SINCE the Premier ended all of the suspense last week and announced that the long-anticipated General Election would be held on July 24, many people have been asking me who I think will win.

Clearly I hope that the Bermudian people are winners regardless of which party tops the polls. But, frankly, there are so many variables at play this time, so many unknowns, so many changed circumstances - remember, this is the first election to be contested in the new, single-seat constituencies and the advent of "one man, one vote, each vote of equal value" will have an as-yet unquantifiable impact on the overall result - that I'm not sure I'm willing to predict the outcome. It would take a very brave (or very foolhardy) pundit indeed to call this one.

Whatever happens on July 24, whichever party emerges victorious, the result will probably create a whole new set of political dynamics that will influence Bermudian politics for many years to come.

In fact, the election may well be less interesting than its immediate aftermath; that period may prove to be more interesting to speculate about. A Progressive Labour Party defeat, for instance, would almost certainly result in the Premier having to resign; and a particularly poor showing by the United Bermuda Party could lead to Opposition Leader Dr. Grant Gibbons' political demise on the basis that voters rejected the "new and improved" label he has attempted to hang on his party.

Either way the election goes, it's more than likely that one of our two political leaders will be out of a job on July 25.

It could very well be that Bermuda has finally broken away from its old, established policy of race-based politics, with more people beginning to identify themselves by what they consider to be their interests - the economy, education, law and order - rather than their race.

If that is the case, then we will have evolved into a more mature electorate with clear political constituencies rather than what we have now - a system still based on the racial divide, a divide that has been the biggest influence on the outcome of Bermudian elections since the introduction of the two-party, Westminster-style political system in 1968.

For a long time Bermuda's politics have been heavily linked to what has gone down in the past. In the eyes of most people, it was believed that this tendency was largely a "black thing - that the black community's view of the past influenced them when it came time to make political choices that would decide Bermuda's future.

And from the black community's point of view, many would consider that they had good reason to think in these terms. But in this new Bermudian reality, it will be the white community which will find that it has to go the furthest in breaking Bermuda's race-based political divide.

Just as there are fiscally and socially conservative blacks who will vote for the UBP because they believe it better represents their interests, those low-income, blue-collar whites who first voted for the PLP in 1998 (it's estimated that the PLP drew somewhere between 15 and 20 per cent of white votes at the last election, a record) will have to stay the course on July 24 if the racial mould of Bermuda politics is to be finally broken: the reality is that the PLP will far better represent their interests than the UBP.

The "New" United Bermuda Party has been making loud noises in recent months about its willingness to embrace political constituencies it previously ignored - largely black, of course. Some of the "old" UBP stalwarts from the 1960s and '70s who have gone on to their rewards must be turning in their graves to hear some of the statements and promises being made by the "New" UBP?

But even if I was prepared to give the reformed UBP the benefit of the doubt, I cannot help but think that all of the radical repositioning that's been going on of late is really part of an overall grand political strategy - one which I didn't really see until the election was called.

Then I saw them, all of the UBP Members of Parliament and political hopefuls standing on the steps of the House of Assembly and, of course, Dr. Grant Gibbons making his party's pledge to the people of Bermuda.

No, I am not criticising the UBP for presenting its brand-spanking new team and policies to the public, not at all. It's just that I have seen this type of political theatre before. A few years ago the US Republican Congressmen and Congressional candidates, under the short-lived leadership of Newt Gingrich, gathered on the steps of the Capitol Building in Washington just before an election making the same sort of political pledge to the public.

It was a great photo op and, as things turned out, great politics; the Republicans swept that election, as I recall - although many of their promises remain unfulfilled to this day. Same thing may apply to all of the "New" UBP's alluring promises.

Even the current UBP position on health care for the elderly sounds a lot like what the George Bush administration is promising voters for the upcoming US elections. Now if the "New" UBP has retained some of the same political advisers as the Republicans in America, well that is all right; it's just that in the Bermuda context, the "photo ops" and "Contracts with Bermuda" do not come across as Bermudian originals.

Now Government backbencher Dale Butler is an original. He is hoping to survive politically in a newly created constituency that is probably evenly divided between traditional UBP and PLP supporters. So he's done the right thing, trying to position himself so that he attracts votes from both camps and comes down the middle. His could be one of the more important political stories to come out of this election.

If the Government hangs on to power but with a severely reduced majority, as some political observers are predicting, Mr. Butler may well emerge as a king-maker. The PLP leadership would be dependent on him to retain the Government - and Mr. Butler would be able to dictate precisely what Cabinet position he wants and exert a tremendous influence over PLP policies and direction.

I am not sure whether the Premier will be similarly rewarded by voters in St. George's. Like Mr. Butler, she has traditionally drawn both PLP and UBP votes, particularly in 1998, but I don't think that will be the case this time - although, in reading through a recent interview with her, I swear I could identify a budding conservative!

On the other hand, the embattled and increasingly unpopular Premier may yet turn the tables on her detractors. She's done so more than once in the past, don't forget. So if she has been doing what she says she has been doing - and that is attending back-to-back party functions throughout the island - she may well be re-energising and encouraging her core support base.

This may be an area that the political pollsters have not examined in much detail and could have a tremendous impact on the July 24 results.

One of the big issues likely to dominate what has so far been a pretty low-key election campaign is the question of affordable housing. Both political parties have promised a hundred new houses for Bermudians - but the real question remains cost.

This whole housing situation is complex, having a lot more to do with affordability than availability. Many people believe if the Government of the day - PLP or UBP - is to provide housing for Bermudians, then they should not be in competition with the private sector: in other words, the cost of Government houses should be lower.

THERE is a reason why both the UBP and the PLP have been reluctant to embrace this obvious vote-winning strategy because in order for them to do so they would have to do one or two unpopular things in order to fulfil such a pledge: they would have to completely subsidise the public housing programmes out of Government funds and swallow large losses on the subsequent sales (remember, the costs of labour and material aren't getting any cheaper); or they could attempt to force the banks and real estate agencies and even private home owners to hold the cost of housing down by law.

You can imagine the public outcry if either of these tactics was adopted!

I guess I could never be a politician. I am afraid I could never promise things that I know I could not deliver. I am more likely to tell you what I think is realistic - and often that may not meet the inflated expectations of voters.

But I wonder how many people out there might consider such pragmatism a pleasant change from the latest round of political promises being made by the PLP and the UBP - promises, which like pie crusts, are made to be broken.