Notwithstanding his relatively poor showing, what is noteworthy nevertheless is his success in staving off, even to a limited extent, the BJP’s fierce and consistent attacks on him and his family in which the saffron outfit has been assiduously aided by a captive media, whose anchors do not waste any opportunity to trash Rahul and to allow a minister to paint him as being mentally challenged.

Considering that this onslaught has been continuing ever since the BJP’s 2014 parliamentary victory, it is a matter of some surprise that the scion of a “naamdar” dynasty, as Modi mockingly calls the Nehru-Gandhi family, has been able to hold on to a percentage of support which cannot be summarily brushed aside as inconsequential. Evidently, the charges that “vanshbad” or family inheritance poses a grave danger to Indian democracy have not had as much of an effect as Rahul’s critics would like to believe.

There is little doubt, however, that the man who is apparently waiting to become the Congress president once again has laid himself open to being vilified even by people outside the saffron camp such as a famed historian who is no admirer of the Hindutva brand of politics. One reason why Rahul has repeatedly exposed his Achilles heel is the impression which he gives of not being a full-time politician. His habit of occasionally disappearing from the scene, usually on foreign jaunts, has lent substance to his image of being a dilettante.

The reputation of being someone who takes his job rather lightly has been all the more damaging because his opponents are the most committed band of politicians which the country has ever seen. As a result, the BJP always appears to be in an election-mode with its battlefields spread all over India. The party seemingly takes every contest, whether at the provincial or panchayat level, as if its life depended on it.

In contrast, Rahul’s most notable example of absenteeism in recent times was his holidaying in Shimla when the secular mahagathbandhan (grand alliance) was fighting a crucial election in Bihar. Because of his truancy, it was left to the alliance’s main provincial leader like the Rashtriya Janata Dal’s (RJD) Tejashwi Yadav to wage a gruelling struggle virtually single-handedly. As a result of Yadav’s dedication, the RJD succeeded in emerging as the largest single party in the state. If Rahul had cared to chip in, it is possible that the alliance might have successfully crossed the electoral Rubicon.

However, the problem with state-level leaders belonging to the “secular” camp, whether it is Mamata Banerjee or Tejashwi Yadav, is that they lack the image needed to succeed at the national level. For reasons that are not easily decipherable, Rahul measures up to a considerable extent to the requirements of a national leader despite all his faults.

This is the reason why Mehbooba Mufti in Kashmir believes that history will remember him for standing up to the dictatorial tendencies of the ruling dispensation at the centre. And the Shiv Sena’s mouthpiece in Maharashtra, Saamna, editorialized that “the rulers in Delhi fear Rahul Gandhi” because “a dictator is afraid even if one man is against him, and if this lone warrior is honest, the fear increases by a hundred times”.

Arguably, one of the factors which favours Rahul is honesty. At a time when politicians are perceived as crooks and charlatans, the heir to the dynastic throne in the Congress is seen as someone who may be somewhat casual in his approach to politics because of his sense of entitlement generated by being born in the right family, but nevertheless remains a person who is forthright and above-board.

These are qualities which are a great asset in Indian politics because of the continuous search by the general public for a Mr Clean who can replicate, albeit partially, the now nearly forgotten era of the Mahatma. Jayaprakash Narayan’s success in the 1970s in leading the Janata Party’s charge against Indira Gandhi’s “tanashahi” (dictatorship) was the result of the former’s reputation for integrity. After the Janata Party’s failure, it was V.P. Singh who emerged as the new Mr Clean of Indian politics. But he, too, faded away.

It is possible that despite the “nervous, unformed quality” in Rahul’s personality which Barack Obama noted, the Congress leader is seen by at least a quarter of those questioned in the opinion poll as candid and trustworthy. These attributes can stand him in good stead when hauteur is a dominant feature of present-day politics. (IPA Service)