CM Dhami Hits Congress Over EVM, Institution Blame
Synopsis
Key Takeaways
Blaming the machines when the votes don't add up — Uttarakhand Chief Minister Pushkar Singh Dhami has turned that recurring pattern into the centrepiece of a sharp political salvo, targeting the Indian National Congress on Sunday, September 27, 2026.
Writing in Hindi on X, Dhami said: 'Apni haar ka theekra kabhi EVM toh kabhi sansthaaon par fodna Congress ki aadat ban gayi hai.' ('Blaming EVMs and constitutional institutions for every defeat has become a habit for Congress.') He went further, adding that a party that has already lost the public's trust will now need to find some new excuse for its losses.
A Playbook Congress Has Run Before
The charge is not new — and that, politically, is precisely Dhami's point. After the 2019 Lok Sabha elections, senior Congress figures publicly called for a return to paper ballots, alleging that Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs) could be tampered with. In multiple state assembly elections since 2017, party spokespersons levelled allegations of bias against the Election Commission of India following defeats. Courts and technical audits have repeatedly examined and dismissed these challenges without altering the legal framework for voting.
The BJP, which has consistently won the contests at the centre of these disputes, has defended EVM-based voting as transparent and tamper-proof, framing the opposition's complaints as sour-grapes politics rather than substantive electoral reform advocacy.
Why the Jab Lands Now
The timing and register of Dhami's post signal a broader BJP strategy: keep Congress on the defensive over credibility, not policy. By framing the EVM debate as a symptom of public trust already lost — rather than engaging the technical merits — Dhami shifts the conversation from electoral mechanics to political viability. It is a rhetorically efficient move: let your opponent's complaint become the proof of their problem.
The broader pattern is well-established across Indian politics. Opposition parties have invoked EVM concerns after losses since the machines' nationwide rollout, yet no systemic change to voting technology has followed. What has changed is the political cost of the argument: each successive cycle in which the complaint surfaces — and then recedes without institutional consequence — arguably makes the next iteration easier to dismiss.
With the next round of state assembly elections on the horizon, the battle over who controls the post-poll narrative — and who looks like they are already making excuses — has already begun.