All the latest analysis of the day's news and stories
The headlines will be “score draw”, but I’d say Cameron won – and comfortably. I write this as someone who could have happily have sunk a few pins into a voodoo doll of David Cameron earlier on this evening – for taking the Conservatives (and Britain) to this appalling point where he may yet lose
On the afternoon of 4 June 2009, John Hutton, then Secretary of State for Defence, told the House of Commons: ‘Every one of our servicemen and women has the right to know that we are doing everything possible to ensure that every pound of investment in our equipment programme goes towards the front line and
It’s been a busy week at Spectator Live, where Gaby Hinsliff argues that what’s wrong the TV debates is the visual aspect, and Rory Sutherland thinks that the Lib Dem surge may give the Tories a lasting advantage in Middle England. There is also a selection of videos, polls and additional articles for your delectation.
With the exception of the Daily Mirror, the pundits’ concede that David Cameron and Gordon Brown closed the gap on Nick Clegg, but not decisively. That has transferred to the ‘who won the debate’ polls. Populus Cameron 37 percent (Up 15) Clegg 36 percent (Down 25) Brown 27 percent (Up 10) ICM Clegg 33 percent
So it’s all down to the next debate. The election will probably be decided in 90 minutes, each segment of 20 seconds for every day of a new five-year mandate. In which case, what is the one thing David Cameron will need to take away from last night’s debate, his “take-home”, as a US analyst
May this Scotsman wish all his English friends and readers a joyous St George’s Day? Why yes he may. And does. Here, for your delectation, are Flanders & Swann performing their splendid Song of Patriotic Prejudice. Great stuff.
It seems that the general election of 2010 will turn on 90 minutes next Thursday. David Cameron was far better tonight than he was last week. This time he managed to bracket Brown and Clegg together and had the moment of the debate when he called Brown out on Labour’s leaflets claiming the Tories would
Gordon just can’t help himself, can he? There can’t be a simple dividing line – oh no. It has to be one built on exaggerations, half-truths and plain lies. So it has always been with his brand of government, and for much of the time – think cuts vs investment – it has worked in
First things first: SKY lost. A debate that was supposed to be about foreign policy scarcely touched on many of the bigger, more interesting issues in the world. Nothing about China, Russia, Iran, Islam, Israel-Palestine, Africa, terrorism, etc etc. The ability of a British government to influence some of the issues arising in these parts
Well, one thing was clear: Brown and Cameron have both been at the textbooks, staying behind for extra classes, and learning the lessons of last week. They came into this TV debate prepared. Not just for the very fact of Nick Clegg, but with strategies and soundbites to slow his advance. The result was a
The foreign policy portion of tonight’s debate offers Nick Clegg several opportunities to bracket Labour and the Tories together. Both of them supported the war in Iraq, both won’t take the military option off the table when it comes to Iran and both believe in the centrality of the alliance with the US to UK
Well, yes, it probably will have some effect. But as Jonathan Freedland argues Clegg may survive the press’s assault with his dignity and credibility more or less intact. Indeed, the entire episode might have the effect of firming up some support for Clegg. There willl be some voters who see it as proof that the
This poll is going to be rapidly overtaken by events, but tonight’s YouGov tracker has the Tories up one to 34, Labour up two to 29 and the Lib Dems down three to 28. We’ll have at least two instant post-debate polls tonight so we’ll have a good idea of who, if anyone, is going
If seven days ago, anyone had suggested that the first debate would propel Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems to the top of the polls we’d all have thought that their lunch had gone on rather too long. But that’s what happened. Tonight, the questions are whether Gordon Brown reprises his ‘I agree with Nick’
One thing’s for certain: the Lib Dems are coming in for greater scrutiny and attention from the media. The covers of the Telegraph, Sun, Mail, Express and, yes, The Spectator are testament to that – even if some are less substantial than others. But the question is: will this derail the Clegg bandwagon? And, like
Now the Lib Dems are riding high in the polls, they attract greater scrutiny – which, to put it mildly, they do not always stand up to. In this week’s Spectator, we look at what can be seen as the Lib Dem vice. They may not charge for duck houses, or mortgages. But they do
Europe is likely to play a big role in tonight’s debate. It is probably the one issue that divides the Liberal Democrats and the Tories as much as electoral reform. Nick Clegg, a former MEP and adviser to then-EU Commissioner Leon Brittan, is a euro-enthusiast who would like Britain to join the Euro, even if
Terrific stuff from Nick Clegg, reported in the Daily Mail here. Nick suggests Britain has a misplaced sense of superiority as a consequence of winning the second world war, should recognize that Germany has become a “vastly” more prosperous country and that we have a “greater cross to bear” than the Germans for the events
I’d expected the papers to be full of Nick Clegg’s offer of an ‘In/Out’ EU referendum, should the EU draw up a treaty that would further alter the British constitution. He made the pledge on radio yesterday; he insisted that he would campaign to remain in the EU, but the people should decide. The papers
Ah, the majesty of the British press! The Telegraph splashes on the fact that various Lib Dem donors funded a researcher and that these funds were paid into his own bank account. A curious, perhaps even sloppy, arangement that may do Clegg some damage but that does not seem to be especially venal not least
2130, PH: And that’s it. I’ll be posting a verdict shortly. 2129, PH: Clegg tries to repeat his Amazing Memory Feat from last week – but this time it’s the issues discussed, and not questioners’ names. Not as impressive. After that, he talks “change” and delivers a few jibes about the “opponents of change”. 2128,
Since the last thing David Cameron is likely to do is surf the web for advice for tonight’s debate, Nick Clegg needs no help and Gordon Brown deserves none, I will give my (again, unsolicited but free) advice to Adam Boulton, the moderator of tonight’s Sky debate. Ask for details. The leaders have rehearsed top-level
Voting with one’s feet is always the most sincere sign of faith – or despair – in a country and its government. And for many the departure lounge, rather than the ballot box, is the surest route to better schools, lower tax and safer streets. The phrase “brain drain” was used in the 1970s and
The strange thing about last week’s TV debate is that, for all its transformative power, it doesn’t seem to have changed Labour’s campaign strategy in any fundamental way. Team Brown were hoping for a hung Parliament, and courting the Lib Dems, before last week. And, as Peter Mandelson demonstrated earlier, they’re still doing the same
There’s a great example of people power on the letters page of today’s Guardian. Last week, a bunch of the educational establishment wrote to the paper decrying the Tory plans to bust open the state monopoly in education and let parents, teachers and voluntary groups set up new schools. Today, 650-odd parent groups have written
Or rather, different polling. Each night it’s the same: we await the latest polls to see if any air has leaked from the Clegg bubble or Cameron has regained the Big Mo or Gordon come alive and then we plug the numbers into Electoral Calculus or UK Polling Report or the BBC and see What
George Osborne put in a fiery and impressive performance in the Chancellor’s debate today, firing off some memorable one-liners as well as unveiling a letter from the former head of the anti-avoidance group at the Treasury questioning the sums on which the Lib Dems’ tax plans depend. Indeed, since the Lib Dems surged, Osborne has
No electoral system is perfect. First Past the Post has its advantages and it’s a mistake to suppose that switching to the Alternative Vote or multi-member constituencies elected by STV solves all problems. On the contrary it probably replaces one set of difficulties with another. Nevertheless, one wonders how sustainable FPTP is. Traditionally it has
Since the Lib Dems starting surging there has been no shortage of speculation about the possible coalitions that may emerge after the election – Lab-Lib, Lib-Lab, Con-Lib. There has also been breathless speculation about what posts Nick Clegg might demand, including by yours truly. But none have been as cleverly-written as Hugo Brady’s. A think-tanker
Danny Finkelstein nominates Lord Pearson’s appearance on The Campaign Show as the worst interview ever given by a party leader in an election campaign. I second that.
What is the difference between ‘an alternative’ and ‘an addition’? It is on this question that the Liberal Democrat manifesto turns. If there is a difference, then there is a substantial black hole in their deficit reduction plans. There is a difference. The manifesto presents a £3.4bn public sector payroll measure as an addition to
I’m glad to see that more people – Iain Dale, John Rentoul, Iain Martin among them – are paying attention to Labour’s eclipse. At present Labour could finish third in the popular vote for the first time since 1922 and yet many people seem to assume that a Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition or arrangement of some
With Cable’s and Clegg’s personal ratings being so high, the trick is to play the ball not the man. Ken Clarke and George Osborne achieved that at this morning’s press conference. Clarke said: “(Nick Clegg’s father was) a very nice, very wise guy, he was a very successful City guy, but he wasn’t a flashy
It’s a gaffe, of course, because it is both true and something you’re not supposed to say. Be this as it may, it strikes me that while political professionals and grizzled foreign policy specialists may chunter about the Liberals’ naivete and the rest of it, the general public will be less likely to complain that