. (In the past) Vajpayee and Advani successfully drove home the message that (the BJP) was a "party with a difference". That is why when Advani spoke of pseudo-secularism and the double standards of Nehruvian consensus, he found a receptive audience. Those who voted for the BJP in droves in 1989, 1991 and 1996 did not do so because they wanted a Hindu theocratic state. Apart from other concerns, they were motivated by a desire to usher in a wholesome alternative to the Congress ... To middle India - the social backbone of the BJP - politics without ethics is meaningless.

Of course, the BJP has paid a heavy price for being excessively goody-goody. The sight of BJP leaders trying desperately to secure additional support for Vajpayee to remain prime minister in May 1996 was, to say the least, funny. They were completely clueless in a game involving bluff, deceit and undercover arrangements.

... In its desperation to prove that it does not lack a killer instinct, the BJP has clearly decided to give up all scruples and join the rest of the political class with gusto ... Why, many of the party's supporters asked belligerently, should we always be at the receiving end of unprincipled deals? Since politics is ultimately about winning power and retaining it, that seems a fair question. However, there is a larger question involved. To what extent must the BJP abandon its "party with a difference" tag ?.. Is fielding notorious criminals in the Legislative Council polls in Uttar Pradesh and inducting bigamists an appropriate way of doing it? In 1991, the BJP stole the moral thunder by recruiting scores of distinguished notables. This year, with the party nearer to power than it ever was, the quality of newcomers is distinctly unappetising.

... Even as Vajpayee and Advani win new allies, they must reassure the BJP's core constituency in middle India that there is a lakshman rekha that will not be crossed ... (Source: The India Today, 29 December, 1997)