A ray of hope

I told myself very clearly that I am not going to write any more blogs on politics. But I am slowly realizing how uncertain the promises could be when it comes to anything related to politics. So I will confidently assure myself again that this will be my last post on politics.

I had been a fervent admirer of Modi for a long time, just like millions of other Indians. I am still not sure what made me such a big supporter of Modi. I think it is more to do with the negative publicity of congress rather than Modi's efforts to showcase himself as an agent of growth. I never spent much time verifying the facts about the 'developed Gujarat'. I just knew by heart that he has changed the image of Gujarat. I just knew that he is the one India has been looking for a long time. There was no need for me to double check that when my heart was very clear about it. However the emergence of AAP had put me in a big dilemma. I know about AAP and its leaders much more than I know about any other politicians. I have been following each and every move of their journey. Their ideology was something totally unheard in the history of Indian politics. It is absolutely impossible for some one like me to resist from morally getting involved with their mission. However I had to make a decision sooner or later regarding whom I want to support for the big fight.

Since AAP and Modi were travelling in different paths, I was forced to think from my brain rather than heart. That certainly revealed some of the black marks in the pristine photo of Modi I had been seeing so far. I did talk about some of that in one of my earlier posts. However, deep down I didn't want to see anyone other than Modi at the top post. Even when I was convinced about myself that not all things I have heard about the bravery of Modi wasn't true, I still had a soft corner for him. However as I got myself involved more and more with the online news (including comments), I started to see the real face of Modi fan-boys. A vast majority of the Modi supporters that I had seen online aren't any better than street rowdies. They had no respect to others, they had no ideology and they never bothered about truth. They only knew how to attack others in a pack with their filthy language. They were strengthening my belief that all those great things I heard about Modi could be just a paid PR propaganda. Unfortunately the esteemed BJP leaders were also in competition with each another in spreading the lies about AAP. Whether it be about fake sting operation or whether it be the issue of foreign funding, they weren't ashamed of going to any extent to defame AAP. All these turned me against their party so much as to erase all the respect I had for them. It also forced me to rethink my support for 'Modi for PM' more objectively. If you aren't yet washed away with the modi-wave, I am sure you will also sit back and ask that question to yourself.

When AAP was making its preparations for the Delhi battle, I had several reasons to support 'Modi for PM'

• There is no other credible alternative other than BJP
• Modi is the agent of change and growth
• He is completely against the appeasement politics
• He is more decisive than divisive
•  

In simple terms, what attracted me towards Modi is his ability to maintain a fine balance between his image of 'development' and the image of 'hindutwa'. I was certainly moved by his slogans like 'justice to all and appeasement to none' and 'toilets first, temple later'.

With the emergence of AAP and their decision to contest as many LS seats as possible, I had to re-evaluate my earlier stand. There are far few reasons now to support 'Modi for PM' campaign as I really had to search hard for credible reasons to prefer Modi over AAP. Modi fan-boys might provide thousands of other reasons, possibly with links to huge statistics selling 'Gujarat development' model with different flavors. I find it hard to make my decision based on those statistics, especially when a modiphobic can provide a counter argument for each one of them with equal amount of statistics. What can I make out with those conflicting statistics. Some one has rightly said 'there are lies, damn lies and then statistics'.

Some people say Modi has extensive experience of  administration whereas AAP has just entered the playground. I don't know whether to laugh or cry at that logic. Many giant companies like Google, Facebook, Microsoft are all started by young entrepreneurs who had absolutely no experience of running the company. Still they succeeded as they understood their clients, they had put their heart and soul to the product they have created. Balu, the new joiner of AAP is right in saying 'AAP is the best start-up ever created by an IITian'. If you have the will and intent, experience doesn't count much in politics. We have thousands of experienced, well qualified bureaucrats, economists there to assist you in every step. Modi didn't fail in his office during his first term without any experience. MMS didn't succeed in his second term after having a great five years of experience. Experience of running a state is not the same as running the country. Experience is certainly good, but it is not essential and there are other things more important than that.

Some people say Modi means business. He knows how to encourage corporates and create more and more jobs, whereas AAP is a socialistic party that will take the country back to the history. I find it strange when these arguments are coming from most educated as well. No party can be completely socialist or capitalist, especially in a country like India where the inequality is at its high. AAP is neither socialist nor capitalist. They are 'opportunist' or 'solutionist' when it comes to economic policies. They are ready to give subsidy in certain sectors and open for free market in others. The only thing that they are against is the crony capitalism. Unfortunately that is exactly what Modi is accused of. Though they weren't investigated, it isn't hard to buy that based on several things like a absence of lokayukta for years, weak lokayukta bill in his state, attacks on RTI activists etc.

I don't think anyone rejects that the next elections are going to be between Modi and others. For congress it is Modi vs Rahul and for AAPians it is Modi vs AAP. It is never BJP vs Congress or BJP vs AAP. In the eyes of everyone, Modi has raised beyond the party that has brought him to the light. With such tremendous control over the party, why is he still silent on a strong anti-corruption law? why is he not taking actions against corrupt ministers in his own cabinet? Why is he silent on bringing the party and its funds under the scanner of RTI? Why is he mum on so many criminals representing his party? Is it really difficult for him to clean his own party? If that is the case, how can one expect him to clean the entire nation? In that respect, Rahul Gandhi seems certainly better. He atleast has the courage to talk about reforms within his party.

The idea of one man changing the nation troubles me more than anything else. Is it fair to support a corrupt, criminal as people's representative just because he belongs to Modi's party? What if (believe me, I don't wish that) something happens to Modi tomorrow? Will Modi fan-boys switch their sides suddenly or will they still stick to BJP? If the answer is no, it is better to think about your support again. Any solution dependent on one person is not going to scale. The problems of this country is certainly not that simple as to be solved by one person. It needs systemic changes. It needs the change in our political culture. Unfortunately Modi doesn't stand for a change in the system. He is projecting himself as an alternate system!

The reasons to support AAP over Modi are very clear. Though Kejriwal is the visible face of the party, it isn't dependent upon a single face. It is a transparent system of alternate politics. It is the system where you will be able to clearly see where and how your tax money is being utilized, starting from their party finance itself. It is a system which will encourage good and honest people to enter politics, not the one with money and muscle power. It is the party that has shown their clear intent in passing a strong anti corruption law, knowing that it can be used to bring them down when they change in future. How hard it could be to place our trust on such a party over others who aren't ready to make their operations transparent? Of-course we can throw them out of power when they also turn like other parties. They are in fact vouching for 'Right to Recall' so that our job will be even more easier to bring them down. But there is very good chance that they won't as it didn't start like a normal political party. They are still working as a movement rather than a political party. They have the intent to provide alternate politics whereas Modi can only provide a replacement.

All these things tells me that there are only two reasons to support 'Modi for PM' campaign.

• AAP will only play the spoil sport resulting in a hung parliament, leading to more economic problems
• They won't be as tough as Modi when it comes to appeasement(read muslim) politics

It is certainly impossible for AAP to have the majority to form the government on their own. They couldn't do that even in Delhi. They can't give their support to anyone else either. So more support to AAP means more certain of an unstable government. However I don't agree that they will help congress to come back to the power. It was very clear from the Delhi elections that majority of the vote share they had grabbed is from Congress. So if anybody is going to be helped by AAP, surely it must be BJP. No one can predict the results of elections clearly, especially in the present conditions. That was evident in the Delhi elections as well. So casting your vote based on some one else's prediction is nothing more than gambling. A better approach would be to vote for an honest, able candidate as we live in a representative democracy. AAP might still be able to form a minority government just like they did in Delhi. Certainly that would be much more effective than a Modi lead government. Even if they fail to form the government, your vote won't get wasted. The vote share will clearly send a clear message to the political class. By not voting for AAP, you are saying that a change in the political system is not something you are interested in. Anyone who is confused about AAP and Modi have a clear choice to make. A choice between a clean political system with both long term and short term benefits over short term gains of a hope of development.

The only remaining reason to support Modi is his Hindutwa identity. However I might try to suppress, deep down there is certainly a hidden desire of seeing a hindu-icon like Modi at the top position. That sentiment is perhaps taking over all other rational reasons and forcing us to look hard for justifications to support him. Perhaps that is why millions of others crave to see Modi as PM though there isn't any other substantial reason to support him over a clean alternative like AAP. The Delhi elections certainly tell that to some extent in my opinion. There was no promise of a better growth from BJP in that state. There was no hope of reduced corruption as BJP ruled MCD itself was immersed deep in the corruption allegations. Still they were able to retain their vote share whereas congress lost heavily to AAP. It is very likely that a majority of them voted for BJP mainly because of their hindutwa ideology. I am not saying whether hindutwa is good or bad especially when everybody has their own definition of hindutwa. But it is certainly bad to bring that ahead of an attempt to bring a transparent, corrupt free administration. Hindutwa will certainly remain as a prominent vote bank for several years. We can certainly bring back Modi or any other pro-hindu leader later after cleaning the current system. The need of the hour is certainly to chose a better system over a better leader.

AAP: Is that the Hope?

I have been asking this question to myself from a long time. What makes me think that AAP will not be just another party in the long run? What makes me really think that they are capable of breaking the old saying 'power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely!'. Do I have any proof that they are really different or is it just my emotion of helplessness against the system that is keeping me optimistic about them. I have heard several other people raising the same questions many times with some valid reasons as well. Every time I heard those questions, I have tried to convince myself by telling repeatedly that they will be different. But, am I really convinced clearly about that or am I still letting that ray of hope to speak on behalf of me? Perhaps it is time to clarify my stand clearly.

Before AAP came into existence, I have been a big fan of Jayaprakash Narayan from Lok Satta party. He is an idealistic man I still respect and accept as one of the finest politicians I have seen so far. When AAP formed, my first question was, why they couldn't collaborate to have a single party to fight the evil. If there are two good people fighting against the same monster, it doesn't make any sense for them to fight independently with reduced power. That is certainly the minimum that we should expect from them. When that doesn't happen, how should I really convince myself that they really are fighting for the same cause and they have valid reasons for not fighting the battle as a single unit? What can be more important than their common vision of cleaning the system?

When Kejriwal floated his new party, people said he deceived Anna and others who wanted to keep the motion apolitical. I didn't believe that. When Kejriwal said, he didn't plan the political party but he was forced to enter the politics, I didn't believe that either. Anna is no where when compared to the intellectual capability of Kejriwal. He was certainly just a tool to grab the attention of the nation on a serious issue. I certainly think it is Anna who got more publicity from Kejriwal and deceived him by not joining his political force. If not directly, at-least as an external supporter. Instead, he went to the cheap level of accusing Kejriwal, giving misleading statements, harming his own image. Whereas Kejriwal maintained his stand, didn't even utter a single word against Anna, despite the clear break-up between their paths. Kejriwal has certainly chosen his every move very carefully defeating everyone decisively. Everyone including Anna, Bedi, government failed to understand his potential. Kiran Bedi is still openly supporting the corrupt BJP as an alternative. Kejriwal was certainly right in assuming that the existing political systems has gone too far in the wrong direction as to completely lose their way back! Being apolitical in a political matter just doesn't make any  sense. It is an excuse for being hypocrite and cowardice.

Even a bitter opponent of Kejriwal cannot deny the fact that he is one of the smartest politician that India has seen so far. They cannot fail to notice how intelligent he is, how calculated he is, how aggressive he is in terms of achieving the goals. Otherwise it is impossible for an ordinary person to raise to the occasion of challenging the major parties to become a serious political force within a span of 2-3 years. That to with no money and no political connections. India is certainly not an easy country to rule. With so much of poverty, so much of diverse problems, it is hard to unite people on a long term ideological cause. Yet, Kejriwal was successful catching the imagination of people, attracting the poor and middle class people to join his fight against corruption. That is the striking difference between AAP and Loksatta and my reason to believe they can achieve what Loksatta has failed to achieve. Being ideologist is just one thing, and bringing that ideology into practice is totally a different thing. It certainly needs aggressive planning, courage, short term gimmicks, dedication and a lot more.

Though there is an overwhelming support for AAP in general, there are also lot people who question and think they can't bring the change that they are promising. It is easy to dismiss if it is coming from a staunch supporter of corrupt parties with some vested interest. But when it comes from others, it feels really bad. I personally feel they are just pessimistic.  But I also wonder a lot of times as whether that is a realistic opinion which looks like pesssimistic for me because of preconceived notion? Looking at some of the incidents, it certainly feels there is some room for people to think that AAP is not as ideological as it seems. Sometime back when Kejriwal expressed his concern about Batla house encounter and Ishrat Jahan encounter, I was really furious. Certainly that was a muslim appeasement gimmick in my opinion. Otherwise there is no need for him to bring those issues. Terrorism is certainly a bigger issue than fake encounter of terrorists. If there is anything wrong with those encounters, it must be the generic issue with all police investigations. He could have easily picked up a common man's case instead of singling out these specific controversial incidents. That is certainly not warranted for AAP publicity. They definitely have other burning issues to raise their voice for.

When I looked at various reports on the AAP candidates also, I got the same impression. Out of 61 candidates announced, close to 11 were affiliated to various other parties earlier. People coming from other parties certainly doesn't make them dishonest. However there is also a strong dissent among the party members against those kind of candidates. Often they switch parties because they were denied tickets from their parent parties. There was a specific instance with one of the candidate who was known as a ration mafia with a pending Lokayukta case. The AAP members went on strike against his nomination as it was against their wish. In fact, there were allegations that the high command completely ignored their suggestions and went ahead with their own list of candidates. That is certainly not what they have promised. Though the cases are not yet proved, AAP certainly doesn't have the moral ground to give tickets to people with questionable reputation. Is it really that hard for AAP to find an honest candidate in such a large country? There were also complaints that most of the candidates are selected based on their proximity to the core committee, but not due to fair election from the party  members of that constituency. Only the people from those constituency will know the real truth, but certainly I wasn't convinced that AAP has really kept their promise in selecting all the candidates honestly. Despite of all these, I could certainly feel there are atleast 30 honest and educated candidates looking at their CV and few comments. That is definitely much better than all other existing parties.

With this change of mind, I really started thinking again. Can AAP really be the change that we have been looking for. What are the dangers that they will not become yet another party in the long run? However looking at the credibility of a lot of people supporting AAP, I feel I have no right to question them. One of the RTI activists, an MLA contestant lost her life fighting against the corruption through RTI. There were so many volunteers who have left their well paying jobs and family to work for AAP in delhi elections. Eminent political scientist and an incredibly honest person like Yogendra Yadav is also part of the party. Looking at the life of Kejriwal himself, I have very little doubt left that about the sincerity about the party. Kejriwal certainly understands the minds of people better than people like me who don't have the real data. His main intention is to get to the power to pass some strong bills like Janlokpal. Once they are passed, even if a legislator is not really very honest, there isn't really much he can do to ruin the system. The reality is that, we still haven't grown enough to chose the right candidates. Considering that, it is wise to make a winning move by sacrificing some of the ideological practice rather than trying to keep every step clean and safe. The damage that can be caused by not winning the elections is much severe compared to the damage that can be caused by few people with questionable integrity getting elected.

Whatever our disappointment is with AAPs decisions, we shouldn't forget that we are still comparing them with other parties who have already got the chance of improving the system. Even with their little mistakes, they are certainly thousand miles ahead of other parties. The change cannot be a overnight process. If they have given tickets to some undeserved candidates for the sake of winning, that is certainly due to their compulsion. But at the same time, we also need to make sure that it doesn't become a habit. Ironically, Kejriwal himself has a become a cult hero in the process of destroying the blind hero worship culture. That is certainly a dangerous development and it has all the potential to take the party back to the same line as other parties. At some point in the past, most of those parties have also started as a good alternative. Congress(not Congress-I) fought for the freedom, Jansangh(BJP) fought against the emergency, now AAP is fighting the second freedom. If we understand where those parties failed, we can certainly keep AAP becoming yet another party, without any difference. We need to keep producing more Kejriwals and more AAPs when the need arises. Until then going along with Kejriwal and AAP and supporting them with whatever we have is certainly the best thing anyone can do at present.

NaMo RaGa

I have been wasting a lot of my time for quite some time monitoring the build up of 2014 central elections. As many of you might have already noticed, we could classify people in two different categories, both obsessed with the emerging new leaders of the two front running parties. There are some overlaps as well between these two classifications, but for clarity it would still make sense to keep them separate. The first classification is dominated by two major groups. One that vehemently condemns each and everything that NaMo does and the other that blindly believes he will be the saviour. In between those two vocal groups, there is also a minor group whose voice is almost unheard due to the noise created by these two groups. That group neither believes NaMo is the saviour nor believes he is going to be the destroyer of 'secular' democracy. The second classification is unanimously one sided, with a large group of people who think RaGa is good for nothing and the minority group that is desperately trying to project him as the one who can steer the nation in the right path.

It is always easier to be in a majority group. You will have very few questions to answer. When there is something hard, you will find hundreds of people trying to support you in competition. Unfortunately, I have a disease of associating myself with the 'minority' group. My brain finds ways of convincing itself that they are always the ones naturally suppressed by the other group and the one that needs the support. Though I was a big supporter of NaMo at one point, I have been gradually drawn to the minority group that thinks Modi can never be the answer to our problems. On the other hand, I had a blunt hatred towards the 'Royal' family at one point, but gradually started becoming 'sympathetic' to RaGa, looking at the way people criticize him. Perhaps there is a pattern for my change of opinion on all these personalities!

I read a lot of criticism on RaGa's CII speech and his remark on 'poverty being a state of mind'. Tempted by those criticism, some time back I watched his long speech at CII's annual convention. To be honest, I couldn't really believe that it was RaGa who gave that passionating speech. There wasn't anything worthwhile criticizing in that speech. Even if there was, it would be really stupid to criticize RaGa for that. They should have criticized the person responsible for that speech instead of the medium that expressed it. For anyone who had also seen the Q&A session that followed the speech, it would have been very obvious. I thought even the questions will be given earlier in those conferences so that they get enough time to prepare for the answers, but probably that didn't happen there. Instead of targeting him for his lack of awareness, I would really appreciate him for his courage to take those surprise questions. Even on his popular poverty statement, he was bashed with unwanted criticism from all the sides. Clearly, he wouldn't have come up with that quote on his own. The quote also started with a story of a woman who came out of poverty using her confidence and self-help group. It was very evident that the author was trying to project the importance of self-confidence  among the poor people. Burying that good intention and projecting him badly based on the out of context quote is surely not worthy of criticism. I would be really surprised whether any of them really understood the strength of that statement even when quoted out of context. Perhaps they have never seen any poor people living happily despite their dire poverty.

People criticizing RaGa for everything should really spend some time trying to put themselves in his shoes. Have you ever tried how difficult it would be to talk some one else's speech that you don't really understand? If you have tried, perhaps you would understand the pain that RaGa is taking for his people. It is easy for someone smart to understand these things easily. But not everyone is same. We need to appreciate the efforts as well. I feel it is a tremendous achievement by RaGa to even show up in those meetings/rallies and address the crowd. Even for an expert, it isn't that easy to face a group of experts. When you don't have that intellectual luxury, you would need to put mammoth effort in bridging the gap. For some one who is really undecided about his goals, the mental strength required to overcome that would be even greater.

Of-course, I don't think any one would argue against the fact that it is the country that is in need of RaGa's service and not the other way round. RaGa would surely have enough money to buy a small country if he wishes. It is also very clear he is not really that interested in the politics of this country. He is being forced by his party and the fellow country-men to be in politics. Whether they are right or not, he has to value their opinion. After all we are a democratic nation, it is not the right or wrong that decides the outcome in a democracy. It is the number that drives everything. If people are ignorant and want him to be a PM, who are we to question them. More importantly what right do we have in finding fault with RaGa who is just respecting their opinions. Just let the people decide that instead of criticizing him for others mistakes. I don't even understand the argument that he can't make up a good PM. They forget the fact that they have already seen 10 years of his rule. Even our PM feels proud to serve under his leadership. When such highly respected people recommend his ability to lead the nation, what is the issue with these common people who don't understand anything about governance. Why are they getting so annoyed when this is all about an official process for change of name?

That is why I feel really bad when people comment about him without realizing what he is really going through. What he really need is some support and appreciation for his efforts.

The topic of NaMo is certainly more complicated. He is clearly a divisive personality. You hardly see anyone taking a middle ground when it comes to NaMo. Either they desperately want him to be the PM or they hate him with all the venom they have!

I have tried a lot to get to the truth of much talked about NaMo development model. The most convincing I could get was Mayank Gandhi's blog. I am not a big fan of pseudo seculars who only talk about riots and fake encounters. Looking at some of the bio-data of the encountered people, I really don't understand why people are making such a big fuss about those encounters. Obviously, the law doesn't allow that. But a country where hundreds of innocent people die everyday doesn't have the right to cry foul for the human rights of criminals. The riot is certainly a black mark on NaMo's record. But attributing all the killings to his name is also blatantly wrong. Perhaps an honest evaluation would be to look at the past records of all communal violence, what was the trigger, what were the losses and mapping that to Gujarat riot. That would give a better indication of how many innocent lives he had failed to save. Further, I don't see much logic in separating the riot victims from other victims. Innocent people don't die only due to riots. There are also a lot of other deaths a government is  directly or indirectly responsible for. Like death due to road accidents, poverty, malnutrition, crime etc. I don't think anybody can claim that these deaths are inferior in nature compared to the riot deaths. Deaths are deaths. When it is unnatural, the only classification should be whether it was preventible or not. So, the real question should be 'how many deaths NaMo has failed to save under his rule compared to other CMs'. I don't think anyone has bothered to check that data. Perhaps it isn't even easy to get any authentic data on that.

So my issue with NaMo isn't that he is communal or he was communal once. People who are after power don't really care much about the religion. He has already shown that in action by demolishing illegal temples and sidelining some of the hard core hindutwa groups. Perhaps the only 'communal' action that we could expect from him is bringing the uniform civil code and bringing the minorities to mainstream. That would certainly polarize  the votes again for him in another election. In the pretext of suppressing the minorities, he might end up as the greatest reformer of muslims of India. So I am certainly not worried about his safron colour. My main problem with NaMo is the authenticity of the development that he has projected to outside world. My problem is in understanding whether Gujarat really saw the magical development under his leadership or it is just the success of a well planned publicity gimmick. My problem is about those crores of people who really think the country will change magically after he assumes the power at centre.

Mayank provides the data showing some crucial points regarding the myth of 'vibrant Gujarath' in his blog. The same data is also available in few other places like this.

• Gujarat has seen high growth since last 20 years. No surprise there as everyone knows that business skills are in the genes of Gujaratis.
• Gujarat's focus was mainly on urban development and industrialization and not the rural part
• Gujarat is only ranked at 11(out of 20) as per as the poverty alleviation is concerned. The tribal(17%) have actually become more poor in NaMo's rule
• Tough NaMo is clean and reduced the corruption at lower level, he hasn't done much in reducing the corruption/irregularity at higher level. That should be very evident as he hasn't done much to pass a strong Lokayukta act in the state.
• 2013 lokayukta act is just a face wash and criticized heavily by the activists

Perhaps I can even conclude NaMo's elevation won't make any drastic difference without looking at these data. NaMo is certainly an 'individual' with a difference. But he doesn't represent a system that is different. If he was a 'system', he could have surely made some miracles in the last 12 years of his rule in Gujarat. The number of seats that he has won is almost the same in last 3 elections. That itself says his 'development' hasn't reached everyone. If it was a miracle, surely more people would have acknowledged him as the leader. Certainly he might have delivered better than others, but that is not the change we should aim for. His performance is going to be even poor in the central compared to state. A lot of states would still be under a different government and it won't make much difference to them. We have already seen how corrupt the Karnataka BJP government was in the past. Having a strong PM with weak state governments will not make a big difference to the people who are in need. The same set of corrupt legislators won't bring much changes however strong their leader may be, unless he is a dictator controlling them with a gunpoint.

If there is any hope for this country, that is only from the new Aam Aadmi Party. That brings a real change in the system. A system that can scale well for this large diverse country. A system that doesn't suffer from the weight of the legacy compulsions. A system with a vision for decentralizing the power completely to the right group of people. A party that doesn't need to return the favour of illegal money of its election fund. A party that is capable of making miracles in a short span. I hope they will win the Delhi elections first and then spread to other parts of the country like an unstoppable tide. They have certainly brought some optimism about the future of India. If we fail to give them a chance in next 10-15 years, we must permanently forget the hope of seeing a better India. We don't even deserve to see a better India. Those who think they have been let down by their ignorant fellow citizens should really think seriously about migrating to some other country with a hope of better life.

However, when it comes to 2014 elections, it won't be that easy for me to decide as whom to vote(though I may not vote, I can still influence a lot of votes). Despite my 'sympathy' for RaGa, I don't think any sensible person can seriously consider him as a PM candidate. AAP is certainly the party that has brought the hope back. But looking practically, 2014 is too early for them to contest in the central elections. They would need to win the Delhi assembly first, prove themselves that they weren't just talking in the air and then strengthen the party in other states before really attempting anything for the parliament. Only three months after the Delhi elections is too short a time for doing all these. We have waited for 60 years and another 5 years wouldn't make it any worse. So the obvious choice has to be NaMo. Not because I have any hopes of seeing something dramatically different under his rule. But only because it will clear the illusion of crores of people expecting a miracle from him. I will also be able to validate the 'NaMo magic' myself instead of relying on others stories. The change that a clean new system like AAP can bring would surely be unmatchable compared to that of a corrupt system with an able leader. Dream big, don't settle for anything less! Though we have waited for unusually long time, it would surely be worth the wait!