Brown has survived 'Bigotgate', but can he survive tonight's final debate?

What a gaffe that was yesterday, undoubtedly the most cringeworthy, appalling incident of the election campaign. The most enraging part of it all was when after coming out of Ms. Duffy's home after the apology he said with that horrendously eerie fake smile that he was 'mortified'. Then why were you smiling you strange man?!

Despite the monumental cock-up, the whole thing doesn't really seem to have done any damage to Labour in today's polls. So with that, all eyes are now on tonight's crucial final debate. This could just be the turning point of the campaign and with just a week to go the pressure on the three party leaders must be immense.

Brown despite all his failings, can appear strong on the economy. This of course in turn despite the evident fact that he was the one as Chancellor and then Prime Minister who presided over the economic recession and record inflation of our public deficit and national debt. He will spew out numbers and statistics that will out-flank and disorientate the two other naive younger opponents and in order for them to really destroy him they must be prepared with counter-attacks.

Brown's incumbancy is simultaneously his asset and his liability and he will attempt to ring circles around Cameron and Clegg to ensure its the former, not the latter, that the public see tonight.

For Cameron, this is his final chance to prove to the electorate that he can be the agent of change. Do I think this will happen? No. He has been too soft in this campaign; trying too hard to be statesmen-like when ideally he could have gone on the offensive and tore both Labour and the Liberal Democrats apart. He didn't because his party failed to give the clear message of what, when, and how they were going to cut in order to bring down the deficit. They fell into the Blairite trap of nauseating soundbites and slogans such as 'We're all in this together' which fell on deaf ears from an electorate literally numbed by political spin. We have after all, lived under New Labour for the past 13 years. Tonight he must be ruthless and concise in his argument; he must spell out in detail what the Tories will do and when, and above all he must show the electorate how they are different from the other two parties in the debate.

For Clegg too this will be a defining moment: will this debate cement the surge of support gained in the past two weeks or will his weakness on the economy ultimately be his undoing? Personally I do hope the latter occurs precisely because Clegg has become arrogant and presumptious over his potential power and demands should a hung parliament materialise on May 7th. He does not deserve the support of the British people. Nonetheless it is of course the wider electorate in particular the undecideds and marginal voters who will decide the fate of this debate and indeed the election next week. Clegg will have to show he is strong on the economy and be willing to defend his plans for tax reform from two opponents who I presume will be doing their utmost to bring him finally down.

All them will have to answer the questions surrounding the apparent blackholes in all their spending plans, if they don't I am certain the electorate will not tolerate it and rightly so. It is about time we had some honesty and clarity in this campaign, especially when it comes down to the state of our economy.

Will Brown win the debate? I doubt it but I do think it will be close. My prediction (and admittedly I was wrong in the last two: I thought Cameron won both...) is Brown and Cameron neck and neck in first place with Clegg behind but only by a few points. We shall have to wait and see.

Flip Flop Clegg

An article in today's Daily Telegraph reveals that Nick Clegg, leader of the Liberal Democrats has, within two days switched his position on forming a coalition government. On sunday's Andrew Marr Show, Clegg made clear that under no circumstances would the Liberal Democrats prop up the Labour government, especially if they come third in the popular vote and yet win the most parliamentary seats. He rightly said that situation would be undemocratic and the result itself would only go to prove the lack of fairness in our electoral system. And yet today he has changed his mind.

Speaking at a campaign stop, he stated that he would support "even the man on the moon" if it led to electoral reform". So there you have it, due to the surge in support Clegg has become arrogant and has out-reached himself with his demands. This is no longer about fairness and democratic accountability, it is about doing what he can for his party not I might add the British people. He has contradicted himself within two days and this is a perfect reflection of the sheer opportunism and dirty tricks so endemic within the Liberal Democrats. Surely supporting the ditching of Brown after the election in return for a more 'compatible' Labour figure is not only fooling the electorate but itself undemocratic?

For those of you thinking he offers change, he doesn't. He just doesn't. He is doing this for himself and his party, not you. His demands only reinforce his growing ego, who is he is to demand what is the rightful choice of the electorate? It is up to them what happens at this election. All of you please, don't fall for Clegg and his thin veneer of 'change'. He would lead this country to disaster.

Clegg's Non-Dom Donation Hypocrisy

It has been revealed that the Liberal Democrats have recently received six figure sum donations from donors not fully resident in the UK. The entrepreneur Bhanu Choudhrie is said to have given a large donation as recent as a few days ago.

Similarly, they have received a £354,000 donation from French businessman Bruno Sangle-Ferriere. Now this may not seem that bad depending on whether you agree with large donations or not. The point that is so startling is that Clegg ranted on in last week's debate on how the Tories and Labour are funded by millionaires and trade unions respectively. Yet here he is, allowing his party to happily take large donations themselves, what utter hypocrisy. What an insult to the people. Does he think perhaps that now they have a shot of political power (or at least a say in government) he best take as much money as he can get?

Clegg recently announced that under Lib-Dem plans, political donations would never exceed £10,000. Obviously the recent six figure sum donations don't count then, eh Clegg? What an absolute joke.

All this just adds to the notorious donation of £2.4m by fraudster and runaway Michael Brown in 2005. Oh and the Lib-Dems never gave the money back, it was as Nick said "a long time ago", that's okay then...

The funniest bit of all of this has to be their spokesman's response: "We are committed to making everybody pay their fair share in tax and to reforming the system of party funding. Unlike other parties, our donors support us because of our values and have (wait for it!) no influence on party policy or campaign strategy." No of course they don't. Surely most if not all donations are made because the donors share the values of the given party? Of course the Liberal Democrats are different from the other parties because they....um...they...uhhh...their party colour is yellow! Yep, that's about it.

Hypocrisy, lies and pathetic excuses. Well, it is the Lib-Dems...

For those of you who have been taken in by 'Cleggmania' perhaps you would like to read this...

A very insightful article in today's Daily Telegraph shows how hypocritical and sly Nick Clegg truly is and what his party is really up to during this election and the elections that have preceded it.

Now I know many will simply say, 'Oh this is just smearing...' but within the article are events and facts that the Liberal Democrats simply cannot deny.

Be careful what you vote for, the Liberal Democrats may seem to be the 'anti-politics' alternative to the other failed two parties but underneath they are just as bad, if not worse.

So the Tories want to talk EU again.

The opportunism of Cameron's Conservatives is there for all to see. After being one of the many issues that David Cameron has been extremely keen for his Party to avoid, the attacks on Nick Clegg's euro-federalist position have begun.

The Tories are well within their rights to point Clegg out as a massive euro-enthusiast. Yet it is the sheer nature of the Tories bringing up the issue when it suits them, beating Clegg with a quick "eurosceptic" slap and at the same time being reluctant to talk about this vital issue when it doesn't suit them. This is out and out opportunism, not an attack on Clegg driven by a principled stance on the issue.

The televised debate tonight will see the EU issue come up and no doubt Cameron will try and push himself as the natural choice for Britain's eurosceptic public. As I said yesterday, Clegg's in or out referendum pledge on EU membership will do more to placate many thinking of voting Tory or UKIP than Cameron's ruling out of any EU referendum for five years.

Do the TV debates show just how vacuous politics has become?

I think that the TV debates were a very, very good idea. They simplify things and allow people who are not normally interested in politics to dip their toes in and make their mind up based on those leading the parties.

Yet the sudden emergence of Nick Clegg (and therefore Liberal Democrats) as a serious political contender does remind me a lot of Barack Obama's Presidential campaign. It had a good image, it was clean, smart and represented "change". But hang on just a second - what policy are the public backing Clegg on? What policies, what actions were the American people voting Barack Obama in as President to take?

I've asked a lot of people who have warmed to Nick Clegg in recent days what he said that they support. And not one of them has replied with a policy proposal, simply the fact that he came across better than Gordon Brown and David Cameron. That is in a way unsurprising, but in another really quite scary. Politics is ultimately about handing individuals power that they will use to influence the lives we live. The electorate dishing out power based solely on personalities is very dangerous.