It may not be possible in every country’s political situation to win national elections by becoming a defender of the aam aadmi, but it seems that Indian leaders, especially the young and dynamic Rahul Gandhis, can learn a lesson from how the young American leader, Barrack Obama, clinched his second election victory by doing just that – listening to and working for the American middle class.

President Obama came to the American political scene when the plight of the Aam American or the common man in America was becoming almost as bad as it is in the third world countries where the poor youth has no job, no money and no future and no dream. By 2008, the US economy had been ruined by former US President George W Bush by attacking Iraq at a time when the economy was already under pressure due to the Afghan war. The economic situation was also being affected by a real estate market fraud that caused the US banks to foreclose and throw some middle-class Americans out of their homes that were sold to them fully knowing that they will not be able to pay off their mortgage loans. Also, the unemployment rate was rising rapidly towards double digits, and the consumer confidence was at its lowest.

But Obama took the challenge, called on the youth of America to get together and help him. “Together”, he said, “we can bring the economy back.” “It will not be easy, but it is possible.” And he gave the American youth a positive message and the famous slogan “Yes we can”. The youth listened to him, trusted his genuineness and rallied behind him to get him elected in 2008. From that point on, President Obama became a genuine “defender” of the Aam American. He campaigned against the ruthless bankers who were foreclosing homes; the oil companies who were making huge profits and still increasing the petrol prices at the pump; and he also went against the Wall Street brokers who were manipulating stock prices to make huge profits and draw fat salaries and bonuses at the cost of smaller investors.

And then during the four years after his victory, Obama was seen as working really hard to improve the plight of the middle-class Americans who had no jobs, but had faith in their man in the White House who was visibly working day and night to fix the mistakes his predecessor had made on the domestic front as well as the international front. They saw him slowly fixing the US economy, step by step, by bailing out the banks in trouble and by rescuing the US auto industry. The Aam American also saw him working hard to make affordable quality health care possible for every American, including 48 million Americans who had no health insurance. It was a move that so far had been a “political risk not worth taking” for any American president in the past and a move that even President Clinton had to abandon because of tough opposition from the powerful lobbyists. The Aam American also found Obama openly chastising the top business executives of the companies who were receiving the government bailout money on the one hand and still drawing fat salaries and bonuses and wasting the company money for using expensive private jets for their travel.  Obama was also seen reversing his predecessor’s pro-rich tax policies, and bringing in reforms under which no tax breaks were given to any family that was making more than $250,000 per year. He also offered huge incentives to the banks for offering new easy loans to those middle-class homeowners who were losing their homes to foreclosures.

And as Obama neared the end of his four-year term, the voters began to realise that his hard work had paid off. His health care programme had become a reality, the unemployment rate had come down to a little over 7 percent, the GDP was up by two percent, the House market was picking up and the consumer confidence was also going up.

And so it was no surprise that the Aam American had no second thoughts in choosing him again as their leader, because he really cared, and he was genuine. The voters remembered that Obama did not budge from his resolve to help the Aam American even when his Republican opponents called him a “Communist” who was trying to thrust leftist policies down the throats of capitalist Americans. The voters knew that Obama will continue his hard work to create more jobs and improve the plight of the middle-class Americans.

And today in India, the situation is very similar to the one Obama inherited in 2008. The aam aadami in India is also suffering because of mal-distribution of wealth, shameless corruption and bad governance. So today India’s disillusioned and frustrated youth can provide a vast constituency for a leader like Obama, who genuinely cares. And there is a golden opportunity for the young and dynamic Indian leader like Rahul Gandhi to adopt them as his constituency and use their “angry impatience” to create a “forceful impetus” to push their cause within his Congress party and also to infuse some fiery enthusiasm in his campaign.

In fact, now is the time when Rahul Gandhi can disprove his critics who say that he has an ill-defined urge to improve the lives of poor Indians, but no real idea of how to do so; that he feels obliged to work in politics, but his political strategies are half-baked; and that he fails to develop strong ties with any particular constituency. So if Rahul Gandhi is really serious about leading the country, he should rise to the occasion and claim his constituency of millions of Indians who are impatiently waiting for the Congress party’s economic reforms to better their lives.  He should seize upon the fact that today there is a glaring vacuum in the country’s political leadership, a scenario where no political party has a leader who genuinely cares about the so-called “aam aadami” of India, who also wants to enjoy the benefits of the rapidly-growing economy.

So it will be natural for Rahul Gandhi to pick up the thread from where his father, Rajiv Gandhi, had to leave it when he was slain more than two decades ago. Now the son can further his father’s quest to modernise India, by providing an Obama-style leadership to millions of Indians who are waiting for the proverbial “trickle down” of the benefits of globalisation, liberalisation and privatisation.