Why I'd Make a Fine Pundit

Punditry suits me. From the fresher vantage point of the morning after, yesterday's incursion into the realm of insightful political commentary was brief, but edifying. I detect, now, a peculiar facility with exactly the sort of in-depth analysis required to quantify the qualifiable, and vice versa. I will demonstrate.

In a nutshell, our political system's minima and maxima have yet to define the boundaries of incommunicado elements derived, certainly, from an era of unbridled grit. Circumstances beyond the pomp of pitch and yaw—e.g. economic stability in the swing states—make this feasible, not only in terms of prosperity, but in the larger sense of provincialism bound and gagged by the force of law.

Aloof and alone, these are the little people of whom it was written that neither the old New Deal nor the newer Big Deal might assuage their hunger, for a chicken in every pot only levels the boiling point. The winds of change blow hot and cold, fast and slow, up and down the great divide that separates one delineation from the next, leaving the huddled masses to the clergy, who may not even feel the draft beneath their robes.

Political elasticity, then, may indeed require the full cooperation of voters in the autonomous districts. As a solution to the troubling issues that coalesce during an election year, this form of lapidary cannot be easily dismissed without first examining the trends responsible for the fissures and cracks that threaten the very foundation of hyperbole.

Therein lies the rub.