ealizing that the whole shooting match will be over one week from today, it is time to address the travel plans of all those Americans who have threatened to leave the country if one guy or the other wins.
Because prosperity is so rampant, plenty of voters who fear the the victory of the man they oppose have the scratch to pick up stakes and head for that place where they won't have to worry about being governed by President So-and-so.
And because the world is largely at peace, those vowing to vamoose have a lot of territory to choose from.
Leaving aside the obvious no-go areas (the Middle East, East Timor, the rogue states, etc.), there is no shortage of destinations for the I-can't-take-it-if-What'sisname-wins crowd.
These are the people who'll vote with their feet after the fact. It has long been a tenet of my esteemed colleague, professor Martin F. Nolan of the San Francisco branch office, that voting is a hostile act. This syndrome was identified in a previous century by the late Henry Adams, who defined politics, particularly as practiced in Massachusetts, as ''the systematic organization of hatreds.''
Using this theorem, one divines the intent of the typical voter by first establishing what he or she fears most, and then extrapolating back.
Employing this rule of thumb, if what you fear most is a superior-sounding smart-alecky fellow who was number two to a boss who was caught messing around with one of the female help, why, then, your course is plain.
But if you dread more the prospect of four years of listening to a twangy-voiced Texan mangle the language, malapropping his way through his daily round of press conferences, ribbon-cuttings, and East Wing parties for dignitaries like Charlton Heston, then your opposite course is equally plain.
I have stacks of mail and e-mails from people from around the nation predicting dire consequences if either Bush or Gore wins. But no one expresses grave fears of how the United States would turn into some sort of Green Gulag under President Nader. Or Nadir, as some critics call him.
Seems that no one thinks Ralph has even the slightest chance of winning, and thence forcing all the SUV owners to convert their behemoths into chicken coops or backyard recycling centers.
No, it's the prospect of President Bush or President Gore that motivates most of the fear-mongering that comes my way. So the question comes, just where will those voters go if the man they fear actually wins on Tuesday next?
Where do you flee, if you're a gun-lovin', God-fearin', tax-cuttin' Sun Belter who quails at the notion of Al Gore lecturing you, day in, day out, for four long years? You certainly don't go to California, or anywhere in the Northeast, for if Gore's to win, he'll win those neighborhoods first.
Where do you head? Mexico? Canada? Is there anyplace on earth that CNN does not reach, where Bernie and Judy cannot accost one at 5 p.m. every weekday for an hour of Inside Politics?
And if Bush wins, as the polls seem to suggest he may, what prudent course awaits those voters who fear he will do to the other 49 states what he's already done to Texas?
First off, I'd say it's time to search for higher ground.
George Dubbaya's oft-remarked scorn for the notion of global warming and his implicit pledge to pour more hydrocarbons into the atmosphere suggest that Americans living along low-lying coastal zones should consider moving up - literally.
Word came in September from NASA that the hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica had expanded to 17 million square miles.
That means the hole in the atmosphere that allows killer ultraviolet rays to reach the earth's surface has expanded to 19 times the size it was 20 years ago.
It's the CFCs, or chlorofluorcarbons, that erode the stratospheric layer of protective ozone molecules, three atoms of oxygen hitched together in a way that soaks up the ultraviolet rays.
Bush scoffs at the notion of global warming. ''We need more study,'' he says with conviction.
Those moving out from fear of a Bush presidency would do well to avoid the southernmost tip of South America, where parts of Chile and Argentina get bombarded with deadly ultraviolet light thanks to the ozone destruction hastened by global warming.
In some southernmost communities, the school kids are kept indoors at recess, and they go home daily wearing the special sunglasses provided by the government. Smearing sunblock on unprotected skin is a routine practice there.
Under Bush, the sky might not fall, but the ozone layer could.
''More study'' on global warming, and pass the sunblock.
David Nyhan's e-mail address is nyhan@globe.com.
