Will he, won't he?
So what do you reckon? Should there be a snap General Election or not?
As a source of innocent merriment, I have posed that question to sundry folk at the party conferences, Labour last week, Conservative this.
At Bournemouth, the Labour answers were universally predicated on party advantage. Would we win? Would we win big? Could we gain revenge on the SNP for May?
Yes, they had considered factors such as the weather, the dark nights, the unnecessarily early timing, possible apathy, possible voter antagonism - but only in terms of the impact upon their own party, not as issues of distinct substance.
In truth, I wasn’t surprised. In a democratic system, it is healthy - and inevitable - that politicians will calculate the potential impact on their own party’s chances of success. It is a vital check.
However, it was just a mite depressing that every single interlocutor gave a partisan reply to a neutral question.
I hadn’t asked about the impact upon Labour. I had asked in general terms about the rights and wrongs of such a step.
An early election is, strictly speaking, unnecessary. The Government has a substantial majority. There has not been a confidence vote defeat. There is no great, unsolved question to go before the people. Gordon Brown is not a president requiring a personal mandate - he can govern according to the mandate given in 2005 to his party’s manifesto.
However, politics is about momentum rather than pure constitutional theory.
Those facing election will, understandably, ask: "What does this mean for me?"
The rest of us can decide for ourselves whether it feels right, at this point in the political cycle, that Britain’s new prime minister should subject himself to our verdict.
Consequently, I wouldn’t use the phrase deployed by Sir Malcolm Rifkind at a Conservative conference fringe meeting today.
He said an election just two years on from the last such contest was “a constitutional outrage”.
Indeed, he suggested - with a broad grin - that if/when Gordon Brown goes to Buckingham Palace, the Queen should refuse his request to dissolve Parliament.
Grinning still more broadly, Sir Malcolm added: “It might well be the end of the Monarchy - but what a way to go!”
However, Sir Malcolm’s is not the most commonly expressed view here in Blackpool.
Instead of indignation and drollery, most Tories here feel themselves obliged to offer bold bravado. Bring it on. Come and have a go if you think you’re hard enough.
Also on the fringe, Annabel Goldie challenged Mr Brown to “stop footering” - and call the election instantly.
Do they mean it? Well, some do. But a fair number here in Blackpool suspect that their party’s policy portfolio isn’t yet quite in a shape to endure sustained exposure to voter scrutiny.
Philip Hammond, who shadows the chief secretary to the treasury, said he and his colleagues were carefully studying the report from their economic policy group, adding in a wry aside that they might well have to accelerate the process if an election is called.
Because of course, just as with Labour, the real consideration for the Tories here in Blackpool is - what would an early election mean for the party?