Why did the Congress win?

India witnessed elections in May and a win for the ruling party, United Progressive Alliance (UPA). Congress is the main party in the alliance and Sonia Gandhi is the Chairperson of the Congress.
The victory of UPA has been given many shades of reason by journalists. The biggest two reasons that have been given are the emergence of Rahul Gandhi as a reckoning force, especially in Uttar Pradesh, and the performance of the Manmohan Singh government. However, I believe that more than these two, there are other complementary issues that need to be analysed when looking at the overall picture.
First, the voter turnout was much higher than in the last election. Empirically, trust and turnout are positively correlated in US elections. This could imply that there was higher trust in the political system among the citizens and especially the educated voters. Trust was higher because of little reported corruption during the last five years. Because of the way the government handled the situation post-Mumbai terror. Because of the long-term thinking and political will that was demonstrated by the nuclear deal. And because, psychologically, one starts to trust people (even if they are born in Italy) who are not power-hungry.
Second, the timing of the election was suited to ride over relatively high growth during times of financial turbulence and unprecedented economic insecurity. It was obvious to the voters that a reputed economist at the helm would be their best bet against the insecurity. It also helped that inflation had been timed to reach a record low. This ability to manage the timing of elections, often called the incumbent advantage, seems to have worked for the Congress. In the last elections, the BJP had advanced the date of the elections to get this to work in their favour. Knowing that worse was to come, BJP thought it could use this incumbent advantage. However, the voters being rational, also understood that worse was to come. It is for this reason that political parties should not try and advance the date of elections, as it can lead rational voters to smell something fishy.
Third, the structure of the political parties was favourable. The right alliances (in West Bengal, Maharashtra and Kashmir) helped Congress. The Left parties were seen to have played no positive role at the national and local levels. There was infighting in the BJP, and the leaders lacked the messianic appeal of the trio of Gandhis. Moreover, Varun Gandhi’s speeches seemed to have worked in favour of the Congress too.
Fourth, most people wanted a stable government at the centre. This meant that even if they were ideologically closer to the BJP, they preferred to vote for the Congress as it had the maximum chance of emerging as the single largest party. The formation of the Third and Fourth fronts made the incentive to vote for Congress even greater as the media projected a hung parliament. In short, strategic voting in favour of the Congress may have resulted due to pre-election polls by TV channels. No wonder then, that they are usually wrong in their forecast as they do not consider the change in voting patterns resulting from their prediction.
James Madison, one of the architects of the US Constitution, had stated:
“The aim of every political constitution, is or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess the most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of society, and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.”
Even if by chance, India’s constitution has succeeded in accomplishing the first goal. For the second, there is an incentive for getting re-elected, but given our history of political corruption, it may not be enough.