Rahul Gandhi’s Politics of Perpetual Defeat and Manufactured Outrage

Paromita Das

New Delhi, 10th  December: Politics has always rewarded winners, but Rahul Gandhi has perfected a paradoxical craft—he loses with remarkable consistency yet emerges claiming a moral victory, draped in righteous indignation. Each electoral setback becomes not a moment for reflection but a theatrical accusation that Bharat’s democracy is under siege. If the voters refuse to hand him power, he insists the system itself must be rigged. This peculiar transformation of defeat into martyrdom has now become his political identity.

The latest Parliament session showcased this pattern in full display.

Parliament Drama and the Return of “Vote Chori”

During the debate over the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls, Rahul Gandhi resurrected his favorite charge—“vote chori”. He went as far as calling it the “biggest anti-national act,” warning that Bharat’s democratic fabric was under threat. His speech was dramatic, emotional, and predictably accusatory. What it lacked, however, was factual grounding.

According to Rahul, institutions like the Election Commission, judiciary, bureaucracy, and investigative agencies have all been captured by the government and its ideological affiliates. The narrative was familiar—every institution he doesn’t influence must surely be compromised.

He even declared that he had presented “proof” before Parliament, but like most of his proclamations, the evidence remained conveniently invisible.

Repackaging Old Claims: The CEC Selection Controversy

Rahul Gandhi also alleged that the government removed the Chief Justice of Bharat from the panel selecting the Election Commissioner to manipulate appointments. What he glossed over is that for decades—under Congress rule—no CJI was part of the process. If his logic stands, is he suggesting that every CEC appointed during Congress governments was a puppet?

The new committee includes a member of the Opposition—Rahul Gandhi himself. Yet somehow, this structure, which offers more balance than before, is painted as a crisis.

This isn’t confusion. It is calculated misdirection.

The 45-Day CCTV Fiction

Another dramatic charge was that the Election Commission stores CCTV footage for only 45 days. Rahul Gandhi framed this as deliberate destruction of evidence. But anyone familiar with data management knows that no institution stores terabytes of footage indefinitely—not banks, not courts, not airports.

Expecting polling booths to do so is absurd. If Rahul truly applied this logic to his own phone, he might accuse himself daily of destroying evidence by deleting old selfies.

This isn’t concern; it’s conspiracy theatre.

Immunity Misrepresented: A Deliberate Half-Truth

Rahul further claimed the Election Commission was given “immunity to do anything.” But the reality is clear: Commissioners can still be prosecuted through legal and Parliamentary mechanisms. The protection exists to ensure independence from political revenge—especially when leaders openly declare they will “change the law retrospectively” if they return to power.

Ironically, the threat sounds far more dangerous than the protection itself.

Democracy, According to the Dynasty

Rahul Gandhi’s definition of democracy has a striking simplicity:
If Congress wins, institutions worked. If Congress loses, democracy died.

When Congress wins Karnataka or Telangana, EVMs are trustworthy. When they lose nationally, the same machines become sinister. This schizophrenic relationship with technology reveals much about the selective outrage.

A Party That Lectures Democracy but Undermined It First

Rahul Gandhi’s moral posturing conveniently ignores the decades when Congress treated institutions as extensions of its political office. The Emergency reduced the Election Commission to a ceremonial puppet, dissenting voices were jailed, and newspapers were censored. Booth capturing and ballot stuffing flourished under local Congress networks.

Democratic fragility didn’t begin in the last decade—it was nurtured during Congress’s golden age of dominance.

EVMs Become Villains Only When They Block a Gandhi

The Electronic Voting Machine becomes the “Evil Voting Machine” only when the electorate refuses to endorse a dynasty. Technology isn’t the real issue—rejection is.

Attacking Institutions: The New “Politics of Love”

Rahul Gandhi claims to be fighting for institutional integrity, yet every institution he cannot influence becomes biased. The Supreme Court, the EC, investigative agencies, universities—all are cast as villains in his story. The only voices he celebrates are those of NGOs and narrative platforms that echo his accusations.

It’s less statesmanship and more a quest for international validation.

A Script of Excuses, Not Leadership

Rahul Gandhi’s rhetoric reflects not democratic concern but democratic discomfort. In an era where delivery, governance, and performance define politics, the Congress model of hereditary entitlement feels outdated. Instead of adapting, Rahul Gandhi manufactures paranoia to compensate for electoral irrelevance.

Bharat’s institutions are not perfect—but they cannot be the scapegoat for a leader who repeatedly fails to win trust.

What Rahul Gandhi’s Rhetoric Really Reveals

Ultimately, Rahul Gandhi’s cries of “vote chori” reveal not a crisis in Bharatiya democracy but a crisis within Congress itself. The nation has moved beyond royal surnames. Voters are choosing policies over pedigree, performance over legacy.

Democracy does not owe Rahul Gandhi victory. It only owes Bharat a fair choice—and the people have spoken. The more he shouts about stolen votes, the more obvious it becomes that what’s truly slipping away is the dynasty’s relevance, not Bharat’s democracy.