Chief Minister YS Jagan is currently engaged in extensive surveys to determine candidate selections for upcoming elections.
He intends to allocate MLA and MP tickets based on these surveys, decisions that were discussed among party leaders during a meeting.
He straightforwardly acknowledges the need for robust public support to the candidates for allocating tickets.
However, a notable misstep lies in his decision to delegate the survey responsibilities to his party’s internal leaders.
This move has led to concerns, as some leaders with close affiliations to him have been involved in multiple surveys, potentially involving crores of investment.
Within the YCP, there’s an ongoing internal debate surrounding the transparency of such reports when party members are overseeing the surveys.
Criticism has arisen as same party leaders are presenting the findings that differ from the actual ground-level reality.
The YCP leaders appear apprehensive, fearing that biased reports could favor leaders in their proximity and that these reports might be manipulated to cater to Chief Minister Jagan’s preferences.
Reports suggest that those assigned to survey duties might also be influencing external survey organizations.
Furthermore, allegations have emerged, accusing ruling party leaders of manipulating survey firms by exerting financial pressure to elicit favorable or unfavorable reports.
Interestingly, an observation has surfaced that Chief Minister YS Jagan tends to favor individuals who praise him, and the presence of such individuals in his vicinity is causing political ramifications.
Amidst these circumstances, claims have emerged that some leaders are amassing huge wealth by deceiving YS Jagan in the nameof surveys.
Some argue that under the guise of surveys, efforts are being made to portray a positive image of the YCP’s popularity, even though certain locations might exhibit opposition to specific candidates.
YCP leaders maintain that defeating Jagan would not require an external opponent, expressing concern that the individuals he trusts could inadvertently lead to his political downfall.
There’s a prevalent notion that more credible results would be achieved if impartial survey organizations, rather than party leaders, conducted these assessments.