... Having won the "weak" versus "strong" debate conclusively - the PM's contribution to the victory should not be underestimated - Manmohan Singh must now live to the faith reposed in him and actually exercise the tough options. Will he take steps to curb a fiscal deficit that has become unmanageable? Will he inject a sense of urgency into the security establishment so that terrorists, and not citizens, become the hunted? The voters have been very generous to an incumbent government which allowed too many things to drift in the past five years. But the season for excuses ended on Saturday afternoon.
Let's get this straight. You just conceded that Manmohan Singh won the weak-versus-strong controversy; and you still expect to be able to set the agenda for him, even though you represent the, um, losing side? Nice try, but ... Fail!
You talk about the government's drift. But, here's the thing: the verdict shows that people didn't see this drift. Or, if they saw it, they weren't bothered by it.
Isn't punditry about testing your own views against that of the public, and responding creatively to the differences? By peddling the same old arguments and buzzwords which didn't find too many buyers, you have just displayed an acute inability -- or, arrogant unwillingness -- to engage with the people's verdict. Fail, again.
Finally, voters have all kinds of virtues in a democracy, but 'generosity' is most definitely not one of them. They have been ruthless when it comes to judging governments. Ask BJP about 2004. And yes, they have also been ruthless in judging the Opposition. Ask BJP about 2009!
Yet, you view Congress's (and UPA's) gains through the lens of voters' generosity.