and more like resignation. Logically, employment—or its absence—should be the most potent electoral issue alongside basic education. But will it?
The state’s welfare architecture is vast—free bicycles, pensions, student incentives, cash transfers, free rations and honoraria. But do these programmes make a long-term difference? The liquor ban itself is a case study. Police and excise officials reportedly extort both smugglers and citizens. Courts are clogged with prohibition-related cases, consuming administrative bandwidth that could have been spent on development.
The ruling government’s focus on welfare “freebies” reflects both electoral pragmatism and structural paralysis. In a state with little industry and weak private investment, the government’s role as the main distributor of benefits has become the central mode of political control. But welfare without reform breeds dependency, and does not build resilience.
The Caste Factor
The fact is caste is the invisible architecture of Bihar’s politics and everything revolves around it. Be it JD(U)-BJP, RJD-Congress, or new formations like Jan Suraaj, everyone calculates its arithmetic on caste equations. Women, empowered through prohibition and targeted welfare schemes, have emerged as a distinct voting bloc, however, gender empowerment in Bihar is narrow—it expands welfare access but not economic agency.
Overall, it is caste that drives electoral strategy, with representative leaders negotiating with bigger parties for gains that hardly reach their voters. Regional leaders thrived, often using public resources for patronage, nepotism, and populist schemes, leaving Bihar dependent on migration, remittances, and informal economies.
According to observers, Bihar’s chronic underdevelopment is no accident—it is the product of decades of political neglect, mismanagement, and opportunism. Despite being among India’s most populous states, it consistently ranks at the bottom of human development indices. Political elites prioritized survival over reform, building vote banks through caste and community appeasement rather than investing in industry, education, or healthcare, with freebies and symbolic schemes (like the liquor ban) substituting for real economic growth.
Nitish Kumar’s tenure has seen some infrastructure gains—electricity coverage has improved in urban and many rural areas, and rural roads expanded under central and state schemes—achievements that are real but insufficient to offset decades of neglect and entrenched poverty.
For Bihar to break free, politics must move beyond caste arithmetic, symbolism, and survival strategies.
The Current Situation
Hailed as “sushasan babu,” Nitish Kumar is a pale shadow of his former self who once challenged the then Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi because he saw himself as a competitor and a better candidate for the post of the Prime Minister. Twelve years down the line, his image is frayed due to his various U-turns and failing health.
The BJP top brass is well aware of the situation, a reason perhaps for playing a controversial yet significant card—the SIR/electoral roll revision. Many believe it may tilt the playing field in favour of the ruling alliance (NDA) by changing voter registration dynamics.
The impact of new entrants or a third front (Prashant Kishor’s Jan Suraaj) is uncertain—the untested newbie may pull votes from both major blocs, particularly from segments dissatisfied with the status quo. Preliminary poll snapshots reflect current sentiment and volatile political environments which can shift closer to election day. Prashant Kishor has leapfrogged Nitish Kumar in the CM preference rankings.
Even if Kishor’s Jan Suraaj is merely a “third front”, “spoiler”, or “vote-splitting” factor, it is capable of influencing who eventually comes out on top. PK is emerging not necessarily as the top choice but as a strong second contender—signalling significant traction for a newcomer in a state long dominated by entrenched party identities.
The fact that he has overtaken Nitish suggests declining confidence in the incumbent, and that some of the anti-incumbency vote is gravitating toward him, not the RJD-Congress-Left parties’ mahagathbandhan. Some of the polls still show a big gap between him and Tejashwi Yadav, but even a modest base can swing outcomes by fragmenting vote shares in a three-way contest where the BJP-led NDA has the edge.
Who will win is anybody’s guess, but in real elections, factors like local candidate strength, alliance arrangements, party machinery, caste dynamics, and ground mobilization override.
Political Fatigue
Prashant Kishor openly accuses BJP and Congress of compromising the state by piggybacking on “regional corrupt parties.”
Bihar’s greatest challenge is not just poverty or migration—it is the deep political fatigue born of recycled promises. For decades, the state has oscillated between the same faces and formations, each claiming moral reform while preserving structural rot. Yet, under the surface, a restless young electorate—better connected, more aspirational, and less patient—is beginning to question inherited loyalties.
Observers say if Bihar does spring a surprise, it will not come from a new alliance or slogan—it will come from a generational demand to move beyond survival politics toward dignity, opportunity, and accountability. Bihar is not just a land of intellectual brilliance—it has also been an incubator of political activism in India.
The Jayaprakash Narayan (JP) Movement of 1974–75 stands out as the defining moment of Bihar’s revolutionary spirit. Sparked by widespread corruption, misgovernance, and inequality, the movement galvanized students, workers, and ordinary citizens across the state to demand “Total Revolution”—political, social, and economic reforms.
It is a close contest between the ruling NDA alliance (BJP, JD(U), LJP and others) and the opposition Mahagathbandhan (RJD, Congress, Left and other parties), with the newbie Jan Suraj Party positioning itself as the third alternative. Players like AIMIM and BSP are also in the game
The elections, to be held in two phases on November 6 and 11, carry several intriguing possibilities. Freebies for women and youth may influence voter choices, while the Jan Suraaj Party could attract disenchanted voters—especially the young and first-timers. Voter turnout, particularly among women and youth, along with the effectiveness of alliances, will be crucial. Whether Bihar can overcome its entrenched social, political, and economic divides to deliver an unexpected outcome—or if it will be the same old story again—is something only the voters will decide.
The “Jungle Raj” theme works as a defensive and emotional weapon, reminding voters why they once rejected the RJD. It can consolidate NDA’s core vote and older demographics. But it won’t automatically win new voters unless it’s paired with a strong narrative on jobs, migration, and growth — issues that dominate Bihar’s youth mindset today.
Photo: courtesy PM social media
With the Mahagathbandhan making Tejashwi Yadav, son of former Chief Minister Lalu Prasad, as its official face now, the BJP-JD(U) led ruling NDA has made the return of “Jungle Raj” its central campaign issue, seeking to counter the opposition coalition led by the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD). Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who will visit Bihar on October 24 to launch the NDA campaign with rallies in Samastipur and Begusarai, has already sharpened the attack on the RJD-Congress combine, framing the contest as one between “Vikas Raj” and “Jungle Raj.”
Addressing young BJP workers via the NaMo App, Modi urged them to campaign jointly with NDA allies, declaring, “Raftaar pakad chuka Bihar, phir se NDA sarkar.” He said Bihar’s growth under a stable government must not be derailed, contrasting it with the RJD’s earlier rule marked by corruption and crime. “Biharis will never forget the Jungle Raj era — the fear, the lawlessness, the misgovernance. We must ensure it never returns,” Modi said.
The PM also took a swipe at the opposition’s INDIA bloc, calling it a “lathbandhan” — a coalition of criminals — and accused its leaders of being out on bail and prioritizing self-interest over youth and development. Modi linked the opposition to Naxalism and Maoist extremism, urging party workers to expose their record while focusing on youth outreach. He directed workers to engage first-time voters, involve senior citizens in recounting their experiences of the “Jungle Raj,” and campaign intensively over the next 20 days.
Party leaders including BJP national president J.P. Nadda and Bihar unit chief Dilip Jaiswal have echoed Modi’s message, warning voters against “Jungle Raj 2.0.” The party’s communication strategy revolves around contrasting NDA’s decade of governance with the RJD’s past, presenting the election as a choice between progress and regression.
The BJP’s campaign theme — “Jungle Raj vs. Vikas Raj” — is expected to dominate the final leg of the election drive as Modi begins his Bihar tour on October 24. Bihar votes in two phases on November 6 and 11, with results to be declared on November 14. The “Jungle Raj” theme works as a defensive and emotional weapon, reminding voters why they once rejected the RJD and Lalu Prasad Yadav. It can consolidate NDA’s core vote and older demographics. But it won’t automatically win new voters unless it’s paired with a strong narrative on jobs, migration, and growth — issues that dominate Bihar’s youth mindset today. In short, if the election becomes a referendum on the past, BJP gains. However, if it turns into a debate about the future, the opposition gains.
RJD leader Tejashwi Yadav was on Thursday officially declared the chief ministerial candidate of the opposition Mahagathbandhan for the upcoming Bihar Assembly elections. “We have decided to contest the elections with Tejashwi Yadav as our CM face,” senior Congress leader Ashok Gehlot announced. Meanwhile, Mukesh Sahani of the Vikassheel Insaan Party (VIP) has been named the Deputy Chief Minister candidate if the alliance comes to power.
Interestingly, this is one of the rare occasions when the name of a Deputy CM has been announced in advance. All seven parties of the Mahagathbandhan, including the Congress and Left parties, endorsed the decision, presenting a united front at the press conference amid an ongoing tussle over seat allocation.
Gehlot arrived in Patna on October 22 to mediate between alliance partners, meeting RJD chief Lalu Prasad Yadav and his son Tejashwi Yadav to defuse tensions within the alliance — primarily between the RJD and Congress, the two major constituents.
Meanwhile, Tejashwi questioned the NDA’s silence over its leadership, asking why there had been no joint press conference between the BJP and JD(U). Responding to the ruling alliance’s “jungle raj” allegations, he said, “I want to tell people that Tejashwi will not compromise on corruption or law and order. I also want to assure all Mahagathbandhan parties that we will build a new Bihar.”
The ruling BJP–JD(U) NDA has not yet officially said who will be its chief ministerial face.
Endorsing Tejashwi’s candidature for the top post, other leaders from the INDIA bloc also questioned the NDA’s lack of clarity. “The NDA has not even announced a name. They are saying MLAs will decide who their leader will be. So tell me, who is late? It’s Bihar that has been kept 20 years behind on the path of development. Strategies have been decided for all seats; there is no confusion on our side,” Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera said.
BJP leaders have so far refrained from officially projecting incumbent CM—JD(U)’s Nitish Kumar—as the NDA’s chief ministerial face, maintaining that the decision will be taken by elected MLAs after the polls. Political observers believe the hesitation stems from multiple factors — the BJP’s desire to keep strategic flexibility, internal ambitions to expand its influence in Bihar, and concerns over Nitish’s waning popularity and health. By not committing publicly, the BJP retains leverage within the alliance and avoids alienating its cadre, some of whom feel the party should assert its own leadership in the state. The ambiguity also keeps post-poll options open.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced on Wednesday that he will participate in the 47th ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur virtually. His decision effectively rules out any possibility of a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump on the sidelines of the event.
“Had a warm conversation with my dear friend, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim of Malaysia. Congratulated him on Malaysia’s ASEAN Chairmanship and conveyed best wishes for the success of the upcoming Summits. Look forward to joining the ASEAN-India Summit virtually and to further deepening the ASEAN-India Comprehensive Strategic Partnership,” Modi posted on X.
Taking a dig at the Prime Minister’s decision, the Congress claimed the reason was “simple.” “He just doesn’t want to be cornered by President Trump, who will also be there. He refused an invitation to attend the Gaza Peace Summit in Egypt a few weeks back for precisely this reason,” the party said.
In a post on X, Congress leader Jairam Ramesh wrote, “For days the speculation has been — will he or won’t he? Will Mr. Modi go to Kuala Lumpur for the Summit or not? Now it appears certain that the PM will not go. It means the loss of many opportunities to hug and get photo ops with world leaders, or to flaunt himself as the self-styled Vishwaguru.”
Ramesh further remarked, “Posting messages in praise of President Trump on social media is one thing, but to be seen physically hobnobbing with the man who has claimed 53 times that he stopped Operation Sindoor, and five times that India has promised to stop buying oil from Russia, is another matter. It’s far too risky for him. The PM may well be recalling that old Bollywood hit: ‘Bachke rehna re baba, bachke rehna re.’”
