This is a media situation where lessmay be more. The headlines will read that Sharon won because the people like his policies. That's overstating it a little - the carrot it nicer, but has failed over and over. The further analysis in the papers will Labor under the delusion that it's because the loyal (or in the case of Peres, disloyal) opposition has failed to provide an alternative. The Post claims that Labor lost its way by not opposing Sharon more forcefully. They have the same prescription for the Democrats in the US Senate - oppose the executive more forcefully. This solutions is as wrong there as it is here. It will only further marginalize the party, split it, and pave the way for its successor(s).