BBC BLOGS - Nick Robinson's Newslog
« Previous | Main | Next »

Election outcomes considered

Nick Robinson | 18:54 UK time, Monday, 3 May 2010

In just four days' time the Browns may be packing their things to leave Downing Street. The Camerons may be moving in.

That certainly is the growing expectation of politicians on all sides - speaking privately, of course.

All emphasise that this campaign has been more unpredictable than any they can recall; that the polls and anecdotal evidence show that many, many people have yet to make up their minds and that there is still time for things to change.

Labour HQ was relieved not to slump into third place after Gordon Brown's disastrous encounter with Mrs Duffy.

However, some ministers have told me that their hope is not that Labour will win but that they might come second in the popular vote and win enough seats to make the Liberal Democrats an offer they cannot refuse. Some mutter that the price they may have to pay is replacing Gordon Brown with a new leader.

The Conservatives expect to come first but do not know whether they can win enough seats to govern without depending on the support of other parties - which is a far cry from their confidence of a clear majority before the campaign started.

The Liberal Democrats insist that the polls show that they can still come second and are praying that as voters focus on the choice between two occupants of Downing Street that their vote is not squeezed.

All agree that we/they can't know the outcome of an election which has yet to take place.

That doesn't stop them/us having to consider an outcome which - whatever happens - will make political history.

Comments

Page 1 of 3

  • Comment number 1.

    'Some mutter that the price they may have to pay is replacing Gordon Brown with a new leader'

    Price ? I like your sense of humour.

  • Comment number 2.

    'Labour HQ were relieved that they did not slump into third place after Gordon Brown's disastrous encounter with Mrs Duffy'

    Labour's vote has already reached rock bottom. GB could have strangled Mrs Duffy, shot Sue, and 28% of the populace would still vote Labour.

  • Comment number 3.

    Nick - you say "some ministers have told me that their hope is not that Labour will win but that they might come second in the popular vote and win enough seats to make the Liberal Democrats an offer they cannot refuse"

    Remembering where the quote ("I'm gonna make him an offer he can't refuse") comes from, this doesn't bode well!

    Is Brown the new Godfather? Can Clegg expect a horse's head?

  • Comment number 4.

    It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the perceived closeness of the race reflects the quality of the contestants. Sadly, this is in the sense that a 100 yards sprint between 80 year old men may well be competitive - but not of Olympic Games standard.

  • Comment number 5.

    How can you expect that something "may" happen? Yet another non-comment on a non-story. Where are the commentaries on today's speeches (and where have commentaries on issues been for the entire campaign)? Instead all we get is speculation about speculation. Yes, Cameron may end up in Downing St. But the way the polls are it's very possible, even likely, that he won't.

    These continual stories about building Tory "momentum" are utterly pathetic. It's a direct parroting of Tory propaganda - it seems the only tactic the Tories have had for the last few days, hoping that the voters will follow like sheep a perceived crowd of "winners". Just as they've been relying on avoiding having the issues dissected.

    Where have the in depth discussions of campaign speeches been in the past few weeks. Where is the mention of Brown's towering performances against Paxman and at Citizen UK today? Instead all we get is fluff.

  • Comment number 6.

    The 'swing' to the tories that some witnessed as beginning Friday night/Saturday morning has already petered out (Andrew Neil concurs).

    This race is not over and still too close to call. The mori marginal poll out tonight is all about Con-Lab seats. The Lib-Con ones are reported as safe for the Lib Dems!

    Somewhere there is a fat lady... she still taking visitors in her dressing room sans make-up and in a state of partial undress.

  • Comment number 7.

    Nick, what the polls in general don't reflect is the swing in the (politically) important marginal seats, particularly Lab-Con marginals.

    According to politicalbetting.com:

    "The final Reuters/Ipsos MORI marginals poll, is just out and points to a 7% LAB-CON swing which would just be enough to secure an overall majority.

    That could be just enough to put them into power without the need for support from other parties."

    The forecast is a Tory majority of 2.

    Squeaky bum time!

  • Comment number 8.

    Labour to replace Brown by another unelected P.M. They will do anything to stay in Power and together with Clegg ( Who will also make any vague promise to get some power)will drag this country down.What type of decisive Parliament is this country going to get.How will they start to get the debt down,it will go at lot higher with their give aways.The SNP and the Welsh nationalist parties will want more cash for their votes too.Cameron for all his faults is saying that we have to live within our means and Pay our debts.THEY ARE ALL VAGUE ABOUT HOW AND BY HOW MUCH THEY WILL ATTACK THIS PROBLEM CAUSED BY BROWN WHO TRIED TO SPEND HIS WAY OUT OF THE PROBLEM. Den the man.

  • Comment number 9.

    Most undecided voters - and I speak to a lot - are concerned about jobs and health care.
    On both counts they rate Labour as being probably better than Conservatives. They also say that the turmoil and uncertainty of the prominent media coverage unsettles them. They are also concerned about the behaviours of some benefit claimants (not seeking work; gaming the system) and the effects of large scale migration.
    In just a few days they will make up their minds. Until they do, this election is NOT over.

  • Comment number 10.

    I confess that, living overseas, I had been unaware until a week or so back that many local authorities go the the polls on the same day. This is partly due to the very low priority that the local elections have received in the media under the shadow of the big one. It does raise a rather disturbing prospect of people going to vote next Thursday and deciding at the last minute to play it safe ('better the devils you know' approach) and serving up a load of local councils to the Lib Dems as a kind of consolation prize. A few days ago, we began to sense a real possibility of fundamental change. Now the polls begin to suggest a return to the old Tory/Labour seesaw. Does anyone else think the local elections might be a factor?

  • Comment number 11.

    I am furious with the BBC and their political commentators for the obvious biasness towards Labour supporters and the party.
    The Citizens UK Event speech today by Gordon Brown, was inspiring. When he entered the room after Cameron and Clegg had given their speech's, Gordon Brown got a standing ovation. Not according to your commentators, it was a speech "only luke warm reception according to Laura". On the news you only showed GB hugging a young lady and didn't give the full facts as to why. She was not crying because her mother wasn't getting a living wage as you Nick made it appear to be the case. Anyone who saw the whole speech knows the truth and the BBC should be forced into showing everything which happened prior to this incident so they can decide for themselves.
    Nick can only talk about GB being replaced. Let me remind you Nick the votes have not been cast yet, POLLS HAVE BEEN WRONG IN THE PAST.
    If the Media were not so anti Labour, the Polls would not show them in 3rd place. We the supporters are not just fighting the other two parties, we are also fighting a hostile media towards the Labour Party, it is disgraceful and is not DEMOCRATIC.
    Nick and Laura's comments are so obviously anti Labour.
    And another thing, on the Parliament channel, when Labour news conferences are on Live, the sound quality is appauling, NOT FOR THE OTHER PARTIES THOUGH.
    Todays live news conference for Labour was actually taken off air and replaced by a video about parliament.
    YOU ARE AN ABSOLUTE DISGRACE BBC and I intend starting a campaign to show just how biased you have been during this election campaign.
    I have recorded lots of programmes, news items etc from all difference sources, I have compared them and find the bias is disgraceful.
    A DVD is being sent to OFCOM.
    I hope you loose out when the Tories get in, they intend ripping the BBC apart and serves you right.

  • Comment number 12.

    Labour is a dead duck. They cannot win this election - too many people are against them.

    The only way to stop the Tories now is for Labour voters to switch to the Lib Dems. If Lib Dems can get a last minute surge, they may siphon off some Tory swing voters as well.

    I am really afraid that we are going to end up with some weak Tory government, just like after the 1992 election.

    Given the enormous spending cuts that the next government will have to carry out (which go way beyond what voters expect), we cannot afford to have a government in a minority or with a wafer thin majority elected by less than 40% of the electorate, desperately clinging to power for the next 5 years.

    Far better to have a coalition with a big parliamentary majority and 60%+ of the vote.

  • Comment number 13.

    Problem is who is there that could take over that wouldn't be distrusted by the public in the end and who Nick Clegg would want to work with?
    Of course Miliband is feted as the future leader but this is too early surely.
    The number of votes cast of course are interesting, have to se how that goes as if Labour was third in the popular vote Nick Clegg said he wouldn't deal with Labour in that case.

    The important thing is really more to make sure that whoever is in the position to become a king maker, it's not the SNP or PC. They don't deserve to have any say in anything of importance.

  • Comment number 14.

    btw, if anyone wants to know why they shouldn't vote tory, just look up george osborne on wikipedia.

  • Comment number 15.

    Two things - firstly, its pretty obvious by the way all the Labour big hitters have been supporintg Brown that one strategy is the "not lose, shift Gordon, get an audtumn rerun" its what I would do, though I admit I am just a ordinary Joe and not a politician!

    Secondly, the tories have already "lost" if they can't muster a majority against a "dead on his feet" PM

    The reason for the tories being so poor? The total reliance on Cameron and no one else

  • Comment number 16.

    Cameron has had four and half years to inspire the nation and has failed to do so. Clegg has had just three weeks thanks to the completely corrupt and prejudiced voting system/media ownership concentrated in the hands of Tory proprietors - and has persuaded a great many people. On a separate note: it seems to me that journalists everywhere including the BBC's have failed to really puncture Gordon's great "myth" that somehow he has been a great leader when it has come to the economy. There have been many improvements under New Labour but we have come out of it with a trillion quid of debt AND a whole lot more hidden in PFI (which seems to have hardly been mentioned by any journos). M

  • Comment number 17.

    After every election everyone wakes up and moves on. It is not like a revolution, which is what is probably needed to change anything. Sides win and sides don't, it is the people that have to deal with whatever happens not the politicians who seem to think that the nation waits for their every word to decide if they should go to work the next day. Part of the process is the continuation or change of power periodically without a lot of people dying in the streets...works OK. Now, when whoever wins comes calling to collect the taxes for the money given to the bankers, that is when things will get interesting.

  • Comment number 18.

    The tories are running at about the same level of support as Michael Howard achieved in 2005. Sad really. Nevertheless I think they'll just make it - C15 - but hope I'm wrong.

  • Comment number 19.

    " In just four days time the Browns may be packing their things to leave Downing Street. The Camerons may be moving in.

    That certainly is the growing expectation of politicians on all sides - speaking privately, of course."

    That's pretty clear. And since the conclusion starts the article, I'm expecting some more detail confirming the conclusion as I read on...

    "All emphasise that this campaign has been more unpredictable than any they can recall; that the polls and anecdotal evidence show that many, many people have yet to make up their minds and that there is still time for things to change."

    Hmm. No, different story.

    "However, some ministers have told me that their hope is not that Labour will win but that they might come second in the popular vote and win enough seats to make the Liberal Democrats an offer they cannot refuse..."

    Oh. So it might be a Labour or Lib Dem moving into Downing Street.

    "The Conservatives expect to come first but do not know whether they can win enough seats to govern without depending on the support of other parties - which is a far cry from their confidence of a clear majority before the campaign started.

    The Liberal Democrats insist that the polls show that they can still come second and are praying that as voters focus on the choice between two occupants of Downing Street that their vote is not squeezed."

    Right. In which case, Gordon Brown would continue as PM whilst the various parties tried to form a Government. A coalition is also a real likelihood as an outcome. Odd, but all of the detail in the article so far backs a different conclusion from the opening two paragraphs.

    "All agree that we/they can't know the outcome of an election which has yet to take place."

    What? But the start said it was the Cameron's moving in to Downing Street, and that was a "certainty".

    And yet all the detail in the article says that the outcome is not certain, and that the Conservatives are unlikely to win a majority, and that a coalition is a reasonable outcome. So why the opening two paragraphs?

    My question: Why does the BBC tolerate Nick Robinson's continual pro-Cameron slant?




  • Comment number 20.

    This race is getting more dull by the hour. Clegg set it alight two weeks ago and since then the two old parties have done their best to drag the whole process back to the tired red v blue circus show.
    Our politicians need to know they represent all of us...not just the few hundred "swingers" in margins. The chance for a real break from this pitiful game of political ping pong is driving me to vote on Thursday. We must have real change this time.

  • Comment number 21.

    #5 - roob_the_doob

    I will grant that Brown was good at Citizen UK today - in fact better than he has been throughout the contest - although in fairness Clegg did well as well. But where did you see a towering performance against Paxman? Did the BBC record two versions, one a 'towering performance' for domestic consumption the other a pathetic apologist version for the export market?

  • Comment number 22.

    First poll of the night shows Tories and LD down and Labour up. Ipsos MORI also saying 36% not yet decided.

    This is far from over.

    LD vote starting to be squeezed?

  • Comment number 23.

    At 7:53pm on 03 May 2010, benagyerek wrote:

    btw, if anyone wants to know why they shouldn't vote tory, just look up george osborne on wikipedia.

    -------------------

    If anyone wants to know why they shouldn't vote Liebour, look at the state of the country after 13 years of them bankrupting us.

  • Comment number 24.

    There have already been complaints of postal vote fraud (maybe Gordon's last hope). It will be interesting to compare the results from postal votes with those from the polling stations.

  • Comment number 25.

    how to defeat tories:

    tory/lib dem marginal: vote lib dem
    labour/tory marginal: vote labour
    lib dem/labour marginal: congrats - you are free to vote on conscience
    3-way-split: vote lib dem (as vote already swung to lib dems since last election)

  • Comment number 26.

    Why has the bbc failed to mention the homophobia of Phillipa Stroud? Given the recent discussions on equality, surely this is important. Why the media silence?

  • Comment number 27.

    14 benagyerek

    Pretty scary reading, isn't it?

    £50k billionaire donation on the yacht, autism slur and the extent of the alleged expemse fiddling does raise more than a question about his character.

  • Comment number 28.

    benagyerek (#12)- if former Labour supporters vote indiscriminately for the Lib Dems, including in Labour-Tory marginals, then we will wind up with a Tory government. Exactly what you don't want I think.

  • Comment number 29.

    I read an article today about Cameron saying that he would not form an alliance with the Lib Dems - as long as he can rely on the Ulster Unionist when forming a minority government, which it looks like he can.

    If this is true, then this is a blow to Clegg but means he can push his policies through - but is this democratic? Could he get a second term from this?

  • Comment number 30.

    The reporting for this election has been terrible.
    Im no dedicated Labour voter but you seem to have been sniping at them for the last year without even scrutinising tory plans..dont suppose any of it really matters that much to you on your bbc wage.

  • Comment number 31.

    I'm not sure that this election will make political history at all, except for the foot note...they had TV debates for the first time. So what?

    For this to be historical, something real has got to change; something fundamental like our undemocratic electoral system. Otherwise it'll be the same old blue minority to red minority , red minority to blue minority power game. If real democracy arose from this election...now that would be historic.

    No doubt in a few weeks time, we'll all be too busy worrying about the cuts and taxes to worry about electoral reform (secretly, I think that's what most of politicians are hoping for) and we'll all be far poorer for it, because we'd have missed the opportunity of a generation to make a real difference.

  • Comment number 32.

    8 Dentheman,

    I think 4 out of the last 7 Tory PMs took the top job without an election.

    General elections come every 4-5 years - the people will always have their say

  • Comment number 33.

    what lib dems should say to labour if lib-lab coalition is possible:
    - ditch brown, replace with alan johnson
    - pass electoral reform
    - do the 5-year spending review and draft 2011 budget
    - hold another election under pr in the spring to get a proper mandate for austerity

  • Comment number 34.

    14. At 7:53pm on 03 May 2010, benagyerek wrote:
    btw, if anyone wants to know why they shouldn't vote tory, just look up george osborne on wikipedia.


    OR

    If you want to know why you shouldn't vote labour look at the £163,000,000,000 deficit, and soon to be £1,400,000,000,000 debt

    PRICELESS

  • Comment number 35.

    i cant for the life of me understand why anyone over the age of 35 years of age would vote conservative?. as a young working class man growing up in the 80s i witnessed first hand the destruction of livelihoods and communities from these upper class selfish fools. Labour may not be brilliant but i honestly think i have a better chance of survival with them than rather than get mugged from the Tories again. God help us all if they get into power!!!

  • Comment number 36.

    11

    Chrissie

    May I ask you six questions?

    1.Did the Media invade Iraq?
    2.Did the Media call Mrs Duffy a bigot?
    3.Did the Media run up a £163bn deficit?
    4.Did the Media overspend from 2002 onwards?
    5.Did the Media save the world?
    6.Did the Media say no more boom and bust?

    Or did you think they did

  • Comment number 37.

    Nick. If labour come second in the popular vote and replace Brown I think it will be very difficult for that new leader to be prime minister. The public will simply not put up with a prime minister who has not taken part in the prime ministerial debates. The debates have gone some way to reconnect the public with politics after the expenses scandal but to have an unexpected prime minister suddenly foisted upon them would kill of respect for politics for good. The labour ministers you refer to haven't grasped the truth - that the only credible leader of a lib-lab government now is CLEGG. Will labour countenance putting Clegg in Downing Street? I think not, in which case Cameron will be Prime Minister.

  • Comment number 38.

    I tend to agree with jobsagoodin. A pantomime horse, George Bush or the rotting corpse of Fred West as Labour leader would poll about 28% - though whether they will turnout to vote might be a little more doubtful.

    Certainly this election is nothing about policies - they are not honest. There are really 3 dimensions: entrenched party loyalties, trust in the leadership skills of the 3 stooges, and the absurdities of boundary anomalies and our electoral system. It is not even the economy stupid. If it were nobody would give the job to the genius who has presided over a doubling of national debt since 2001 (never mind the "off balance sheet" debts) - any more than they would have given Fred Goodwin a £30m pension pot.

    Cameron and Clegg are at least positives for their parties but Gordon could have spent the past month in Barbados, and his share of the vote would be no lower - actually he might have met a couple of real uncommitted voters that way - but at least he wouldn't have a microphone on his swimming shorts.

    This may have been the most interesting election in my life time, but it has also been the least honest, and the least about the issues.

  • Comment number 39.

    10. At 7:41pm on 03 May 2010, threnodio_II wrote:
    It does raise a rather disturbing prospect of people going to vote next Thursday and deciding at the last minute to play it safe ('better the devils you know' approach) and serving up a load of local councils to the Lib Dems as a kind of consolation prize. A few days ago, we began to sense a real possibility of fundamental change.
    ================================================

    God help the LibDems if people do that, it may finish them off.
    People forget that the delivery mechanism for many services e,g, schools, social services, local roads, etc are the local councils.

    Cameron is very keen on his Big Society - promoting parents/churches/community providers running schools, voluntary groups delivering local care and social services, outsourcing of back-office functions etc.

    Now why might these two be linked? Seems very obvious to me - the councils are like under the 80 ctus going to take a pounding and the Big Society will be needed to make up the gap in societies needs and what it can afford.
    Neither main party has been too shy of fiddling with the funding formulas to prop up flagship authorities or entrench marginal politically expedient gains. Starving out hopeless political territory is par for the course.

    One can only hope that the big society does not turn into the kind of big society that the Poll Tax created.

  • Comment number 40.

    27. At 8:09pm on 03 May 2010, DeepingDavie wrote:
    14 benagyerek

    Pretty scary reading, isn't it?

    £50k billionaire donation on the yacht, autism slur and the extent of the alleged expemse fiddling does raise more than a question about his character.

    All set up by Mandleson

    Need I say more?

  • Comment number 41.

    21. At 7:59pm on 03 May 2010, threnodio_II wrote:

    #5 - roob_the_doob

    I will grant that Brown was good at Citizen UK today - in fact better than he has been throughout the contest - although in fairness Clegg did well as well. But where did you see a towering performance against Paxman? Did the BBC record two versions, one a 'towering performance' for domestic consumption the other a pathetic apologist version for the export market?


    The first ten minutes of the Paxman interview were excruciatingly boring. Only the most motivated could have sat through that puerile line of questioning. For the last twenty minutes, though, I would say that Brown towered. The Prime Minister also got Paxman to laugh his face off.

    I saw the version of the interview in which Gordon Brown was unexpectedly brilliant. If there is another version of it I'd like to see it.

  • Comment number 42.

    Let's hope the election outcome is clear and resounding no to Gordon Brown. He's single handedly ruined the UK economy and should never be allowed anyway near the levers of power. And the thought of another unelected Labour leader is just ridiculous. Do they think they can take this country for a ride?

    What this country needs is a fresh approach with David Cameron and the modern Conservative party. They have the ideas and the energy to move this country from the disastrous position that Labour has left it in. As usual it is a Conservative govt. that is required to clear up the mess left by Labour politicians. And I hope the current state of the country will mean in future people will never be foolish enough to vote in a Labour govt.

  • Comment number 43.

    At 7:47pm on 03 May 2010, Chrissie wrote:

    I am furious with the BBC and their political commentators for the obvious biasness towards Labour supporters and the party.
    The Citizens UK Event speech today by Gordon Brown, was inspiring. When he entered the room after Cameron and Clegg had given their speech's, Gordon Brown got a standing ovation. Not according to your commentators, it was a speech "only luke warm reception according to Laura". On the news you only showed GB hugging a young lady and didn't give the full facts as to why. She was not crying because her mother wasn't getting a living wage as you Nick made it appear to be the case. Anyone who saw the whole speech knows the truth and the BBC should be forced into showing everything which happened prior to this incident so they can decide for themselves.
    Nick can only talk about GB being replaced. Let me remind you Nick the votes have not been cast yet, POLLS HAVE BEEN WRONG IN THE PAST.
    If the Media were not so anti Labour, the Polls would not show them in 3rd place. We the supporters are not just fighting the other two parties, we are also fighting a hostile media towards the Labour Party, it is disgraceful and is not DEMOCRATIC.
    Nick and Laura's comments are so obviously anti Labour.
    And another thing, on the Parliament channel, when Labour news conferences are on Live, the sound quality is appauling, NOT FOR THE OTHER PARTIES THOUGH.
    Todays live news conference for Labour was actually taken off air and replaced by a video about parliament.
    YOU ARE AN ABSOLUTE DISGRACE BBC and I intend starting a campaign to show just how biased you have been during this election campaign.
    I have recorded lots of programmes, news items etc from all difference sources, I have compared them and find the bias is disgraceful.
    A DVD is being sent to OFCOM.
    I hope you loose out when the Tories get in, they intend ripping the BBC apart and serves you right.


    ...Oh dear diddums just go and suck a dummy and down some nightnurse to help ease your pain!, listen, the 'good ship labour' has had thirteen years to parrot on to us all about what they'd do for the nation but at the end of the day it won't be the BBC or Nick here who decides the election outcome, quite simply if labour hadn't forgotten the ordinary voters who it was supposed to serve, instead of standing by allowing the nation to end up riddled with massive debt, gambling on a discredited war and fiddling the voter amongst other things, while displaying such self righteous arrogance combined with a worse than a useless leader to boot, then that lot may still be in with a chance to govern, but as it seems, its now a case of Bob Hope and no hope, sadly for labour Bob Hope's absence makes there chances microscopically thin!

    And for what its worth before anyone creeps out this old chestnut, i'm not a Tory or one of its voters! .. for the record I can't stand any of them frankly!, whats more i've had dealings with OFCOM and wet blanket springs to mind!, so do yourself a favour bung your DVD in the recycled heap and save your time and a stamp!!

  • Comment number 44.

    I am surprised by the number of bloggs that blame Nick Robinson for bias towards labour, conservatives or liberals, all over the same article.Well done Nick.
    I read many bloggs from many sources stating that Cameron is counting his eggs or even chickens before the votes are counted.I can not read that either.I can not understand some of the SPIN thats being put around but Lies I can spot.I would say that Brown and Clegg would make a fair pair as they are both attempting to use Spin and lies now.Clegg is learning,how fast power(or the nearness of it)corrupts.Roll on Friday and we can watch a Football Match with all the divers and over the ball players in peace ie the Political spin doctors.

  • Comment number 45.

    22. At 8:03pm on 03 May 2010, DeepingDavie wrote:
    First poll of the night shows Tories and LD down and Labour up. Ipsos MORI also saying 36% not yet decided.

    This is far from over.

    LD vote starting to be squeezed?

    ===

    YouGov - the Sun May 3 May 2

    CONSERVATIVES 35% 34%
    LIB DEMS 28% 29%
    LABOUR 28% 28%

  • Comment number 46.

    Nick

    It looks like the Lib Dems are going to let slip their greatest opportunity in 80 years.

    They will fall for rescuing the Labour party in their hour of need. The party that has kept them as the 3rd party for those 80 years.

    They may get PR but this will mean they will never have power in their own right.

    This at the moment where they could have brought about the situation where they put Labour out of power for decades.

    In the Lab Con marginals Lib Dems will vote Labour letting Labour off the hook.

    If they vote Con in those marginals Labour will be finished and the Lib Dems will become the second party.

    If the Governor of the Bank of England is correct the Conservatives would be unelectable for years.

    So the Lib Dems would win power on their own by the FPTP system and have a majority.

    But the Lib Dems are to blind to see this opportunity, that's why they will always come third.

    Clegg the great tactician don't make me laugh.

  • Comment number 47.

    The 4th estate have completly failed in their duty to be impartial in this campaign as has the BBC Nick Robinson should start wearing a blue rossette.The Tories have come under no scrutiny whatsoever whereas Labour and to a lesser extent the Lib Dems have. This election is not over by a long way BRITAIN IS NOT BROKEN and you know how the saying goes. Still if all those who say it is wake up on Friday morning with Cameron in power think it will get better think again. If you think things are bad now they will make then far worse.

  • Comment number 48.

    Nick said
    In just four days time the Browns may be packing their things to leave Downing Street. The Camerons may be moving in.
    ____________

    Whoever gets the keys they will still claim for a another residence near Parliament.

    Musn't be any beds in Downing Street.

  • Comment number 49.

    For the life of me i cannot understand why no politician or commentator is prepared to mention what the great british public wish to see. That is either labour finishing second or third, who really cares, and a coalition being formed with the lib dems with Nick Clegg as Prime Minister. If these 2 parties were 2 stand up now and tell us all they would be preapred to offer us this they would win by a country mile. Their dilly dallying could well let the Tories in with the Ulster Unionists propping them up.

  • Comment number 50.

    Quote by Gordon Brown from yesterday's Guardian:

    "I think people are very determined. And I think when people saw the divides between us, between ourselves and the Conservatives, exposed on Thursday, people became more determined. I mean a lot of people did not know until Thursday that the Conservative party's main beneficiary in their manifesto is 3,000 millionaires."

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Hmmm...Mrs Duffy is 'determined' - I wonder what was 'exposed' on Thursday?

    Any Labour party cabinet ministers amongst the 3,000 who would wish to pay more IHT? Well there is nothing stopping them paying more IHT if they want to and prove themselves not to be hypocrites.

    Please tell us about the IHT loopholes Mr Brown? You know the ones that you didn't want to see any mention of in your Labour Party manifesto?

    Also, a further serious gaffe by Gordon Brown here - I calculate that the number of 'main beneficiaries' in the Conservative Party manifesto, to be about 61 million.

    How's Labour's IHT 'attack' going? Might do better attacking the well preserved 'IHT loopholes' instead?

  • Comment number 51.

    Election outcomes considered:

    Some of the worst possible outcomes from Thursday in my view:

    1: Labour majority or minority government. Daves and Georges mates in the city will make it the shortest post election honeymoon period in history.
    2: Conservative minority government just short of the absolute majority and able to run effective minority government by selectively picking up other nationalist blocks to push English only measures through whilst handing out pork to the devolved nations. Would be a bad choice but he really really wants to live in No10.
    3: Conservative majority government of less than 20/25 seats - Cameron will become prey to the rabid right of his party who are still there though underwraps and keeping quiet until they have the reins of power.

    All other reasonable combinations are quite practical and could work - if the politicians want it too - are they grown up enough to respect the peoples wishes if that is what is voted for?

    What needs doing needs a mandate from the majority of people NOT just a parliamentary majority under our flawed system.

    I fear we may be on for either No2 or No3.

  • Comment number 52.

    32 Yes that is of course a conveiniently forgotten fact.

  • Comment number 53.


    I saw the version of the interview in which Gordon Brown was unexpectedly brilliant. If there is another version of it I'd like to see it.


    He was so wooden, I was surprised someone didn't come on and creosote him

  • Comment number 54.

    Do Conservative supporting posters believe it is a positive thing that more than 10 of DC's team are old Etonians?

    Is this some kind of record? I know SuperMac in the 1950s possibly had more than this, I think many of them related to him.

    Is there a danger that any Cameron Cabinet is out of touch with the common man as a result?

    Curious,
    Deeping

  • Comment number 55.

    29. At 8:11pm on 03 May 2010, northJason wrote:
    I read an article today about Cameron saying that he would not form an alliance with the Lib Dems - as long as he can rely on the Ulster Unionist when forming a minority government, which it looks like he can.

    If this is true, then this is a blow to Clegg but means he can push his policies through - but is this democratic? Could he get a second term from this?

    =======================

    The North Down question replacing the West Lothian one?

  • Comment number 56.

    Being very easily led, I have now convinced myself that a hung parliament is as likely an outcome as a Labour majority or a Conservative one (I don't think any polls or pundits are predicting a LibDem majority but if they do then I shall probably quite happily jump on that bandwagon too).
    So, my prediction in the event of a hung parliament is that Labour make the LibDems an offer that they THINK they cannot refuse and Nick Clegg refuses it. Conservatives form a minority Govt.
    Nick Clegg calls up Gordon Brown - Peter Mandelson answers the phone, "Gordon isn't here, he's gone."
    Nick Clegg agrees to support the new Labour leader in bringing down the Govt. asking nothing in return. Next General Election is called, Labour vote disintegrates because those that thought Gordon was the man to pull us through the crisis don't have the same faith in his replacement and those that had previously voted Labour to try and keep the Tories out now see Clegg as a credible choice. In a final stroke of tactical play Clegg changes the party name to Democratic Liberals to appeal to the younger voters. DemLibs win with comfortable majority and decide not to introduce PR as it would make it too easy for Labour to get back in the game.
    Its a fairytale I know but for those that previously thought LibDem was the collective noun for a group of Geography teachers they are certainly giving good value for money in this campaign. This takes me back to the days of the extraordinary Mr Thorpe.

  • Comment number 57.

    It was the Blair/Brown party that brought in the massive postal vote scheme, the one that got Blair, then Brown in 2005.
    Now I read that many postal votes (from servicemen/women) and others abroad have been delayed/lost due to volcanic dust. There is insufficient time to send out replacements.
    This does not bode well for democracy. Who controls these 'votes'?

  • Comment number 58.

    35 its just a game

    "i cant for the life of me understand why anyone over the age of 35 years of age would vote conservative?. as a young working class man growing up in the 80s i witnessed first hand the destruction of livelihoods and communities from these upper class selfish fools"

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    As someone once told me, "If you're not a socialist at 20 there's something wrong with your heart, if you're a socialist at 30 there's something wrong with your head".

    Suggest you read a biography of Mrs Thatcher if you think that she was either upper class or foolish.

    Suggest you also look at the economic transformation of the UK from the sick man of Europe in the 1970s under Labour and the unions to one of the world's leading economies under a succession of Tory governments.

    Then Labour get elected and we have come full circle, economy run in to the ground, mountain of debt, bloated public sector etc.

    Time for the Tories to save the nation again!

  • Comment number 59.

    Nick,
    Your opening logic that privately the two leaders expect to swap places at No 10 escapes me since I understand to command a working majority the Tories need to gain a significant swing to counter the current seats held in Parliament, a swing that would require them tipping over 40% of the national vote. Perhaps you could explain how your opening statement fits with the working hypothesis of a hung, or even caretaker parliament. It is more conceivable surely that Gordon Brown will retain the keys?

  • Comment number 60.

    How about the remaining 30-40% who have not made up their minds how to vote - not being bothered to vote at all (particularly Labour supporters staying at home)?

    The opinion polls are a joke with 'arbitrary unknown behind the scenes adjustments' being applied 'post survey' to match small sample votes to the entire voting population?

    The real question is what is the margin of error on these polls - could be up to 5% or more - plus or minus?

    We're all beating ourselves up for nothing as simply too close too call if a good overall turnout and which is probably more important on the dispersal of the result than currently predicted voting patterns.


  • Comment number 61.

    Say, for the sake of argument, it turns out Con 280, Lab 250, LD 90. Price of a Labour deal with the Lib Dems is Brown going, which he grudgingly does after meeting a man in a grey suit (called Straw). Convention would have it that the incumbent PM should be allowed to try and form a Govt (barring outright defeat) but there isn't one, because Brown has walked. Er, who exactly does the Queen invite to form a Govt in the absence of an elected Labour leader? Harman, as the acting leader, pending resignation when there is an elected leader? Or who?

  • Comment number 62.

    Chrissie,
    The BBC have been pretty fair during this election. I appreciate that to a Labour supporter, having watching the Beeb during the last 10 years, it's going to feel like bias.

  • Comment number 63.

    #51 - Whistling Neil

    There is a fourth and more palatable outcome but it requires Clegg to regain the momentum that has slipped away in the last couple of days and he needs to find a way of backtracking on his rash statement that he would not serve in government with Brown.

    Hung parliament with Clegg as kingmaker (possible grand alliance with SNP and Plaid Cymru with a referendum on Scottish independence and a parliament in Cardiff?). Clegg goes with whichever party concedes PR. Alliance lasts only until PR is on the statute books. Next election under new system. Godbye two party system - and good riddance.

    (Watch out for flying pigs!)

  • Comment number 64.

    At 8:56pm on 03 May 2010, Matt Clayton wrote:
    Nick said
    In just four days time the Browns may be packing their things to leave Downing Street. The Camerons may be moving in.
    ____________

    Whoever gets the keys they will still claim for a another residence near Parliament.
    Musn't be any beds in Downing Street."

    They will call it the bung parliament.


  • Comment number 65.

    33. At 8:14pm on 03 May 2010, benagyerek wrote:
    what lib dems should say to labour if lib-lab coalition is possible:
    - ditch brown, replace with alan johnson

    ===============================

    Not a practical solution to that connundrum.

    Whatever anyone thinks of Brown or the process by which he was elected Labour leader - it was the choice of a democratic party according to their rules.
    In the short term however what you would get is Harriet Harman - the elected deputy. And I can't think of anyone but Harriet who really wants that, just adding insult to injury really.

    Clegg might have had to be reminded but demanding the dumping of a democratically elected head of another party for politically expedient reasons is a dangerous precedent.
    He may also have had it pointed out that even if they quietly defenstrated Gordon upon request - the next leader has to face election by the Labour party , now all any opponent to the annointed selection need to do is submit papers and then point out that no Labour member chose the other one on the ballot - and I wonder what that would do to their chances of winning?

  • Comment number 66.

    #58 - Labour not only saved us from the last bout of Tory, they healed the dreadful divisions Tory created.

    Tory tends to deliver a balance of payments problem. I see no reason to believe they would be any different this time and that is because their economic policy is ideologically motivated and unchanged.

  • Comment number 67.

    My predictions are these: The Daily Mail will continue its proud traditions and produce a Zinoviev Letter type story on Wednesday, maybe against the lib-Dems, maybe against Labour, or even both. I imagine this is being preared at this moment, and it will be supported by the Torygraph and the Sun.

    However, these tactics will backfire, and there will be a late swing to Labour which will end up with more seats than the Tories. BUT the Tories will end up with more votes, yet still resist any change to the electoral system. Gordon will hang on for a week trying to save his skin, until his party knife him to save their own necks.

    Seats: Lab 270, Con 269, LD 80
    %..............30 .......34 ......27

    Labour and the LDs will agree on a two year minimal programme, with Jack Straw as PM, Darling as Foreign Sec, Uncle Vince as Chancellor and Clegg as either Home Sec or leader of the house. They will hate each others guts, but hang together to avoid hanging separately.

    Mandy will be spurned and then swipe from the sidelines. The Tories in the Lords will resist all constitutional reform, but some deal will be forced through. There will be spending cuts, and they will hurt in some quarters, but also more QE to stop deflation.

    What will then happen in the general election of 2012?

  • Comment number 68.

    What dos B.I.G.O.T stand for?

    Brown Is Going On Thursday!!

  • Comment number 69.

    The election outcome in England will not be unpredictable enough for this blogger.

    Consider the what the above link reveals, over 1700 candidates from minority parties and independents and yet just a handful will probably be elected to Westminster.

    The English Democrats, Greens and UKIP alone are fielding hundreds of candidates but their return will be pitiful.

    Yes, we English are at the bottom of a steep learning curve when it comes to having a truly representative democracy.

  • Comment number 70.

    Nick

    The manic panic Labour Rapid Rebuttal Unit are all this blog like a bad rash tonight slagging you off.

    Anyone would think they were just about to loose power or something?

    Desperation.

  • Comment number 71.

    NT 50

    Before we wholeheartedly endorse Mrs Ds views about East European immigrants we need to ask why the native British don`t get off their backsides and work alongside them in the fields.

    In a recent Panorama programme,a farmer was persauded to employ several unemployed English labourers alongside his East Europeans.As I recall,some preferred to remain unemployed after a day or two`s work,two that remained had lower productivity than the East Europeans and were doubtful whether they would stay.

    I am not inferring that Mrs.D was bigoted,but I believe she was wrong and this is an untold part of the story because she is being used politically.

  • Comment number 72.

    58. At 9:14pm on 03 May 2010, AS71 wrote:Suggest you also look at the economic transformation of the UK from the sick man of Europe in the 1970s under Labour and the unions to one of the world's leading economies under a succession of Tory governments.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    That's one way of looking at it.She also paved the way for the roller coaster boom'n'bust cycles we've endured under both parties and through dismantling our manufacturing base left us at the mercy of the bankers whose deregulation she oversaw.She privatised our utilities so that new "efficient" companies could hike their charges endlessly without it being called a tax increase.
    Once she made the econonmy "better", through avoiding investment in public infrastructure and exhausting North Sea oil revenues,someone else had to pick up the peices of what was left,for example, of the failed internal markets experiment that was the NHS.

  • Comment number 73.

    Regarding election outcomes, I expect labour to do much better than indicated by opinion polls, thanks to a huge client state and labour's canny postal voting strategies.

    In this context, the BBC should devote more resources to Bristol-east-postal-vote-twitter gate. There are quite a few interesting aspects to this story:

    Why does Labour not suspend their twitter tsar (or czar) McCarthy after clearly breaching electoral law? The breach should be sufficient reason for suspension, but McCarthy is an experienced politician (she has been a whip in parliament) and as a candidate should be aware of the rules that state you are not allowed to influence the final vote. Does Labour leave her on the ballot sheets because they can field a candidate in a possibly required byelection rather than forfeiting the seat now?

    Not only tweeting the party split of a sample of votes was illegal, the retweeting likely as well. That is interesting because Unite's Whelan, Brown's former spin doctor, retweeted McCarthy's initial tweet that has been seen by at least 5,000 people, while the Labour twitter site also displayed it for a few hours.

    The most important point is that for verification checks the number on the back of ballot forms should suffice and the side of the form that shows the actual vote should have stayed face-down. Was it illegal to count some of the votes, i.e. turning them over, before the May 6 polling closing time?

    In addition, the question should be asked whether Labour went decided to have a general election 6 May because the general election would then coincide with local elections and local party workers have a big incentive to max out the postal vote? In local elections the effects of fraud can be greater than for the general elections because the number of votes involved is smaller so a set of rigged papers has a higher chance of swinging the result. There are quite a few reports that party activists have asked citizens to send the request forms for postal votes to the party constituency office to facilitate databases of postal voters. That makes it easy to copy the signature and let party workers collect ballot forms after they have been sent out. With the signature on the database the party workers can use empty ballot forms at their leisure ...... Although against best practice, handling of postal votes by party workers is not illegal (voting obviously is).

    The Bush brothers are enjoying themselves. Happy postal voting!

  • Comment number 74.

    re #14 if anyone wants to know why they shouldn't vote Tory, watch Gove on this afternoon's BBC TV education debate on iPlayer...

  • Comment number 75.

    AS71,

    "As someone once told me, "If you're not a socialist at 20 there's something wrong with your heart, if you're a socialist at 30 there's something wrong with your head"."

    I just bet they did. And you replied, "you get out of life what you put in."

    They nodded sagely and said, "if you look after the pennies, the pounds look after themselves." You said you had to agree.

    "My round?" you asked ...

    "Mmm," they said, "just a half this time."

    And so it went on (and on) until time was called at Ye Tired Olde Chestnut Arms.

  • Comment number 76.

    Is Cameron's job under threat if Labour end up with most seats (as would happen if tonight's polls are representative of Thursday's outcome)?

    Surely some must be asking: "If not this time, why?"

    And then a lurch back to the right?

  • Comment number 77.

    #25 How to defeat Labour

    Tory-Labour marginal -> Vote Tory
    Tory-Lib Dem marginal -> Vote Tory
    Labour-Lib Dem marginal -> Vote Libdem

    Enjoy the evening.

  • Comment number 78.

    66. At 9:31pm on 03 May 2010, mr_scotty wrote:


    .....Tory tends to deliver a balance of payments problem...........

    **************************************

    While Labour only bankrupts the UK!!

  • Comment number 79.

    I blame Sue!

    Susan Croft to be precise. Has she scared off moderate minded potential Tory voters with her epic emails? She certainly scares me...

  • Comment number 80.

    I mean it's amazing really. Everyone is concerned about immigration, for a variety of legitimate reasons (including the numerous OAP 'bigots' in the UK), and no one can really discuss it. The problem? For the non-Euro blogger it is the fact that the UK still has to comply with European rules on the movement of "labour", even of course when that working force isn't, in fact, working at all! And once again my friends, the election comes down to an almost meaningless stalemate with no redemption. What will it take for a real revolution in British politics that fires up the people? Or have those days gone for good and all that the island race can now muster is a boring chat about a hung parliament?

  • Comment number 81.

    On "Have your say" on the main BBC web page the question being asked is

    "How should society be run?"

    Can I ask politely that everyone adjourn to that site and question as it is the most succinct and aposite question ever asked by the BBC.

    thank you.

  • Comment number 82.

    11. At 7:47pm on 03 May 2010, Chrissie wrote

    Rose tinted spectacles - some points you may wish to consider:

    Brown did indeed recieve a rapturous reception before he had said a word - the applause after he had spoken was somewhat muted by comparison, I would have described it as polite not the ovation he got for turning up. Did his speech fill the receptive audience with joy and meet expectations from an audience which could be expected to be broadly supportive by it's nature?

    What caused the little girl to cry was mentioned and the nasty biased BBC had the temerity to show Gordon actually being human and comforting her how dare they, he shoudl only be shown insulting old ladies and punching things.
    Had someone wearing a blue or yellow rosette rushed on stage and hit her to make her cry? IS that what you are upset about ? or was it that someone had frightened her with all the nasty things the bad David Cameron planned to do to her hard pressed family with his cuts allegedly?
    Or was it just relating what is her own painful personal experience in a very large hall in front of a couple of thousand people was overwhelming, very brave for a girl of that age, knowing it was being filmed and all her friends may see it?

    Given the basic party positions and facts of this governments overall record you are also fighting reality.
    Yes some of the media are blatantly biased, the Mirror , Sun, Mail etc. , most thought the Guardian was Labour biased - but your party have even managed to frighten them off, a feat in itself.

    I am sure Ofcom will have fun with your complaint and evidence, which I am sure they add to the no doubt similar pile of "BBC Biased for Labour"
    complaints which they will recieve.

    The BBC is NOT a political mouthpiece for anyone no matter how much the party spin doctors want otherwise. Political activist who blubb about it when it does not present the story you want are a sad bunch - why not take the opportunity to ask the question why are they reporting these facts? Might it be that my party are wrong on this?????

  • Comment number 83.

    threnodio II should be assured that having Metropolitan elections on the same day WILL make a difference.
    Not because of folk giving any consolation prizes. But because winning local elections is all about achieving turnout.
    With a General Election on the same day, the Labour turnout for the Metropolitan Councils (the big English cities) will be way above average.
    That's because many labour voters are less enthusiastic about Council elections. The conjunction should mean that a lot more Labour city councillors are elected. Making a strong base of support for the next general election campaign – whenever that’s called.

  • Comment number 84.

    I don't know how anyone that is paying down a mortgage dare vote Tory, Remember 15% interest rates?. It will be the people with mortgages to pay that will re-capitalize the banks under a Tory government.

  • Comment number 85.

    Latest polls out tonight- see Comres, with 37% for Conservatives - and also the crucial marginal seats polls - 7% swing to Conservatives away from Labour - show that Middle England is getting ever more ready to eject one of the most incompetent and deceitful governments ever to misrule our country.

    So, "fire up the removal van", Gordon- "it's time for change"- real Conservative change....

  • Comment number 86.

    79. At 9:57pm on 03 May 2010, DeepingDavie wrote:
    I blame Sue!

    Susan Croft to be precise. Has she scared off moderate minded potential Tory voters with her epic emails? She certainly scares me...

    ==================================

    As one of those people I can tell you that no, I am not scared off by Susans posts. In fact they are quite interesting to read and most importantly present fact based arguments for her views.

    However you have helped considerably in crossing Labour off my list of potential voting options since all you do is try to distort reality with easily disprovable propaganda - if you cannot even work out where the Conservative front bench went to school and get it right (nor be bothered to work out that your own deputy leader amongst others went to a private school) - what hope is there of you doing something difficult like running the economy?

  • Comment number 87.

    I must admit I was wrong in a previous blog to describe DuffyGate as a 'storm in a teacup'.

    Upon reflection, it was a terrible error (not removing the mike), in that via the proxy of the lady, Mrs. Duffy, Gordon Brown managed to inadvertently broadcast an insult to the entire foot-soldier core of the Labour Party.

    Party foot-soldiers who have been around a bit are usually under no illusions about the 'leaders' they serve, as they are close enough to see the warts, but being humilated, in effect, in public; will be too much for some to bear and they will depart.

    It really is goodbye Mr.Brown but at least you did'nt have to explain precisely where the £400Bn in your public borrowings went over the past decade or will you have to figure out how to pay it back.

    That is 'somebody else's problem'.

  • Comment number 88.

    It would serve them and you if none of us bothered to vote. I am sick of opinion polls - none of them has every asked me or anyone that I know. Political commentators only make it worse. I will vote, despite all of you, and it will be a secret, so there.

  • Comment number 89.

    @73 - Econoce: it may also be a mirror of the situation in 1992. Then the polls were wrong, because some people were ashamed to admit they were voting Tory. Things have gone about face now.

    @79 DD I was involved in every general election from 1879 to 1997, and Sue is mild compared to some party workers I have known. There are very scary activists involved in all parties.

    Actually, the worst aren't the blind loyalists. The one I was most frightened to meet was at a Labour Party press officer's course in 1997. He was soon to be elected as MP for Cardiff South and Penarth, and listening to him I realised he didn't believe in ANYTHING. He was the face (or perhaps the faceless) of New Labour to come. Give me Sue any day - at least you know where you stand (or crawl). :-)

  • Comment number 90.

    #80 - Ollathair

    "For the non-Euro blogger it is the fact that the UK still has to comply with European rules on the movement of "labour", even of course when that working force isn't, in fact, working at all!"

    If that was true - and it isn't - no EU citizen is going to go 'underground' when he/she is entitled to participate in social care system of the host country. The vast majority of EU folk go to work, pay tax and engage in the process fully and they make up about 80% of all immigration. They are not the problem and to suggest they are is deliberate muddying of the waters.

    #81 - moncursouthernreiver

    Pay attention. There is no such thing as society. Margaret Thatcher told you that years ago.

  • Comment number 91.

    75 Saga

    "Ye Tired Olde Chestnut Arms"

    The first and only time I've drunk there, should have known you were a regular!



  • Comment number 92.

    Nick

    further to my post at 46.

    I see Balls has told Labour voters to vote Lib Dem.

    Manic Panic.

    The thing is the Lib Dems will do there bit to help Labour out and shoot themselves in the foot.

    Lib Dems Go back to your constituencies and prepare to be the 3rd party.

    AGAIN Ha Ha

  • Comment number 93.

    Nick has put all his eggs in the Tory basket. Why are you allowed to express your Tory views on the BBC as if they are actually 'news'

  • Comment number 94.

    #83 - leftie

    I entirely agree that having both elections on the same day will boost turnout in the local elections. Traditionally, however, voters have tended to punish the incumbents in midterm votes. I was merely speculating that some voters may be tempted to express their anger and frustration on the local ballot and 'play safe' on the parlimentary one.

    It is not just metropolitan elections anyway. There are pleanty of seats in the shires up for grabs.

  • Comment number 95.

    Nick - you say "The Liberal Democrats insist that the polls show that they can still come second"

    It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing....

  • Comment number 96.

    I originally came on here to complain of your growing bias against Gordon Brown in particular and Labour in general. Having read Chrissies post I don't have much more to add, she says it all. Your bias is more appropriate to Sky TV. During the Mrs Duffy saga there were two female presenters who couldn't restrain themselves from gloating how there was no need for Cameron or Clegg to comment as it was all down to them. It's a great pity a live microphone wasn't in Camerons car after he ran away from the disabled boys father who dared to question the Tory manifesto on disabled access to main stream schools. I suspect his comments were far worse than Gordons who at least had the common decency to fully apologise.

  • Comment number 97.


    Too much analysis of very low probability outcomes.

    What will happen is a Labour-LibDem alliance with essentially Labour re-elected for another five years.

    Labour voters will be surprised and delighted.
    Tory voters will be upset.
    Clegg and LibDem party activists will be delighted.

    LibDem voters are the odd ones out. They will at first think they have won and be delighted. Within a week, the penny will drop that they have kept Labour in power and they will wonder what on earth they thought they were doing.

    But it will be too late then until 2015. Life is rough.

  • Comment number 98.

    This blogger thinks that David Cameron is being very presumptuous to already be describing his first few days in office.

    Cameron is 'fully loaded' as the younger people might say, so the lure of ultimate political power, one of the few things his money cannot buy, that is now within touching distance must be overwhelming but he should resist.

    By the way, this blogger is not impressed that a Westminster Tory Cabinet that will be stuffed with multi-millionaires, is going to take a 5% pay cut - that really must be the epitome of gesture politics.

    Why not tell us how you're going to tackle Gordon's £400bn decade long public spending splurge instead?

    On reflection, don't bother - we, the English people already know the answer - we are to be screwed over until its paid down to a reasonable level i.e. tax, tax, tax, as Mrs. Duffy so accurately foretold.

  • Comment number 99.


    'Everything to play for' and 'everything up for grabs' is the usual media line at this stage of an election. And with so much spin and speculation going on in the final frantic few days it's difficult to sort out truth from fiction.

    Without a clear majority and a constitutional mandate to govern, voters will have to go through the whole rigmarole again sooner rather than later.

    I would suggest an election end-game is beginning to emerge. And the name of the game now is post-election politics?

    http://theorangepartyblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/weary-voters-taken-for-final-spin.html

  • Comment number 100.

    For 3 months both labour and the lib clams have been asking the tories to say about their plans in office, once they are told they claim arrogance! They really do take the british people for fools in the desperate lies and 'punch and judy' politics. Labour are trying to make out they have not been in office since 1997 and they are the alternative, while the clams are saying vote for us with a blank cheque and all will be well. I trust the electorate are not the fools these opportunists think they are!

 

Page 1 of 3

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.