A nicely written article. But, I with ommissions & partisanship
1) You point that no alliance won the election (NDA =36, UPA =33). Similarly, UPA alliance did not win the national elections (and did not humble the NDA). In fact, UPA's vote % was marginally lower than NDA's. Your subsequent points apply to UPA's national conduct, just as well.
2) I agree that democracy is about an accountable system of political parties that act in consonance with the popular mandate. That is exactly why I cannot call the hodge-podge alliance at the centre 'democratic'
3) On BJP's envoking Emergency - Why should this be an issue when the Gongress glorifies the ex-PM who had scant regard to democarcy and envoked emergency for personal gains and circumvented judiciary's independence.
4) You say the presidential system is highly centralized and unitarian. I think it is much better than our indirect democracy that allows bribery and coercion of MPs & MLAs (which you condemn). In the presidential system, an unpopular leader (like PM) or an unelected alliance (like UPA) cannot rule the country.
5) On Kalam's alleged partisanship -compare with previous ex-congress presidents -who is better?
