Why did “polarisation” not work in West Bengal?

Discuss.

I have my own answers to this question. The larger point I want to make is that we buy the “polarisation” theory so easily. If BJP had won Bengal, both left and right would have been crediting polarisation. Now that BJP has lost, nobody is talking about failure of polarisation.

Such is the power of “polarisation” over our minds that many on this thread are crediting the BJP’s poor showing of 78 seats on polarisation — there were no local factors, no anti-incumbency agaisnt TMC, no shift of CPM voters for ‘protection’. Only and only polarisation.

According to this article, the average winning margin of TMC MLAs was the highest average winning margin in any assembly election in India ever. https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/opinion/west-bengal-results-victory-margins-show-the-depth-of-tmcs-victory-6864111.html

Yet people are clinging on to “polarisation” theory.

Many in the replies to this thread believe every single vote for BJP is driven and motivated by Islanophobia (polarisation). Presuming that that is true, why does the BJP win some elections and lose others? Why did it lose Jharkhand after all those lynchings?

Why did the BJP not win a Majority in Karnataka, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Delhi…