Every time the Indian National Congress party loses a state election in India that it should have retained, the party goes through a familiar ritual. Committees are formed, statements are issued, lessons are announced, and then the same mistakes are repeated in the next state. Goa, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh, and now Kerala all point to the same pattern: Congress is not merely losing elections to its opponents, but also weakening itself through its own internal choices.
The recurring problem is simple. Congress often relies on leaders who build victories from the ground up, only to sideline them when power arrives. Leaders who have spent years organizing workers, touring districts, and creating local networks are frequently passed over in favor of figures closer to the party’s central leadership. This sends a damaging message to the party cadre: hard work and local credibility matter less than proximity to the high command. Over time, that message demoralizes workers, deepens factionalism, and drives valuable leaders away.
Goa offers one clear example. Congress had the numbers to form a government in 2017, but indecision at the top created an opening for the Bharatiya Janata Party to move quickly. The result was not just the loss of a government, but the collapse of trust within the party’s own ranks. In Madhya Pradesh, Jyotiraditya Scindia represented years of organizational effort and political capital, yet his growing dissatisfaction with the party’s treatment of him ended in a dramatic defection that brought down the government. What Congress lost was not only a leader, but an entire network of workers and supporters who followed him into the BJP.
Rajasthan tells a similar story. Sachin Pilot played a central role in Congress’s 2018 victory, but the decision to elevate Ashok Gehlot reflected the party’s old preference for loyalty and familiarity over generational change. The resulting rivalry between the two leaders consumed the government’s energy and weakened Congress’s ability to prepare for the next election. Even where Congress retained power for a time, the internal conflict became a lasting weakness. The party paid the price later at the ballot box.
READ: Siddiqi | West Bengal election proves that the Great Muslim Vote Fraud is finally over in India (May 10, 2026)
Assam perhaps shows the long-term cost of neglect most clearly. Himanta Biswa Sarma was once one of Congress’s most effective regional organizers in the northeast, but repeated denial of authority and recognition pushed him out of the party. He joined the BJP and went on to become one of its most influential leaders in the region. Congress did not merely lose a politician; it helped strengthen its principal rival in one of the most strategically important parts of the country.
Karnataka has so far been Congress’s more successful example, but even there the leadership question has required constant management. The tensions between Siddaramaiah and D.K. Shivakumar demonstrate that the party still struggles to settle succession and authority in a way that feels fair to the leaders who actually deliver victories. A temporary compromise may hold the coalition together, but it does not solve the deeper problem.
The issue is not just one of personalities. It is structural. Congress has long depended on an old guard of leaders who remain close to the Gandhi family and retain influence because of that proximity, even when their electoral relevance has faded. Some of them served the party well in earlier decades, but Indian politics has changed. Voters have changed, organizational demands have changed, and state politics now requires leaders with deep local roots and current legitimacy. Yet the party continues to reward familiarity more often than performance.
That creates a dangerous cycle. Young and capable leaders see that their efforts may not be recognized. Workers become cynical. Factions harden. And when resentment builds long enough, some leaders eventually leave, taking their influence and organizational strength with them. BJP has repeatedly benefited from this dynamic because it has understood how to absorb Congress’s frustrated leaders and convert their local strength into its own advantage.
Kerala may now become the next test of whether Congress has learned anything. If the party prioritizes Delhi’s preferences over the judgment of its Kerala leadership, it risks repeating the same error. The lesson is not complicated. A party cannot expect loyalty from the ground while rewarding only those who are closest to the center. It cannot keep sidelining the people who actually build victories and then act surprised when they drift away.
READ: Siddiqi | My friend Venu — A message to Congress (May 12, 2026)
Congress does not need more committees to explain its failures. It needs a new political instinct. It must recognize that proximity to the high command is not the same as electoral value, that ground leaders are not disposable, and that old loyalties should not automatically outweigh present-day relevance. Until that happens, the pattern will continue. The graveyard will keep growing, and Congress will keep blaming everything except the system that keeps causing its own losses.