
Political prudence or just pressure? DMK allies turn up heat over seat-sharing before Tamil Nadu polls
VCK leader Thol. Thirumavalavan, who has been pressing for more seats, went a step further, meeting opposition AIADMK MLA and former minister Vaigaichelvan who visited him at his residence on 16 June.
Chennai: With assembly elections in Tamil Nadu just about 10 months away, allies of the ruling DMK in the state including the Congress, Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi (VCK) and the Communist Party of India (Marxist) have started mounting pressure on the senior partner to give them more seats to contest the polls.
'The DMK alliance has developed cracks and it is just the beginning. You will see more parties having discussions with the AIADMK,' Vaigaichelvan told reporters in Chennai on 18 June when asked about the meeting.
Hours later, addressing a public meeting in Madurai, Thirumavalavan said while VCK is not averse to the idea of joining the AIADMK-led alliance, 'the alliance also has BJP and the PMK, which would not go well with us.'
'VCK will not be part of any alliance where BJP and the PMK are there,' he declared.
Thirumavalavan and CPI(M) state secretary P. Shanmugam have said on multiple occasions that they would definitely demand more seats from DMK.
CPI state secretary P. Mutharasan told ThePrint they too want more seats. 'But, demanding and negotiating the seats are supposed to happen discreetly between parties. It should not be discussed with the media like how other alliance partners are doing,' he said.
Asked about it, DMK spokesperson T.K.S. Elangovan said it was for Chief Minister M.K. Stalin to decide who gets how many seats in the alliance. 'Our leader will not let anybody be unhappy in the state. Alliance leaders will also be treated in the same manner.'
In the 2011 assembly elections, DMK contested 119 of the 234 seats. Its ally Congress was given 63 seats, while VCK and CPI were allocated 10 each, and the CPI(M) 12.
While CPI won one seat with a vote share of 1.49 percent, CPI(M) didn't win any, though it did corner 2.22 percent votes. The Congress managed to win five seats with a vote share of 9.31 percent percent, while VCK won two seats with a vote share of 1.51 percent.
In the 2016 assembly elections, VCK, CPI, CPI(M) and other parties formed a third front and contested separately but did not secure any seat, and their vote percentage was also under one percent. The Congress, which was part of the DMK-led alliance, contested 41 seats and won eight, securing 6.42 percent votes.
In 2021, VCK, CPI and CPI(M) contested the assembly elections as DMK allies and were allotted six seats each. While CPI and CPI(M) won two seats each, VCK won four.
The Congress contested 25 seats and won 18, securing 4.29 percent votes, compared to CPI(M)'s 1.13 percent, CPI's 1.10 percent and VCK's 1.01 percent.
Also Read: Stalin's face front & centre, I-PAC hits ground running to shape DMK campaign for 2026 polls
'Just a pressure tactic'
Political analyst P. Sigamani told ThePrint it was just a pressure-building tactic by smaller parties so they can bargain a better deal during seat-sharing talks with senior allies. But it would not have any bearing on the larger alliance.
'The DMK-led alliance is a tested and proven alliance that would win the elections, be it parliament or assembly or even the local body. Hence, there is no chance of the alliance breaking. But, these demands in public would give them a leverage to (potentially) get more seats in the upcoming assembly election,' Sigamani told ThePrint.
'If political parties that have increased their vote share and their presence over the years and they demand more seats, it would definitely help the alliance. But, if parties like the Congress demand more seats, it would have an impact in securing a majority in the assembly,' Sigamani said, recalling the past performance of the Congress party.
In the 2011 polls, the Congress won just five of the 63 seats it contested. In the 2016 polls, the Congress was allotted 41 seats and it won eight. In the 2021 assembly elections, the Congress was allocated 25 seats and it won 18 seats.
'We have also increased our presence in the state,' Tamil Nadu Congress Committee President K. Selvaperunthagai told ThePrint. 'Unlike in previous elections, we have proved our support base in the last two Lok Sabha elections and in the 2021 assembly election as well. So, we would definitely demand for more seats to contest, and the numbers will be decided by the national leadership.'
VCK general secretary Sinthanai Selvan said it was the need of the hour to strengthen the alliance to achieve the larger goal of protecting the country.
'We are part of the DMK alliance not just for the seats and power, but, for a larger cause of saving the nation from the Hindutva forces,' he told ThePrint. 'In the journey to protect the country, it is also essential to strengthen ourselves to fight Sanatan forces. So, demanding more seats to contest is natural to strengthen our own party.'
He, however, added the demand would not be at the cost of the DMK-led alliance.
Shanmugam also told ThePrint seat-sharing talks would not be at the cost of the alliance, but it would only aim at strengthening his party and its representation in the assembly.
'The representation of the Marxist at the state and national level has been dwindling for years. And as a party, we want to increase our presence in assembly in accordance with our increase in presence on the ground,' he said, adding that they do not have any number in mind for now, but would decide at the time of seat-sharing talks with DMK.
(Edited by Ajeet Tiwari)
Also Read: How smaller TN parties are bolstering bargaining power to extract more from senior partners in 2026

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
New CIA report criticises investigation into Russia's support for Trump in 2016
A declassified CIA memo released Wednesday (July 2, 2025) challenges the work intelligence agencies did to conclude that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election because it wanted Republican Donald Trump to win. Also Read | Russia interfered in U.S. election to help Trump win: report The memo was written on the orders of CIA Director John Ratcliffe, a Trump loyalist who spoke out against the Russia investigation as a member of Congress. It finds fault with a 2017 intelligence assessment that concluded the Russian government, at the direction of President Vladimir Putin, waged a covert influence campaign to help Mr. Trump win. It does not address that multiple investigations since then, including from the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee in 2020, reached the same conclusion about Russia's influence and motives. The eight-page document is part of an ongoing effort by Mr. Trump and close allies who now lead key government agencies to revisit the history of a long-concluded Russia investigation, which resulted in criminal indictments and shadowed most of his first term but also produced unresolved grievances and contributed to the Republican president's deep-rooted suspicions of the intelligence community. Also Read | Robert Mueller's Trump Russia probe and its aftermath The report is also the latest effort by Ratcliffe to challenge the decision-making and actions of intelligence agencies during the course of the Russia investigation. A vocal Trump supporter in Congress who aggressively questioned former special counsel Robert Mueller during his 2019 testimony on Russian election interference, Ratcliffe later used his position as director of national intelligence to declassify Russian intelligence alleging damaging information about Democrats during the 2016 election even as he acknowledged that it might not be true. The new, 'lessons-learned' review ordered by Ratcliffe last month was meant to examine the tradecraft that went into the intelligence community's 2017 assessment on Russian interference and to scrutinise in particular the conclusion that Putin 'aspired' to help Trump win. The report cited several 'anomalies' that the authors wrote could have affected that conclusion, including a rushed timeline and a reliance on unconfirmed information, such as Democratic-funded opposition research about Trump's ties to Russia compiled by a former British spy, Christopher Steele. The report takes particular aim at the inclusion of a two-page summary of the Steele dossier, which included salacious and uncorroborated rumours about Trump's ties to Russia, in the intelligence community assessment. It said that decision 'implicitly elevated unsubstantiated claims to the status of credible supporting evidence, compromising the analytical integrity of the judgment.' But even as Ratcliffe faulted top intelligence officials for a 'politically charged environment that triggered an atypical analytic process,' his agency's report does not directly contradict any previous intelligence. Russia's support for Mr. Trump has been outlined in a number of intelligence reports and the conclusions of the Senate Intelligence Committee, then chaired by Sen. Marco Rubio, who now serves as Trump's secretary of state. It also was backed by Mueller, who in his report said that Russia interfered on Trump's behalf and that the campaign welcomed the aid even if there was insufficient evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy. 'This report doesn't change any of the underlying evidence — in fact it doesn't even address any of that evidence,' said Brian Taylor, a Russia expert who directs the Moynihan Institute of Global Affairs at Syracuse University. Mr. Taylor suggested the report may have been intended to reinforce Mr. Trump's claims that investigations into his ties to Russia are part of a Democratic hoax. 'Good intelligence analysts will tell you their job is to speak truth to power," Taylor said. "If they tell the leader what he wants to hear, you often get flawed intelligence.' Intelligence agencies regularly perform after-action reports to learn from past operations and investigations, but it's uncommon for the evaluations to be declassified and released to the public. Ratcliffe has said he wants to release material on a number of topics of public debate and has already declassified records relating to the assassinations of President John Kennedy and his brother, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, as well as the origins of COVID-19.

Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Can Trump fire Jerome Powell? Here's when Fed chair's term ends
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday reiterated his call for Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell to resign, saying the central bank leader should do so immediately. President Donald Trump has previously expressed frustration with Powell's rate hikes.(REUTERS) Powell, who was nominated by Trump to lead the Fed during his first administration, has been facing pressure from Trump to vacate his position following his reported disagreements with the President over the Fed's inflation policies Joe Biden, who succeeded Trump after the 2020 Presidential Election, nominated him for a second term. Trump has previously expressed frustration with Powell's rate hikes and has hinted at replacing him with someone more aligned with his economic outlook. Amid repeated calls by Donald Trump for Jerome Powell's resignation, the question arises whether the US President has the power to fire the Federal Reserve Chairman. Here's the answer. Can Trump fire the Federal Reserve Chairman? The question of whether a U.S. president can fire a Federal Reserve chair has resurfaced amid speculation about Donald Trump's potential efforts to challenge Jerome Powell's leadership. However, in one of his previous press conferences, Powell asserted that the law does not permit a president to dismiss a Fed chair without justification, emphasising his refusal to resign if pressured. Legal experts like Russel Morgan of The Morgan Legal Group note the ambiguity in statutes governing Fed leadership removal. Under the 1913 Federal Reserve Act, the central bank operates independently from political interference, with officials protected from dismissal over policy disagreements. A 1930s Supreme Court ruling adds that removing a Fed chair would require proof of 'inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance.' Morgan explained that any attempt to oust Powell would likely involve a lengthy process, including a Senate-led investigation to establish valid grounds, as per Barron's report.

Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
New CIA report questions intel on Russia helping Trump in 2016 presidential election
A declassified CIA memo released Wednesday challenges the work intelligence agencies did to conclude that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election because it wanted Republican Donald Trump to win. Russia's support for Trump has been outlined in a number of intelligence reports. (REUTERS) The memo was written on the orders of CIA Director John Ratcliffe, a Trump loyalist who spoke out against the Russia investigation as a member of Congress. It finds fault with a 2017 intelligence assessment that concluded the Russian government, at the direction of President Vladimir Putin, waged a covert influence campaign to help Trump win. Also Read | 'Get them the hell out': Donald Trump now mulls deporting US citizens It does not address that multiple investigations since then, including from the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee in 2020, reached the same conclusion about Russia's influence and motives. The eight-page document is part of an ongoing effort by Trump and close allies who now lead key government agencies to revisit the history of a long-concluded Russia investigation, which resulted in criminal indictments and shadowed most of his first term but also produced unresolved grievances and contributed to the Republican president's deep-rooted suspicions of the intelligence community. The report is also the latest effort by Ratcliffe to challenge the decision-making and actions of intelligence agencies during the course of the Russia investigation. Also Read | House set to pass Trump's Big Beautiful Bill? Here's who's voting 'No' and what 'NV means A vocal Trump supporter in Congress who aggressively questioned former special counsel Robert Mueller during his 2019 testimony on Russian election interference, Ratcliffe later used his position as director of national intelligence to declassify Russian intelligence alleging damaging information about Democrats during the 2016 election, even as he acknowledged that it might not be true. The new, 'lessons-learned' review ordered by Ratcliffe last month was meant to examine the tradecraft that went into the intelligence community's 2017 assessment on Russian interference and to scrutinise in particular the conclusion that Putin 'aspired' to help Trump win. The report cited several 'anomalies' that the authors wrote could have affected that conclusion, including a rushed timeline and a reliance on unconfirmed information, such as Democratic-funded opposition research about Trump's ties to Russia compiled by a former British spy, Christopher Steele. The report takes particular aim at the inclusion of a two-page summary of the Steele dossier, which included salacious and uncorroborated rumours about Trump's ties to Russia, in the intelligence community assessment. It said that decision 'implicitly elevated unsubstantiated claims to the status of credible supporting evidence, compromising the analytical integrity of the judgment.' But even as Ratcliffe faulted top intelligence officials for a 'politically charged environment that triggered an atypical analytic process,' his agency's report does not directly contradict any previous intelligence. Also Read | Donald Trump says Vietnam to face 20% tariff under 'great' deal Russia's support for Trump has been outlined in a number of intelligence reports and the conclusions of the Senate Intelligence Committee, then chaired by Sen. Marco Rubio, who now serves as Trump's secretary of state. It was also backed by Mueller, who in his report said that Russia interfered on Trump's behalf and that the campaign welcomed the aid even if there was insufficient evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy. 'This report doesn't change any of the underlying evidence — in fact, it doesn't even address any of that evidence,' said Brian Taylor, a Russia expert who directs the Moynihan Institute of Global Affairs at Syracuse University. Taylor suggested the report may have been intended to reinforce Trump's claims that investigations into his ties to Russia are part of a Democratic hoax. 'Good intelligence analysts will tell you their job is to speak truth to power," Taylor said. "If they tell the leader what he wants to hear, you often get flawed intelligence.' Intelligence agencies regularly perform after-action reports to learn from past operations and investigations, but it's uncommon for the evaluations to be declassified and released to the public. Ratcliffe has said he wants to release material on a number of topics of public debate and has already declassified records relating to the assassinations of President John Kennedy and his brother, Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, as well as the origins of COVID-19.