Eliot Sherman: The search for a party leader

Ok, I'll admit it. The Republican Party beat me up and took my lunch money.

Historically, the period following this type of sweep is marked by a certain amount of blaming, finger-pointing and general tomfoolery. In the name of that grand tradition, let the brouhaha commence.

I'd first like to take a moment to blame society for the Democrats' loss. Seriously. It's not just that we are a jaded, apathetic and apolitical generation. The nature of politics itself has changed in a way such that they have ceased to captivate our attention as they once did.

Gone are the days when Gerald Ford fell down a lot and firmly declared: "There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe." Gone are the days when the passage of a divisive bill meant someone was getting caned. Gone are the days when, at the very least, politicians had interesting names. Spiro Agnew, where art thou?

I'd also like to blame the media, because, in the unforgettable words of Will Smith, circa Bad Boys, "that shit be havin' a slant."

Does it ever.

I don't know how the mainstream media can make corporate scandals sound so tame, but they do. I read this stuff, and it almost sounds like millions of Americans were forming lines in front of board rooms, itching to hand over their pensions, and that the business elite were doing them a service by taking every last bloody cent. Where's the outrage?

Part of this is also a matter of disproportionate language between Democratic and Republican scandals, as Saturday Night Live's Tina Fey has pointed out. Democratic scandals involve words like "fondle" and "bosom" and "over and over again."

Republican scandals, on the other hand, involve words like "accounting irregularities" and "filing false documents with security regulators." Softcore pornography or your Accounting 101 textbook? You know what, don't even answer that.

And of course, I'd like to blame my party. In all seriousness, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle has to take the hit for this. It is the job of a party leader, figurehead or not, to unite the divided and deliver a clear party message. This was simply not done.

Republicans these days are quite good at presenting a consistently united front. Even in that most contentious of political battles, vying for the presidential nomination, Sen. John McCain grit his teeth and towed the party line, assuring everyone that then-Gov. George W. Bush would be a responsible, dedicated and courageous leader.

My suspicion is that he would rather have said something in the order of "you lily-livered, spoiled coward; you got off the hook in Vietnam with some pampered National Guard duty, and then you didn't even show up! You were AWOL for the better part of 1972 while I was getting the tar beaten out of me by the Viet Cong. Payback's a bitch, ain't it?"

Excuse my digression. The point is that, on almost all things, Republicans present a cohesive and unified message, even if it's a blatant lie, like "we are devoting countless resources and manpower to clearing ourselves, er, to eliminating corporate fraud from this great country."

Democrats, if put in the same position -- and don't get me wrong, hands are dirty on both sides -- would spend some time trying to get a consensus on the meaning of the word "fraud," and then half would vote for it and half against.

This leadership gap has gutted the Democratic Party. There are no rising stars, and even the grizzled veterans are no longer sure bets.

There are murmurings for 2004, certainly. Some people are projecting Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina; he's young and nobody knows much about him, which is always an advantage.

Of course, Al Gore's camp will tell you that the former vice president is the only choice for the nomination, but I have a feeling Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAullife isn't going to let him near a podium for a while, which is a shame because I still think that bad politicians make great statesmen, and vice-versa.

Daschle was so focused on gearing up to run in 2004 and denying it in 2002 that he practically stopped doing his job.

Still, none of these candidates, thus far, have demonstrated that they have "it," that intangible, immeasurably essential quality that combines presence, nonchalance and charm, and makes a candidate come off as personable and likeable, regardless of personal politics. Either someone steps up before 2004, or the Democrats will be forced to wait and hope that the Republicans back themselves into a wall by coughing up the ball on the economy, foreign policy or any number of issues without the easy out of a Democratic majority in Congress.

But back to the blame game. More than anyone, I'd like to blame myself for not voting.

Surprised? Well you'd better believe I'm voting in 2004. And you should too, even if you don't agree with anything else I say. Just vote.

Eliot Sherman is a sophomore from Philadelphia, Pa.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.