How many speeches did Vijay, who is likely to be next CM, give compared to Stalin and EPS in the last week of TN campaigning? News18 explains
(Clockwise from left) Thalapathy Vijay, MK Stalin and Edappadi K Palaniswami (EPS).
The 2026 Tamil Nadu election saw a high-stakes three-cornered battle between DMK’s MK Stalin, who focussed on Dravidian model and welfare; AIADMK’s Edappadi K Palaniswami (EPS), who banked on anti-incumbency and development; and TVK’s Thalapathy Vijay, who focussed youth appeal and change.
But amid the intense fight, Vijay, who has won the race and is likely to be the next CM, maintained what can now be called “golden silence”. How many speeches did he give compared to Stalin and EPS? News18 explains.
Vijay vs Stalin vs EPS: TN campaign speeches
Vijay disrupted the traditional binary, with high-impact, low-volume speeches, while Stalin highlighted his experience and EPS focused on corruption. As a newcomer, Vijay positioned his speeches as a fresh alternative, emphasizing a 2026 Assembly election results. He focused on targeting the DMK’s shortcomings while avoiding direct, harsh attacks on AIADMK, aiming for the “youth” and “first-time voter” demographic.
Stalin prioritised defending his tenure with a “Dravidian model” narrative, focusing on welfare and development. He pitched the election as “Tamil Nadu vs NDA,” targeting the AIADMK for its alliance with the BJP.
EPS focussed on grassroots mobilization, corruption charges, law and order issues, and anti-incumbency. He aimed to position himself as the only capable alternative to the DMK.
| Category | Stalin | EPS | Vijay |
|---|---|---|---|
| Core Message | Dravidian Model, social justice, and welfare-driven development. | Highlighting corruption, law and order issues, and anti-incumbency. | Clean governance, youth-driven politics, and an anti-establishment stance. |
| Campaign Style | Extensive traditional campaigning (356 minutes in the final week). | Massive ground mobilization (800 minutes in the final week). | High impact with minimal appearances (only 35 minutes of speeches). |
| Speech Tone | Focused on experience and continuity; often referred to as “accessible.” | Aggressive opposition leader challenging the ruling party’s record. | Fiery and direct; referred to the CM as “Stalin Uncle” to highlight the generational shift. |
| Strategic Focus | Positioning the election as “Tamil Nadu vs NDA.” | Strengthening alliances to unseat the DMK. | Contesting alone in 233 seats to build a strong position without alliances. |
Vijay vs Stalin vs EPS: When numbers speak
A study showed that while EPS gave extensive speeches (over 800 minutes) and Stalin was also very vocal (over 350 minutes) in the last week, Vijay spoke far less (35 minutes) but attained high impact through his “spectacle politics” and large crowd appeal.
Vijay largely avoided attacking EPS directly, aiming to create a direct contest between TVK and DMK, notes this Times of India article.
He focused on high-impact, low-volume appearances. While Stalin and EPS held dozens of rallies, Vijay spoke just twice, holding targeted roadshows. Despite only speaking for 35 minutes in the final week, his appearance carried high recall value among youth and women.
Stalin relied on a 356-minute, 18-speech strategy to emphasise continuity. He targeted Vijay as an “inaccessible newcomer” playing a drama.
EPS ran a high-intensity campaign of 806 minutes over 21 speeches, focusing on anti-incumbency, criticizing the DMK over crime and corruption.
Vijay vs Stalin vs EPS: The recall value
AI and experts assessed the speeches over the last week of Tamil Nadu campaigning:
Vijay: Strongest recall and social-media stickiness
His content may be lighter on policy, but his retention was strongest because the moment itself was memorable. The conversation was highly meme-friendly and youth-heavy.
MK Stalin: Strongest institutional visibility, but lower emotional stickiness
Stalin’s speeches carred authority, but incumbents often face a harder retention problem because administrative messaging is less emotionally sticky than insurgent messaging. On social media, he remained the central state figure, but engagement was more news-driven than excitement-driven. Much of the conversation was analytical, partisan, or result-focused rather than speech-centric.
The recall was weaker compared to Vijay’s spontaneous public chatter, say experts.
Edappadi K. Palaniswami: Stable but narrower recall
EPS had a stable core recall, especially among traditional AIADMK voters, but outside that base his speeches are being remembered more for controversy than for a fresh political line. His speeches travelled through news circulation and amplification, not broad organic enthusiasm. His clips travel less widely than Vijay’s unless tied to a sharp attack line.
A Times of India analysis found that despite limited speeches, AI tools rated the appeal of Vijay’s message (8/10) higher than EPS (7.7), closely trailing Stalin (8.6). Reports indicate Vijay’s TVK surged by tapping into young voters (below 35, comprising ~33.3% of the electorate) and leveraging social media-savvy politics.
KEY FAQs
Why did Vijay speak for only 35 minutes?
His strategy focused on high-impact, selective appearances—leveraging star appeal and viral amplification rather than long campaign hours.
Why did M. K. Stalin and Edappadi K. Palaniswami clock much higher minutes?
As established leaders, they relied on extensive ground campaigning, multiple rallies, and broader voter outreach to consolidate support.
Does more speaking time mean better voter retention?
Short, emotionally resonant messaging, like Vijay’s, can stick more, while longer campaigns help with reach and reinforcement.
With agency inputs
Read More
