We are less than a week from the Iowa caucus, which is not to be confused with the New Hampshire primary or Iowa straw poll. Simply put, any time Iowa or New Hampshire decide anything for the nation, we witness the triumph of the early bird.
I peronally miss the day of the brokered convention, when party bosses in fedoras, beef fed and whiskey driven, sat in smoky back rooms and made deals that determined who would be president. Those were the golden years, when people wore straw boaters and sat in straight rows.
This year promises to be a bit of a wry twist. One fellow I know who stumped for Obama in 2008 is now pounding the pavement for Ron Paul. When asked why, he evidenced a kind of marvelous amnesia.
"I am for change," he says, eyes adopting the far-off gaze of a madman. "Change is what we want. There must be change.'
From our conversation, I decided his group wants change. His kind of change is somewhat frightening. If he were a driver, he would clean one ditch, then the other, never quite managing to find his proper lane.
I am going to use this space to present my take on politics in 2012. The major news providers call their reports something like Decision 2012. Jon Stewart, the comedian, calls his Indecision 2012. I have decided to call mine Imposition 2012.
In my columns on national politics, we will learn together significant facts, like "No Republican has won the White House without winning the state of Ohio," (actually true) and "A third place finish, or lower, in Iowa, means a candidate needs to start slinging mud in a hurry, or decide to run for Vice-President," (probably true) or "Evangelicals are one nut group that can deliver votes but only on social issues" (increasingly untrue).
We shall even talk about what a nut group is and why they call us a nut group. Along the way, perhaps we will say a word or two about ourselves.
Opinions expressed here are mine alone.