It won't be March

#0

In the run-up to that election we will, it seems, be seeing even more of Peter Mandelson. Number Ten are pushing for weekly televised ministerial briefings replacing, on one day a week, those made by the Prime Minister's Official Spokesman.

You'd insist on equal time for all major parties "in the run-up to that election" wouldn't you, Nick?

I'm sure Mandelson can never have enough titles - though he will never have the one he covets.

The sooner this election is over the better - I suspect this will be a very bitter and personal campaign and after the past few days I wonder how low the press are prepared to go in their efforts to change the government.


I will welcome a change of governmemt, not through any great expectations of the Tories, but rather to put this lot out of their misery. The incumbent party is so entrenched defending its positions that it becomes impoosible for them to make the necessary changes.

It won't always be Mandelson taking them but, no doubt, whenever there are problems facing the government it will be.

So the more we see Lord Peter the more important the government sees the statement ???

This man is one of the reasons Labour are hated by so many now,he represents Government failure to oversee running the country,while amassing small fortunes themselves . Labour have no chance turning this around while parading this man in front of the press.He is as far removed from the rank and file of this country as its possible to get.

But they do have a problem as to who else they could pick , with so many under investigation, and keeping a low profile.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

June

*0* The date of the Pre-Budget Report was announced today as 9th of December. The Code for Fiscal Stability [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] which Gordon Brown put into law in 1998, states that there must be "at least three months" between the Pre-Budget Report and the following Budget.
************************

Hmmmmm! 'Code for Fiscal Stability' Bit of a misnomer now methinks.

As this will be the last budget and the final chance to completely wreck the economy before the election, I presume we will be presented with tax cuts galore. Hand-outs aplenty. A spring time give-away and a bonanza of other cuts.
Oh and probably do away with tax on petrol.

Now Mandelson in a re-make of 'Minder' or 'Only Fools and Horses' would make sense. Anything else - forget it.
Sounds like I might have to change my pub night!!

Why doesn't the Labour party proclaim Mandellson Emperor and retire Brown to his Dacha in some quiet little soviet in the Western Isles? The idea that this dreadful unelected little man should take centre stage in British politics is a disgrace. If the Prime Minister is no longer in a fit mental or physical state to carry on , then he should call an election instead of giving the country, which he has dragged to near banktrupcy , government by proxy. We will now, instead of Brown's bumbling lies, be forced to listen to the weasel tones of Mr Slimy, who can lie much more convincingly than Brown ever could.

ANY spin eh Nick - Tories - worried - what else???? The Tories r only worried that this Stasi Govt declare a State of Emergency and delay any election until they get the result they want. Bring the election on anytime- WE want shot of those corrupt, incompetent, nation wreckers Clown and Slime. Now Dr Goebbels has risen again where r Campbell ad McBride - they surely should have heaps of titles and grand houses too for their reward in wrecking the UK.

8. At 7:29pm on 11 Nov 2009, kaybraes wrote:

........ We will now, instead of Brown's bumbling lies, be forced to listen to the weasel tones of Mr Slimy, who can lie much more convincingly than Brown ever could.
**********************************

And telling us about his plans for dealing with poverty while wearing a £20.000 watch.
The mind boggles!!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

In all seriousness, I don't think Gordon Brown's health will see him through to May. I think we'll have Miliband or Mandelson himself as PM by then.

"The Treasury civil servants are all working towards a spring Budget and Brown would be pilloried if he went to the country without telling voters what economic horrors might lie ahead."

Nick, he could be and regularly is pilloried for everything, but so long as he's got the faithful lobby pack (including your good self as Chief Cheerleader) to put the gloss on everything he comes out with, why the hell should he care? It'll make no difference whatsoever!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This is party political broadcasting by another name. It seems rather odd that, on many occasions since NuLabour came to power, a minister was never available to appear on many of the political programmes on the t.v.

Yet by some miracle they will now be available to appear before the cameras as and when necessary. Mind you the prospect of having to watch Mandy performing twice a day is awful.

I still would not rule a March election out yet Nick. Poor old Gordon`s is looking more and more knackered by the day. Must be all the jogging ! Even his mate Obama has just slapped him down for saying that he, Obama, was going to announce a surge in troop numbers in the next few days. Apparently this is totally wrong and Obama says he may take weeks to make up his mind. Och!

Mandy can only do so much; but even with his guiding hand I think poor old Gordon will implode long before May.

Minor events are tripping him up, time and time again. One big fall and he`s out for good this time.

Will Meddlesome enter the press room to the tune of Jackanory?

I'm trying to think how Darling (or more probably Mandelson & Brown) will present this budget.
Are they going to be honest and tell us what cuts will have to be made and where?
Or, more likely, will they continue in denial and offer more largesse to lost causes.
Either way we're stuffed for years ahead.

Saga @5

I agree with you. Once Brown decided against/bottled (delete as appropriate) an election after he assumed the office of PM, it was surely obvious that, like Major, he would delay the moment of reckoning as long as was legally possible...

It seems, to me at any rate, slightly bizarre that the boy Robinson thinks this is "news"...

Why are the Tories worried about a March election ?

As for "Brown would be pilloried if he went to the country without telling voters what economic horrors might lie ahead."

Avoidance and concealing the true extent of the country's financial situation has been his policy up to now, and I can see no reason he would want to change that ? Gordon Brown will offer us his somewhat unique view of the truth as usual.

I think you have made the wrong call here Nick, he would hardly go to the country "telling voters what economic horrors might lie ahead".

I don't know why post #4 was removed by the mods - I guess post #14 was removed for agreeing.

Did anyone really find #4 objectionable? It seems to me, asserting that the top echelons of the Labour hierarchy are corrupt is a reasonable accusation in a democracy. Especially in the light of expesegate & taking the country to war against Iraq on a lie. Is the BBC running political censorship on this blog?

Nick, It does get a little tiring.

"The date of the Pre-Budget Report was announced today as 9th of December. The Code for Fiscal Stability [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] which Gordon Brown put into law in 1998, states that there must be "at least three months" between the Pre-Budget Report and the following Budget.
Thus, the earliest possible date for a 2010 Budget is the 9th of March. That is after the latest possible date - 1st of March - on which Gordon Brown could call a March election."

Yeah, that could be the big story around the Westminster village.

What about the Jack Straw and pals-inspired law that is now in effect, that means a minister can decided whether there should be a "real" inquest, or just a "special inquiry"?

How many cases could be deemed "special", denying families the right to an open hearing about why somebody died?
Any time a police officer drove too fast, so it would be expedient to avoid public castigation of a generally decent service?
Any time an "offender" was surrounded by controversy, so better not let the public know that maybe he should never have been walking around freely in the UK?

Getting Mandelson into the public eye on a more regular basis could be a double edged sword.

Every private company spends a lot of building a public image. Communications, PR, spin is an inevitability.
But, if the company delivers a crap outcome, which tends to be value-for-money and some reliability of the promised product, the customer base eventually walks away.

I'm really sorry that Brown has damaged eyes. I'm much sorried that he listened to crass advisors who helped him deliver a damaged UK economy.

Agree with previous posts in that i really doubt if Gordon will make it to next summer. Sadly this is going to be his personal winter of discontent.

Started off being narked with him, then angry, then furious, then started to be amused, then ashamed, then sorry and now sad. What a journey.

There is still chance for a labour victory but only if GB moves aside gracefully. If it gets nasty then it will be 'two terms Cameron'. Gordon please do the right thing!!!!!

Nick, you inform us that the Labour party will now have a free television slot (thinly disguised as a "ministerial briefing")each week in the run-up to the election.

As the BBC has a duty of political impartiality, it is a matter of importance that you inform us of the additional television opportunities that will be offered to the opposition parties to balance the propaganda platform you will be offering to the Labour party.

(Or will the common belief that the BBC is pro-Labour be proven by a BBC refusal to give the opposition parties equal air time?)

Oh why can't a Mandy be more like a socialist!

#23 Cynosarges

The whole BBC web presence is a propaganda platform based on their heavy-handed removal of post #4!

The BBC recently launched Democracy Live, which would be an ideal place to put Mandy if he is determined to go ahead with this. A TV slot is indefensible. Do the BNP get five minutes a week to ensure balance? No, stick the lot of them on Democracy Live, and let that be their CSPAN ghetto. Then we get to choose if we log on to admire their oversized egos.

17. Zydeco wrote:
I'm trying to think how Darling (or more probably Mandelson & Brown) will present this budget. Are they going to be honest and tell us what cuts will have to be made and where? Or, more likely, will they continue in denial and offer more largesse to lost causes.

You're right that the pressure on Darling to produce a politically astute budget will be immense. I don't agree with your assessment of what is likely, though. I suspect it will be an austere budget with very little 'largesse' in general but a few targeted measures to help the low-paid and pensioners, in an attempt to woo back some disenchanted Labour supporters and give the backbenchers a fillip.

Either way we're stuffed for years ahead.

We probably are, whoever wins the election.

I must say, there are a lot of rather unkind personal comments about one of our finest politicians.

Poor Mandy.

He came and he gave without taking.

And we need him today.

re 20 i agree far to much P.C.now a days for true public debate,N.U.Labour do not like any comments that expose there betraly of working people,time trade unions stopped supporting such a morally bankrupt party and went back to there grass roots,it would be nice to hear the truth for once and forget spin

Thank you ReardenSteel for support on my post at #4. I still stand by what I said. When you look back at all the 'misdemeanors' attributed to the Labour heirarchy over the years, what other conclusion can you come to?

I quote the old saying 'Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely'. This current government, run by Brown and (unelected) Mandleson, are clinging to power in a way I have never seen before - and I go back very many years, born in WW2.

In the past, any ministers caught with their fingers in the cookie jar over the expenses scandals would have resigned. In the past, a prime minister that has supported ministers such as Jacquie Smith, Hazel Blears or Baroness Scotland when they have been blatantly wrong or found to have broken their very own laws would have found his position untenable and resigned. In the past, a prime minister who cannot fail to notice that he has really messed up the country, and sensed the anger amongst the electorate, would have by now called an election and asked for a fresh mandate.

But Brown just is oblivious to all this, and clings to power regardless of the damage it is doing to the country. If that is not being corrupted by power (and that, moderators, is my primary meaning by my use of the word 'corrupted'), then I don't know what is.

Worried? I don't think so Nick! More like eager anticipation!

And as for Mandelson assuming the role of official spokesman, Cameron will be very happy! No one in politics is more detested and distrusted than Peter Mandelson. This will be playing right into the Tories hands.

Labour keep telling us that it's policies not personalities that matter, so why is Brown handing over responsibility to Mandelson? Answer - Because Brown has lost the plot and Mandelson has assumed control!

I can think of one title which Mandelson richly deserves but we could not post about him any more because we would all be moderated off.

I don't think the Tories are worried about the timing of the general election. I think they are worried about what they will have to do to put things right after the election.

I shudder to think what Mr Brown will do in the final budget - it will surely be tactical to favour the Labour party (as they all have been) rather than strategic (in the interests of the country).

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

"The Tories have been worrying away about the possibility of a March election giving Gordon Brown an element of surprise"

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

you have got completely the wrong end of the stick here nick, only labour are worried about any forthcoming election, the tories, like the british public, cannot wait and would gladly have one tomorrow!

i think it is obvious to any person with half a brain this government will hang on until they are pushed becouse they are a dead duck government with no hope of re election or survival.
as a voter i can only hope i live long enough to see a change of government in this country away from self interested parties over to honest groups of mp's working firstly for the good of the nation above all others.

26. At 8:44pm on 11 Nov 2009, pdavies65 wrote:

......You're right that the pressure on Darling to produce a politically astute budget will be immense.

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

Left to his own devices I'm pretty certain Darling would come up with a realistic - albeit unwelcome - budget. Unfortunately he won't be allowed to.
Gordon has never really let go of the Treasury and working on his "I know what's best" principle, I fear the coming PBR will reflect GB's touch only too obviously.

slightly off topic but do the BBC pay these politicians for being on TV by any chance ???

Perhaps in light of cut backs that should stop if they do.....and if they dont want to put up someone to defend their policies on TV so be it....

The tax payer should not be paying them for doing their job twice....

Minister of Information, secret inquests.

Deja vu.

This is going to get ugly sometime before the election.

No20 Reardon,
I am not aware that any senior Labour Party figures have faced any criminal charges in recent years, are you? It is in sharp contrast to the Thatcherite jailbirds, Black and Archer and former Tory cabinet minister Aitken, who have been guests at various penal institutions.I am sure from your comments that you are more than familiar with the work of Montesquieu.

What a dilemna!! Does he present a budget that reflects the true financial position of UKplc and the measures needed to deal with it?

Or one that buys votes?

Answers on a postage stamp please.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

No29 Cornedia.
Can you let me know when a UK government was formed without unelected ministers in the House of Lords? Can we assume that you support the abolition of such an appalling anachronism? In the event of Cast Iron 'Cam the Sham'forming a government how many unelected ministers do you think he will deploy.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

In America, it is a fact that more and more voters are becoming what we know as 'floating voters', that is abandoning their tribal allegiance to the Democrats or Republicans.

Maybe at the next General Election, whenever it is, more English voters might do likewise, that is, abandon their tribal allegiance to the tired old duopoly of Labour or the Conservatives.

We English cannot carry on investing in political failures - which votes for those two mainstream parties represent.

#39 braveSouter

There's time yet. I'm hoping we'll see Blair and Campbell in the Hague before they pop their clogs.

We should have had an election this year and I think that the electorate will reflect this frustration in their voting next May.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

#42 braveSouter

It's conedia, not cornedia.

What's the HoL to do with the current mess this power-corrupted prime minister and his cohorts have got us into?

As for what Mr Cameron (I assume that is who you mean by 'Cam the Sham' - moderators, please pay attention) plans to do, you'll have to ask him.

Whatever the budget comes up with, we still won't know what the true cost of the various PFI projects out there is going to be.
I just hope - probably in vain - that the £billions hidden there is factored in to forecasts.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

No45Reardon
Surely you are not equating the role of Her Majesty's first minister with that of a civil servant. VacuDave's shock troops seem to have a lot to learn.

Makes no difference, the tories are going to throw this fight anyway. They dont want to form the next administration. They have no interest anymore in forming the next administration.

If they had even the remotest interest in winning, Broon would have been nailed to the wall 18 months ago.

Get yourselves down the bookies. Ladbrookes' will give you 13/1 on a Labour Majority. Stick a fifty on it.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

51 braveSouter

You'd think after 12 years of New Labour you'd have something to point at and proudly proclaim: 'Look, we made this!'. What do you have? Nothing but a country in ruin. Time to let the toffs back in to fix the mess, lol!

52. Fubar_Saunders wrote:
Makes no difference, the tories are going to throw this fight anyway. They dont want to form the next administration. They have no interest anymore in forming the next administration.

Just as I was thinking I'd overstepped the mark labelling you a deluded conspiracy theorist, you come roaring back with a comment like that!

53 meninwhitecoats wrote:
Aah but Gordon needs him.

Indeed. He can't smile without him.

Nick, you say: Some have suggested that the First Secretary of State etc may also become "Information Minister".

Actually, the title 'information minister' would suit Lord M very well - particularly when we consider previous holders of that post

55#

Think about it.

They're quids in anyway if you lot are to be believed. They dont need the money.

How many of the europroblem lot and the expenses crowd arent going to stand again next year?

How much worse is the economy going to get?

Loss of triple A, currency not worth squat, major cutbacks to the public sector, the unions are already playing up now... how much worse do you think it will get?

With a public already sick of buggins turn and blaming the previous administration and no chance of any kind of electoral reform on the table?

And who will cop the blame for it? Who will milk it for all its worth along with the unions?

Cam, if he survives would be looking at one term, if he's lucky before the tories got kicked out. Then another 10 years in the wilderness once Labour sort themselves out.

After those 5 years, Labour will be so hated, they'd be lucky to have as many MP's as the DUP. Even the tribalists will turn on them. No more expenses problem as the 5 year period will have elapsed - no more MP's tainted by the past.

No more Europroblem and no way they can have any kind of blame pinned on them for the financial meltdown.

If Cam was truly serious, Brown would have been a gibbering wreck 12 months ago, he would have shown no mercy and that would have been that.

Why has he given him such an easy ride? Why isnt the gap in the polls bigger than 42-28? Why do you think no serious policies, no commitments?

How much longer is it worth keeping your powder dry when you know when the end game is?

You dont think that after so many years of short-termism by politicians that someone hasnt seriously thought of playing the long game for better long term results?

How long do you think it took for the NL experiment from initial idea to crushing victory in 97? How long did it take to get rid of Clause 4 and Militant? Do you remember that far back?

Dont you know anything about strategy?

*0* Some have suggested that the First Secretary of State etc may also become "Information Minister". Friends tell me that "he has quite enough titles already".

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

Mandelson must be the only politician with an A4 size business card 8-D

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

fs @ 58

"Cam, if he survives would be looking at one term"

if he loses this election, he'll be looking at NO terms

he wants to win

Clown by 30 - 50

jr perry @ 50

so pop goes another one of your little inflatables, JR

don't I keep telling you that politics is an Art not a Science?

If Peter Mandelson would like a further title, I have a few I could suggest. Delicacy forbids me from mentioning them here.

Elections Nickie?
We want public executions of the treasonous maggot-folk of Mordor(Troughminster).
The citizen arrest squads are ready and waiting :)
Just think of the ratings Auntie will get(what`s left of Auntie anyway LOL)

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

58 Fubar

Yes, yes, I do realise why you think that, you don't need to talk me through the logic. I just think you are wrong. Politicians want power, end of story. It's in their DNA.

All you're saying is that the economy is a poisoned chalice, and you're right.

But the Tories still want to win.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Fubes@58.

"If Cam was truly serious, Brown would have been a gibbering wreck 12 months ago, he would have shown no mercy and that would have been that."



er...maybe he's just not very good at politics?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I guess the timing of the Election (June) is of rather less import than its result and on this I'm calling it to the Cs by around 50 seats overall majority, something like that

but I'm not quite as certain as I was this time last week

why? well I keep my ear to the ground and I can tell you that Hampstead is quite a flutter at the moment ... positively buzzing ... with a couple of things:

(1) this new Bolivian poet who's taken residence chez nous and is knocking people's socks off with her hard crafted tales of dispossession and struggle in Latin America

(2) rumours of the mass defection of erstwhile Conservative supporters over to UKIP because of what they're calling Cameron's "Eurosellout" - LIVID they are

now forget about the poet (she's rubbish, as it happens) but the UKIP thing, well you don't need me to spell out the potential consequences, do you? it's been Psephologically calculated by Psephologists that if one in five clowns go that route, then Labour squeeze back in and Gordon gets the chance to (finally!) relax into the job and cement his legacy

food for thought

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Election, sooner the better but who to vote for? The main parties? Nope. It'll have to be a party ready to do something about immigration and willing to undo all this PC stupidity that's gradually clogged our freedom of speech.

It would be more honest to just have Mandelson as Prime Minister.

And in face of the failure or global capitalism, the fall of communism, the rise of china & india and the diminishing status of the US, personally i'm willing to give being ruled by an evil genius a try.

As long as James Bond doesn't turn up to scupper his plans, Britain should be ruling the world well before the mandatory dae for general election...

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

The more Mandleson hits our screens the worse Labour will do in the election. I am not sure Brown and Mandleson realise how much they are hated by the public, or maybe they are so thick skinned they do not care.
Unelected and rejected!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

77. sagamix

"...then Labour squeeze back in and Gordon gets the chance to (finally!) relax into the job and cement his legacy"


Saga, are you vying with Fubar's 'Tories throwing the election' for the most outrageous comment here?

The Nick Robinson 'Creative Writing' award is up for grabs...

I'm so pleased that Gordon Brown and David Cameron had such a good PMQ's - its so nice to see them getting involved and not solving the problems we have a country - a cynical observer might have thought they were more worried about scoring points off each other than actually sorting things out
Seriously, what does PMQ's actually solve or help ? It might have once been used to hold the PM to account but not any more - so why bother ?
Brown has bogged up the country and I don't need Cameron to point that out - and I don't know if Cameron could fix it without an ocean of grief - some choice come next year ..!

It seems that now Kelly has drawn the curtains on Labours £10,000 PA communications propaganda allowance they are seeking other ways to put their messages in front of the public without challenge by the opposition.

Funny how this has been suggested for years, yet it is only a few months before an election where Labour decide to implement it.

These will become nothing more than weekly Party Political broadcasts on behalf of the Labour party. Whilst the PM spokesman is supposed to be non political, that will not be the case with a televised briefing by a party member.

All funded by the taxpayer of course. In the same way that Sarah Browns promotion is funded by the taxpayer, with her blog under the Number10 masthead, and photo ops regularly organised by the Government then promoted on the Number10 site.

Labour have felt that the traditional advantages of office were not enough, and have slowly found ways to increase them.

I note that Gordon Brown was quick to congratulate the Afghanistan Prime Minister on his election Victory (recognised by everyone to have been corrupt) - was he trying to normalise election fraud too?

The other potential pitfall for the Conservatives is this: they will become more vulnerable when they are forced to come out with firm policies.

It's easy to ride high in the polls when you can take pot-shots at an unpopular, 12-year-old government and then dive back behind the bushes.

But so far, most of the policies that Cameron has been specific about have either been withdrawn (however cast-iron) or failed to stand up to scrutiny.

Plus there's the undisputed fact that polls always swing back towards the incumbents as election day approaches.

I'm not saying the Tories won't win. But I doubt it will be the kind of landslide we saw for Labour in 97.

Govt. brought 3m immigrants in here since they came to power. Not to mention the illegals smuggled in from the third world and who scarpered into the undergrowth.

This government are now proposing we should not have consultants coming in from abroad???

Will they say that those of us who complained (millions affected like me) are not actually racists - we are realists - because it's high time they did.

They have now realised themselves, this government, that they need to address the immigration system toute suite to up their chances in the general election.

They are just window dressing. They cannot do it. Their hands are tied to what they have already done. Get the Tories in (and inevitably a back up from the BNP like it or not, it will happen because young disaffected Labour youths will vote them in).

Long term pressure to us is from the Third World. If we can't trust the government on immigration how on earth can we trust them with our young men's lives in Afghanistan.

Can we believe them? Can we trust them?

Anyone with a modicom of intelligence knows the answer to that.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

OK so the government is holding on till the very last minute to legally hold the general election?

Do they think people will come out of their houses then TWICE to vote in the general elections AND the local Council elections in close succession?

Hmmmmmm.

35. At 9:33pm on 11 Nov 2009, delminister wrote:

i think it is obvious to any person with half a brain this government will hang on until they are pushed becouse they are a dead duck government with no hope of re election or survival.
as a voter i can only hope i live long enough to see a change of government in this country away from self interested parties over to honest groups of mp's working firstly for the good of the nation above all others.

I hope you don't expect the Conservatives to deliver your hopes.

87. At 09:06am on 12 Nov 2009, egrid1 wrote:

....Labour have felt that the traditional advantages of office were not enough, and have slowly found ways to increase them.....
***************************

I've noticed that too. Not so much a Cabinet more a coven of 'delboys'

It won't be March? It wouldn't be ever if Gordon Brown had his way and this is why he is going down to a very heavy defeat.

He will not be forgiven for hanging on by his broken fingernails until the last posssible moment.

As for the notion that sagamix ventures that having an ear to the ground in Hampstead, of all places, will give you a clue to which way the country is going... have you ever heard anyhting so ridiculous? This shows how completely out of touch with voters the newlabour apologists really are and long may they remain with their heads stuck firmly up their own backsides.

Sadly for sagamix the majority of the population, or indeed those in key marginals, does not live in Hampstead, does not drink white wine spritzers, does not read the Guardian, does not strive for social justice and the equality agenda; they just want a better life.

They want a better life that is not fuelled by spending we can't afford on a credit card that maxed out two years ago.

They want leadership not media manipulation.

They want an end to this rotten adminsitration.

Call an election.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I thought that BBC political blogs were always closed down if a bye-election was taking place on that day?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Interesting all this speculation about the election result.
If the mood at my OAP lunch club and local working mens club is any reflection of what might happen, it could be Tories in power with UKIP as the opposition. Not scientific I know, but interesting.
It's becoming very hard to find a Labour supporter at the moment.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.