Picking a leader for the Democrats

[question everything]

SignOnSanDiego.com

JAMES O. GOLDSBOROUGH THE UNION-TRIBUNE
Picking a leader for the Democrats

November 25, 2004

All systems of government are imperfect, but one of the imperfections of the U.S. system is that it leaves the losing party without a leader.

The Democrats have no leader.

The virtue of parliamentary systems is that the losing party is not decapitated. In Britain, Winston Churchill lost two postwar elections, but as opposition leader won on his third try, in 1951. In the 1960s and 1970s, Harold Wilson and Edward Heath took turns as prime minister, becoming opposition leader when their party lost... There are exceptions. Adlai Stevenson was the Democrats' candidate twice against Dwight Eisenhower, being crushed each time but still trying for an improbable third nomination against John Kennedy. On their side, the Republicans have the redoubtable Richard Nixon, losing to Kennedy in 1960 but defying all odds to win the presidency in 1968.


(snip)

Today, Democrats in Congress are pretty much wiped out. In the Senate, they lost their leader, Tom Daschle, a good and honorable man from South Dakota who lost to a "values" newcomer in the Republican sweep of the Plains states. In the House, they also lost their leader, Dick Gephardt, of Missouri, who ran for president one time too many.


(snip)

Among Democrats who opposed Kerry, only John Edwards and Howard Dean are contenders, and both will be more seasoned in four years. Both, however, face drawbacks: Democrats aren't likely to nominate another New Englander like Dean. And Edwards carries the burden of being a losing VP, and they, in modern times, don't come back to win the presidency. There's a notable exception to that rule: Franklin Roosevelt was the losing VP in 1920. Kerry didn't lose because he's a Northerner, and Democrats don't have to pick a Southerner to win. Had Kerry won Ohio, he would be our next president. And senators can be elected president, though it's true that governors have a better track record.

If you want to pick a Democrat to emerge as leader over the next four years, almost by default, keep your eye on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. She couldn't win the Deep South, but who needs it? She has the charisma Kerry lacked and would appeal to young voters and women. I'm told some women won't vote for Clinton because she's too modern, refused, as she once said, to "stay home and bake cookies." At least she'd give us a chance to find out if we're a modern nation – or still one that believes women should stay in their place.

Goldsborough can be reached via e-mail at [e-mail].



Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20041125/news_lz1e25golds.html