Iowa: The future starts here

The phoney war is over. Tonight, in school rooms, church halls and private homes across the Midwestern state of Iowa, the first votes will be cast that actually count, kicking off the most unpredictable, the most expensive and arguably the most important presidential election season in modern US history.

Hyperbole is the currency of American politics but this time the superlatives are justified. When the process at last comes to an end, spending by candidates will have far exceeded $1bn. The Democratic and Republican fields are uncommonly strong, but in neither is there a clear favourite. And never have the stakes been higher not only for the US but for countries all over the planet.

Every election in the world's lone superpower matters, but only a few of them qualify for the label of "transformational", those that set the country on a new course. 1932 was one, ushering in Franklin D Roosevelt, the New Deal and more than three decades of Democratic pre-eminence. Another was 1980, which brought to power Ronald Reagan and the conservatism that has dominated US politics ever since. Almost three decades on, 2008 has the potential to be the same.

Related articles

• So what do the candidates stand for?
• Voters enthusiastic in small state which could influence Presidency
• Leading article: The marathon has begun, and the world is watching

Iowa, of course, is just the start of it. Next Tuesday, New Hampshire holds the first primary of the season, this year more closely watched than ever. Tuesday, 5 February has already been called "Tsunami Tuesday," when up to 22 states hold primaries and caucuses. Conceivably, the outcome will be settled then. If not, however, the primary season continues until early June. Then come the nominating conventions, followed by a two-month general election campaign proper that culminates on 4 November, when Americans will finally choose their 44th president.

The process, under way in effect since the mid-term elections of 2006, is desperately cumbersome. But this time the wait will be worth it. If ever a country needed time to assess its problems and deliver a considered verdict on how to tackle them it is the troubled, uneasy America of today.

Election 2008 is a turning point. Not just because, for the first time since 1928, no incumbent president or vice-president has sought his party's nomination. Nor simply because the country yearns for a new beginning after the failures of George Bush or that, for the first time, both a woman and a black person have a real chance of winning the prize. Above all, the sense is palpable that conservatism, Reagan and Bush-style, has run out of answers.

On every side, problems loom. The war in Iraq may be going slightly better but elsewhere in the Middle East, tensions only seem to grow. At home, the mortgage crisis and ensuing credit crunch, soaring energy costs and a tumbling dollar make recession this year at least an even money bet.

Mr Bush may be the most unpopular president in a generation but the approval rating of the Democratic-run Congress is even lower. Then there are the wider concerns, globalisation, global warming. Almost 70 per cent of the population believes the country is "on the wrong track" more than at any moment in almost two decades.

And it is not just the locals who have had enough. What the US does affects many countries more than anything their own politicians get up to. Foreign nationals may have no votes in Iowa this evening but, like Americans, they are demanding change. Be it Iran or global warming, the world wants co-operation, not confrontation, from the US.

If the pendulum of US politics is swinging in 2008, it is equally clear it is moving towards the Democrats.For all three of the party's top-tier candidates Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards change is the watchword. Their approaches, of course, differ. Mrs Clinton advertises her "experience" as the best means of achieving change. Mr Edwards exudes anger at the ever widening gap between rich and poor. Mr Obama promotes his youth and freshness, and his ability to transcend partisanship.With one exception, the issues uppermost in voters' minds are Democratic issues. Soaring healthcare costs, anxieties about the economy and jobs have supplanted discontent with Iraq. On all of them, Americans trust Democrats more than Republicans. Conservatism, above all as practised by Mr Bush, seems to have lost touch with the country's rhythms. That is one reason the little-known Mike Huckabee who could be described perhaps as a "liberal" social conservative has been the surprise of the Republican race so far. The exception, of course, is the issue of terrorism and national security. A violent new crisis in the Middle East, or another major terrorist attack on US soil, could yet propel John McCain, battle-tested in every sense, or Rudy Giuliani, or the former governor and successful businessman Mitt Romney to the presidency. If so, Americans would again have bought the familiar Republican sales pitch that "we can keep the country safe."

Conceivably, even greater novelties are in store. The last time the American electorate was in so foul a collective mood was in 1992. That year, an eccentric Texan billionaire named Ross Perot won 19 per cent of the vote. This year's possible independent candidate is the eminently more reasonable figure of Michael Bloomberg, Mr Giuliani's successor as mayor of New York and, as of last year, no longer a member of either party. Mr Bloomberg denies such talk, but who knows?

The Iowa vote

What: The caucuses are the first formal step in selecting party candidates for the November 2008 election.

How: More than 1,700 simultaneous meetings to be held across Iowa, in which voters choose delegates to go to the county conventions.

Why: The caucuses started in 1972 as a way to encourage more grass-roots participation.

Population: 2,982,085

Voters: 1.8 million.

White 94.9%, Black 2.3%,

Other ethnic groups 2.8%

Key issues: Federal subsidies for ethanol, used by farmers

Previous voting record:

2004: Bush 50%, Kerry 49%.

2000: Bush 48%, Gore 49%.

1996: Clinton 50%, Dole 40%

Current governor: Chet Culver (Democrat)