Today is, of course, the day of the Iowa Caucuses. The system which these take place under is so absurdly complex that only the Democratics could tolerate it and if you want to know then I would suggest Wikipedia.

The point of the matter is that what will take place is one vote that is conducted far too convoluted and social a fashion to be able to predict via any existing statistical methods while there is another which is far too close and tight to be able to predict via any existing statistical methods.

What we do know is that there is a strong chance that Hillary Clinton will be defeated either by Barack Obama {a personal favourite} or by John Edwards, or {best of all} by both. The prospect of this is one that I find highly pleasing as, quite frankly, I hate the idea of her dominating American politics for the next four years, or ever {as seems more likely} at least the next eleven months.

I have come to learn a bizarre amount about this election for somebody not actually within the country, certainly far more than I have done about my own country’s. To be honest this is all so instantly dated and thus tediously dull that I will not bother you with it, instead let me give you the basics:

1) Obama seems the only one likely to take down Clinton. He’s amazing.

2) The Republicans seem to have torn themselves into messy chunk.

Clinton brings the Republicans together, uniting them into a tight, cohesive union of loathing. Obama drags the less extreme ones towards him and none of the shit that they have flung yet seems to stick. When even the hard-right seems to be unenthusiastic when insulting a black man you know that you are onto something.

Meanwhile the Republicans are torn between a plasticated Mormon that will make himself whoever he needs to be {apart from a consistent person with a good memory for his former positions, of course} or an autocrat that, having closed his mighty fist around the nation’s mightiest city, now wants to crush the entire country and possibly sizable chunks of the entire world; an immensely charming and amusing Arkansan that is from the same town as Clinton and wants a massive, philanthropist state; a neo-imperialist torture-victim who wants to rout the special interest groups and stay in Iraq until they obtain “Victory”; or perhaps an elderly libertarian who calls himself a Constitutionalist and wants there to be hardly state at all, along with quite literally no troops abroad, anywhere…

If that sounds immensely diverse then that’s because it is.

So they are probably going to be torn in almost all directions while the Democrats, by contrast, established a creeping consensus before tearing it down. Clinton seemed invincible and pundits grumbled that she was treating the affair more as foreshadowing of a coronation than a contest.

Thankfully it turned out that they did have a decent alternative and one that would still be a “First!” if he won, the “First Black President”, that is. Surprisingly the race issue rose only occasionally, with the Clinton posse insinuating that he may have been a Muslim {could you imagine such an “Allegation” being aimed at a white Christian?} or a drugs dealer {fuck it, Bush was a known cokehead and nobody ever made that claim}.

But it turns out that besides this nonsense he is actually an immensely strong Conservative. Hillary Clinton’s style was best described by Andrew Sullivan as a “Defensive Crouch”, while Barack’s seems to be strong, confident and hopeful.

Hillary will force you to sit through a bunch of nauseating, focus-grouped-to-fuck platitudes that are effectively the spoken word equivalent of the overly numerous Bland FM stations that clog our airwaves {it is best that we do not even get started on my views on them} while Obama actually seems to have some fresh ideas and outlooks.

The only Republican anywhere near as exciting is Ron Paul, which is odd since he is a well known figure in congress and has been such for a very, very long time. He argues a fundamentalist Constitutionalist line that he takes to the extremes of desiring full-scale withdrawals from everywhere {fuck Iraq: we’re talking South Korea, Japan, Germany here…}, the total demolition of the IRS, CIA and pretty much any other easily-initialed government committee going, the destruction of the centralised economy and thus a de facto return to his beloved Gold Standard and {for some reason} far tighter immigration controls, to a draconian extent.

A radical, in short.

I disagree with him over a massive number of issues {he wants pensions, education, all sorts of shit gone} but he has effectively had a movement spring to life around him, with only the mildest of encouragement and, primarily, some bafflement and bewilderment from its focus, a 77 year old man who has been saying the same things for almost as long about just about everything.

The reason that he is so striking is that if you compare him to the slimy, slippery creature that the Establishment has decided upon the contrast is much like observing Johnny Cash and Bon Jovi side by side. Cash’s lyrics may have focused upon topics like taking cocaine and shooting “That bad bitch down”, or shooting his one true love to death with a gun, or committing manslaughter, or being a bastard that murders people, or some cunt who “Shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die” but by fuck he was cool.

Glamourise violence, attach macho legend to acts of random brutality, whatever, if you can sound that intense and earnest while doing it and you earn my respect.

As for Bon Jovi…Well, enough said. That insult is self-explanatory.

Romney is a noxious, irksome little worm, who has thus far based his bid entirely around two things:

1) Lies.

2) Money.

Standard fair for a Republican, you might think. But he has taken it to soaring new levels, heights never even reached by Bush, since at least he shared a religion with the scum that he required to get him into power. Romney has required what is estimated at around $100 and some of the most bare-faced dishonesty ever seen in American politics {and it has a long and dishonourable tradition} to build himself some form of popularity.

Whether it is claiming that “We will see more progress in the next ten years than in the past ten centuries”, shifting his views on abortion and immigration a full 180 degrees for reasons of pure political expediency, pretending that Mormonism is almost identical to Christianity, claiming to be a more legitimate social conservative than true idiot Mike Huckabee or…Well, any of the nonsense that he has spewed, he has proven himself to be an utter and absolute foul demon of a moron.

He has not an ounce of wisdom, of intelligence or decency within him. All that he has is cunning but with the Republicans that, plus a fortune of a few billions of personal wealth, could well be enough. The copraphiliac crowd of the Republican Establishment has, of course, lapped up his bullshit eagerly. Any smarmy, smug cunt with enough cash and a suitably thick slime-coating will be embraced eagerly by them and any person lacking enough dignity to accept their cash with a happy grin will be the darling of the massive corporations.

And so it was that Romney has overtaken the balding thug Giuliani {always a little too keen on the gays, always a tad permissive cocks when it came to abortions…}, who’s gruesome growlings towards Iran were bettered by the arch-bastards pledge to “Double Guantanamo”.

{Incidentally: the Communists claim that the only gulag in Cuba is in Guantanamo Bay. Yet they claim that the British government’s assistance to American rendition is yet another instance among many of them having blood on their hands. Do I detect something of a double standard?}

Anyway, Romney is a putrid, foul construct that fits any shape which is required of it and is devoid of a single shard, an isolated iota, a lonely quark of honesty, reason or earnest.

He will say whatever suits him and when required to give a key-speech will respond by proving himself yet further devoid of any value. When the worry over his bizarre faith came to a head and he was forced to confront them this former Bishop entirely ignored the dark and daft past of his organisation {the institutionalised racism stamped out only just in time for them to remain legal and not banned along with all of the other white supremacist nut-jobs, an amendment made supposedly as a consequence of divine revelation to their leaders in the nick of time, the way in which when their founder’s wife confiscated the Holy Scrawlings he had ordered written he was incapable of remembering the supposedly divinely dictated words, their belief that Satan and Jesus are brothers…} he instead claimed that:

-He believed in Christ as the Saviour, so all was well.

-That said, though, he did not believe in religious tests.

-Religion and freedom walked hand-in-hand {a revelation, surely, to those living in Saudi Arabia or Iran}.

-Americans are wary and sick of atheists.

-You have to be a believer to be an American.

And this was what was supposed to be his “Kennedy Detaching Openly from the Vatican” moment?

If both Romney and Clinton are victorious I am perfectly happy to focus upon British politics again. At least watching Brown get slapped around from all directions will leave me caring, since despite reservations I truly do want him to win the next election instead of the Tories. Between those two I have no fucking concern, they could both die slowly in a chemical fire for all I care.

Either of them would ruin the country and both against each other will be sure to tear it into two. The only thing that can possibly hold the Republican Party together by this stage is Clinton and the only fucker content-devoid enough to beat Bush’s record is…

Actually, wait, all of them.