OS ANGELES - All of the plot conventions are in place: feuding dynasties, sons hungry for power, political shenanigans, even a leading female character in theatrical makeup.
Since election night, the country has stayed tuned to the first soap opera of the new century. Riveted by each plot twist - machine count, hand count, let's recount them all - voters and nonvoters alike find themselves newly fascinated by presidential politics.
Of course, their interest came only after the polls closed, with barely half of eligible voters having cast a ballot. But they care now. They crave information about chads and arcane election laws. They can cite every new move made by the campaigns of Vice President Al Gore and Governor George W. Bush of Texas. As cliffhangers go, ''Who will be the 43d president of the United States?'' ranks right up there with ''Who shot J.R.?''
''From Tuesday night on, I've been flipping through the channels, reading every story,'' said Dennis Deppisch, 53, a mortgage banker of Madison, Wis., who voted for Bush. ''I've found it, for good or bad, captivating and ... despite all the frustration I go through with these lawsuits and recounts, I'm still hanging in there.''
But channel surfing or page turning is not political activism, and upset doesn't necessarily translate into action. No one knows whether the next man to occupy the Oval Office will be the most closely watched in history or whether the electorate will switch channels once the story line is resolved. The citizenry's temporary engagement could become permanent; or, as some voters and political observers believe, the letdown when the drama ends in an uninspiring choice could cause even greater alienation and apathy.
''Most people don't have a lot of faith in our political system and they're going to think this is somehow a failure rather than a wonderful political process,'' said Sarah Schoenkopf, 33, an office manager in San Clemente, Calif., who voted for Bush. ''I'd like to be wrong, but I see most people giving up after this and thinking that everyone's a cheater, a liar, and that nothing ever works.''
Schoenkopf said the controversy has made her feel more connected to America and her fellow Americans than she did just two weeks ago. No matter which candidate is declared the winner by Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, Schoenkopf said, she will try to maintain her focus on national politics in general and presidential politics in particular.
In interviews with dozens of voters from still-undetermined Washington state to Florida, similar aspirations were heard again and again. Few, however, were optimistic about a widespread resurgence in political activism, or even a higher turnout in the 2004 election despite an unexpected lesson in the importance of every vote.
As Erwin Chemerinsky, a law professor at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, put it, ''It makes it very hard for anyone to say, `My vote doesn't count.' On the other hand, our culture tends to move on to the next thing very quickly.''
Curtis Gans, director of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate in Washington, said he anticipates changes. Congress will no doubt address the issues raised by the close count and ballot errors in Florida and other states. A national ballot standard may be established. Debate over the validity of the Electoral College will continue.
In Newport Beach, Calif., real estate developer Robert Parker voted for Gore. In the early days of the post-Election Day dispute, he wanted the Democrats to win. Now he is uninterested in the outcome.
''I just want it to be done,'' said Parker, 44. ''The country is so split and neither candidate is so exciting and I think we all want it to be over already.''
Still, at Parker's health club, the TV sets have been tuned to CNN since Nov. 7. Patrons stand around soaking up the latest buzz on lawsuits and counter-lawsuits and olive branches extended by one party to another. The same has been true among many of Steven Jones's students at the University of Illinois at Chicago. ''Who hasn't been following it?'' he said.
Yet Jones, too, is uncertain how much momentum for change will emerge from the election. He said he sees the crisis as a kind of television drama, taken seriously for an hour at a time, then forgotten.
''What I hear is, `We'll get a president eventually, it's not that big of a deal, I did my part and voted and, I'll watch TV and see what happens,''' said Jones, 39, a professor of communications who voted for Gore. ''There are some people who are passionate about what happens, but it's as though people are almost spent after the election.''
Typically what drives voter participation is a personal stake in an election outcome, and University of Wisconsin professor emeritus Charles Jones predicted that within three months citizens will be more concerned with prescription drug programs than Electoral College reform. A hundred days into the next presidency, he added, the country will be back to politics as usual.
Brad Cecil, 39, an executive with a San Francisco-based software company and a Nader supporter, said, ''Clearly the president-elect will be watched for how he fails, for all the promises he made to get elected and didn't keep, for how the people who didn't elect him are [angry]. But I find the political machine to be more repulsive than these two candidates.''
After insisting for an entire election season that there was no difference between Bush and Gore, Nader supporter Steve Bradburn said he is now following the headlines closely to see whether a Democrat or Republican will take over the White House.
''A lot of people are seeing how really desperate the two big political parties are to hang on to power,'' said Bradburn, a conservationist from Spokane, Wash. ''It doesn't really matter to me whether it's Bush or Gore. But I guess if it's Bush it will bring the revolution that much sooner.''
