CPI(M)Communist Party of India (Marxist)
State-level report card across all 5 contests CPI(M) fielded in the Tamil Nadu 2026 Assembly Election — seats, margins, districts, and head-to-head against every rival party.
- Mirrors CPI almost exactly — 2 wins from 5, 40% strike rate, no forfeited deposits, 32% vote share in seats fought.
- Both Left parties are alliance dependents at this scale — neither has a standalone test in 2026.
- Split head-to-head with TVK — 2 wins and 2 losses against the cycle's dominant force.
Drafted 2026-05-13 · refreshed when the underlying metrics change.
Punched above weight — 2 of 5 (40% strike rate), the kind of efficiency major parties envy. 0.60% statewide.
Margin distribution
margin as % of valid votes in AC · 5 contestsState pulse
extremes across every contested ACDistrict scorecard
present in 5 of 38 districts| District | W / C | Share | Best seat |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kanniyakumari | 1 / 1 | 38.2% | PADMANABHAPURAM |
| Nagapattinam | 1 / 1 | 37.0% | KILVELUR |
| Dindigul | 0 / 1 | 31.4% | PALANI |
| Pudukkottai | 0 / 1 | 27.9% | GANDHARVAKOTTAI |
| Thiruvallur | 0 / 1 | 27.3% | THIRUVOTTIYUR |
| District | W / C | Share | Best seat |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thiruvallur | 0 / 1 | 27.3% | THIRUVOTTIYUR |
| Pudukkottai | 0 / 1 | 27.9% | GANDHARVAKOTTAI |
| Dindigul | 0 / 1 | 31.4% | PALANI |
| Nagapattinam | 1 / 1 | 37.0% | KILVELUR |
| Kanniyakumari | 1 / 1 | 38.2% | PADMANABHAPURAM |
Head-to-head
who they fought across the stateBooth-level extremes
1,199 booths analysed →CPI(M) contested 5 of 234 seats in TN 2026 inside the SPA alliance — the state-level reflection of the INC-led UPA / INDIA bloc. Across 1,199 polling stations with 200+ valid votes, four numbers stand out.
585 of 687 voters chose CPI(M) at Booth 290 in Thiruvithancode — the party’s tightest lock-in anywhere. Padmanabhapuram sits in Kanyakumari, where CPI(M) historically holds an old-left floor inside seats now contested via the SPA arithmetic.
CPI(M) held this booth by a single vote with 33.2% share. Palani is the only constituency that produced both a knife-edge win and a knife-edge loss for CPI(M) inside the same seat — a tight booth-by-booth arithmetic typical of a small-footprint party.
CPI(M) averages 31.5% across Palani, but at Booth 41 it took 82.0% — a 50-point local jump. Despite Palani being a contested seat, the hyper-local pockets show CPI(M)’s residual organisational depth still produces fortress-grade booths inside otherwise competitive constituencies.
CPI(M) averaged 40.1% vote share across the 1,199 booths it contested inside the SPA. With 8 knife-edge wins against only 2 knife-edge losses, the win/loss spine ran sharply positive — evidence that the SPA seat-share routed CPI(M) into seats where the alliance transfer landed cleanly.
≥200 valid votes per booth · ECI Form 20
Every CPI(M) candidate (5)
filter · sort columns · click any row to drill into the AC| AC | Candidate | Votes | Margin ▼ | Status | Age | Net worth | Crim | Drill down |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AC 232 PADMANABHAPURAM Kanniyakumari |  CHELLASWAMY. R rank #1 | 68,938 | +8.6%+15,569 | won | 65 | Rs 64.98 L | 1 | |
| AC 164 KILVELUR Nagapattinam |  LATHA. T rank #1 | 56,108 | +1.5%+2,278 | won | 46 | Rs 25.04 L | 0 | |
| AC 127 PALANI Dindigul |  PANDI. N rank #3 | 65,534 | -0.7%1,452 | lost | 68 | Rs 53.91 L | 10 | |
| AC 178 GANDHARVAKOTTAI Pudukkottai |  M. CHINNADURAI rank #3 | 46,734 | -7.2%12,061 | lost | 59 | Rs 24.52 L | 9 | |
| AC 10 THIRUVOTTIYUR Thiruvallur |  SUNDARARAJ. L rank #2 | 56,503 | -25.9%53,564 | lost | 59 | Rs 51.21 L | 0 |