Nine months to go and I am already sick of the US presidential campaign. Then again, I have been fielding questions on the topic since October. With Senator John Kerry seemingly ready to wrap up the Democratic nomination, let me interpret the madness that will reign between now and November.
First, anyone who says they know anything definitive about the race or its outcome is lying. There is too much uncertainty to make any kind of prediction. Second, expect the nastiest campaign in US history. Newsweek reports that the team of George W. Bush has vowed not to repeat the mistakes of his father's 1992 campaign. Then, they did not take the challenger, Bill Clinton, seriously and gave him several months to establish his own image and shape the race.
For their part, Democrats are still furious about the 2000 election, and many are convinced that their man was robbed. That anger has driven Howard Dean's campaign, and galvanised activists around the country. Some worry whether Senator Kerry can maintain that energy, but Democratic insiders say their party is united as never before.
No candidate can afford to sit still. The United States is just too evenly divided. Remember, Mr Bush won Florida - and the electoral count - by only several hundred votes. The margins are razor thin in most states as well as in both chambers of Congress. Pollster John Zogby predicts each of the two major candidates will take 45 per cent of the vote, leaving 10 per cent to determine the outcome of the race. (As for caveat number one - distrust all predictions - Mr Zogby correctly predicted the 2000 vote, saying it would end in a tie). That means campaigns have to fight for every vote. And there have already been charges that Mr Bush was 'a deserter', later toned down to 'AWOL' (absent without leave) during his National Guard years in Alabama. Senator Kerry is fending off allegations that he had an affair with an intern, a charge rejected by both parties.
Nastiness is also a function of the credibility issue that will be at the heart of the campaign. There is no escaping the questions swirling around the decision to go to war against Iraq: either Mr Bush was misled by his advisers or he misled the public. Ultimately, it boils down to trust. For all the doubts about the wisdom of his policies, Mr Bush seemed to have that angle sown up - until recently. A Washington Post poll last week showed only 52 per cent thought he was 'honest and trustworthy', while only 44 per cent in a Time/CNN survey said he was a 'leader you can trust'.
But, and this is the third main point, the most important factor will be the economy. All politics is local, and you cannot get any closer to home than the wallet or the purse. All things being equal, if Americans feel the Bush administration has the economy back on track, he should win.