AMERICA AND THE PRIMARIES

Over here in old Blighty we are following the American primaries with interest. Or rather, I am. I don't know anybody else who gives a toss.

To me the reason for taking an interest seems obvious. The man or woman (and that is, at last, a possibility), in the White House pretty much decides whether the world burns or thrives in peace and harmony. And the dolt who has been running things for the last eight years seems to have been intent on making the former happen rather than the latter.

Anybody out of the current crop of Republican and Democrat candidates would be better than George Bush, except maybe John McCain, who seems to have even less of a grip on reality than dear old Dubya.

But I am a liberal, of sorts (the new partner of a friend of mine asked her the other day, in tones of muted horror, "Is he left wing?"--he might have been asking if I were a pederast). So naturally I would rather see one of the Democrats win the election, when after America's laborious system finally runs its course people go to the polls. The only one on the Republican side who intrigues me is Ron Paul, who supposedly is against the war and doesn't mind if you smoke marijuana as long as you do it at home. But Ron has less of a chance of getting the Republican Party nomination than I do.

On the Democratic side I find I'm closest, politically, to Dennis Kucinich. He won't get the nomination either. It will go, we can predict with some confidence, to either Hilary Clinton or Barrack (is that how you spell it?) Obama. Neither of whom will be able to effect the kind of restoration of America's soul that they are promising, but there you go. At least if one or the other of them takes the Oval Office, there might still be a world for them to disappoint.

Of the two, I prefer Obama. I don't know why; Hilary has reasonable liberal credentials, though her voting record on Iraq is suspect. But she has a long-standing sympathy problem. It was the same when her husband was President. For some reason Hilary is just hard to like. And trust. Whenever she promises something, you immediately suspect that the opposite is going to happen.

But she has learned now how to combat this. Judicious shows of barely-controlled emotion. Put that quiver into your voice and the voters' hearts will be swayed. She did it the other day in New Hampshire and it swung, supposedly, a large number of voters away from Obama. She could almost have been receiving tutorials on the electoral benefits of the appearance of sincerity from Tony Blair, who won three terms of office using the same manipulative tools. Or maybe she has been talking to that no-talent singer who cried at the right time on national British television and beat everybody in sight to win "The X-Factor".

It could also be that old age is making me cynical. But I doubt it. Obama for president, I say, not that I have a vote in these matters.