Being the worlds largest democracy entails considerable difficulty, but it also involves the prospect of considerable promise. Voter turnout in India has never been too high, often nearing just about 60% in general elections. Shockingly, voter turnout in a constituency of Mumbai (the financial capital of India) after a terrorist attack that ravaged the city was 43%, apparently because voters were frustrated with the administration. However, rates of turnout in democracies across the world seem to be going down, and with an electorate larger than that of the United States and the EU combined voting in the 2009 General Elections, more people seem to be going to the poll booth to cast their vote. This article will focus on methods for the electorate, primarily the youth, to channel cynicism and anti-incumbency anger into building a consensus on how to move forward, and also on what the government can do, specifically the Prime Minister and the primary opposition party, to encourage sentiments in favor of how the government works. Governance in India is primarily vested in the legislature (a bicameral one, consisting of the Lok Sabha, wherein members are elected directly, and the Rajya Sabha, wherein members are both indirectly elected by state legislatures, and nominated by the President) and the Council of Ministers, headed by the Prime Minister, who is, for all intents and purposes, the head of the nation. Even today, the President’s role remains largely ceremonial, and although he retains the power to declare war and dissolve the Council, he can only do so after consulting with the Prime Minister. For a long time, I’ve been a passionate advocate of concentrating more power in the hands of the Prime Minister and his Council of Ministers (COM), and that is something I think we can learn from the United States system. The concept of having a divided government has always interested me, because it allows the executive to perform and make decisions without having to worry about the government falling. In India, a bill has to be passed by both the Houses to become a law, and a failure of a bill to pass in a House amounts to a vote of no confidence in the government. Indian politics has always been very tricky to navigate, purely because of the different regional parties and coalitions involved. Recently, for example, the government tried to pass a series of reforms that eased restrictions on Foreign Direct Investment in Indian retail, a controversial proposition that irked the government’s primary ally, which caused it to back out of the coalition, leaving the government in the lurch, and causing it to rely on the whims of two capricious regional allies, who supported it from the outside. Why is this problematic? These regional parties, quite rightly, are concerned with their electorate, which usually, as in this case, is composed of the citizens of one state. As the primary ruling party (the Indian National Congress) wasn’t able to garner enough seats to meet the majority mark of 272 in the Parliament, it had to rely upon the support of such regional parties. This particular regional party in question, the Trinamool Congress, which became the INC’s primary ally due to its strong showing in West Bengal, a state in Eastern India, has a heavily populist agenda, and ran a campaign which appealed primarily to the middle-class and low-income voters, a group which would supposedly be affected by the FDI in retail reforms. Afraid that a support of these reforms would be seen as hypocritical, the Trinamool Congress withdrew its support to the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) (the majority c