As we watch the 2008 presidential election unfold, we are seeing certain characteristics of the new millennium coalesce to create a type of politics different from the past. One would hope to see a more temperate, enlightened, and capable electorate. Unfortunately, it seems that the information age has yielded nothing better than a greater pooling of ignorance.

The most obvious example of that was the CNN-hosted YouTube debate for the Democratic presidential candidates. CNN received questions from, among others, a snowman puppet, a man with a gun for a baby, and a shirtless man who asked if he could be Hillary’s intern.

When Mitt Romney observed that "the presidency ought to be held at a higher level than having to answer questions from a snowman,” I found it to be the most enthusing comment made by any of the campaigns thus far.

A mistake in perception is being made by many – mostly on the part of young people – that because our electoral process is a populist one, they should be allowed to participate in such a way as to make a mockery of it.

Too many institutions accommodate this juvenile perversion of politics, glorifying it as democracy at work. Politicians go along in order to win votes. In the process, the sanctity of a formerly hallowed system is degraded, and the wisdom upon which a democracy is contingent becomes less and less apparent.

Polls throughout the years have continued to demonstrate this. The MTSU Survey Group, a polling group out of Tennessee, conducted a 2004 survey measuring the degree of voter awareness in that state.

They found that 42 percent of voters were aware that Bush wanted to let younger workers put some of their Social Security withholdings into their own personal retirement accounts. Half named John Kerry as the candidate who supported rescinding federal income tax cuts for “the rich.” Another 23 percent attributed that sentiment to Bush, while 37 percent weren’t sure.

Another 2004 survey was conducted by Ilya Somin of the Cato Institute.

It found, among other things, that 15 percent of respondents could identify a candidate for the U.S. House in their district. About one-third of that number could identify more than one candidate.

A substantial 11 percent knew that William Rehnquist was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

And a proud 9 percent knew that Trent Lott was the majority leader of the Senate.

Thankfully, we can at least say that more than half – 55 percent – knew Republicans controlled the U.S. House.

Successful politicians must recognize the ignorance of the electorate and pander to it. If they don’t, they will suffer the consequences. One example that comes to mind is the attack on Barack Obama after he suggested he would pursue Taliban in Pakistan and negotiate with nations such as North Korea.

He stated the obvious – we should communicate with other nations before we initiate wars (the State Department already does so on a daily basis, as any fool with the slightest amount of interest in the government is well aware), and if communication fails, we will destroy our enemies by whatever means necessary. The prior statement suggested little divergence from our current policies; the latter actually sounded conservative.

But in this day and age, Obama violated three sacred laws to which all presidential aspirants are expected to adhere: Never offer original ideas, never treat the electorate as anything but infantile, and never stray from sound bites. Republicans should brag that they will never negotiate with anyone; Democrats will brag that they’ll never defend America. If either side actually believed in what they were saying, they would be advocating for the abolition of the State Department or the Department of Defense.

This is the generation of the snowman and of purple-haired college students who expect to be taken seriously, but who have no grasp of how their government functions. Our political process has been reduced to a montage of sound bites because of this absurd need to include every freak in society.

Why not? Professors have taught America’s youth that there’s no distinction that can really be made between the respectable and the depraved. The latter is even taught to be preferable, because it allows trodden-upon dope dealers to be respected like more “fortunate” members of the public.

I made similar observations about MTV’s Rock the Vote in a 2004 article. The official Rock the Vote Website commented on it by comparing me to Jim Crow racists. That’s what qualifies as intellectualism in the new world, and it is all the opposition can say to refute me.

Respect, credibility, and the ability to influence one’s government have traditionally been left to those who earned them. Our system has deviated from that precedent to produce, as they say, a regression below the mean.