The Dirty Digger Nobbles the Debate (With Help From a Noble Lord)

The blogs are sceaming with advice for the participants in tonight's debate. Do this Gordon, don't mention that. Dave should push on this subject, raise this matter..etc.  etc. etc.

But I'm very much afraid that Cameron's best tactic is probably to do nothing. Given his position and the support he has in terms of a compliant press and cash to spend, he really doesn't have to impress, just make no big mistakes that the press simply cannot ignore, smirk a few lines and go home. The Murdoch Empire will do the rest for the debates (Dave Done Great!) and Ashcroft's cash willl deliver in the marginals.

So Cameron and his supporters can relax. The foreign owned press and the non-dom millionaires are seeing him in with friendly media coverage and Central American cash. The Sun's headline is already written, (Cam 'e Won!), and it will be emailed from Australia before the debate begins so as to be in time for the first editions.

The price we, the people of theUK, will have to pay if DC does "win", and goes on to govern with the backing of foreign interests is worth considering. Murdoch and Ashcroft don't do favours: they do deals, and the deals they have done with the Tories will come home to roost, after (if) a Cameron victory.

The price we will pay is likely to include a damaging "review" of the BBC and the "privatisation" of some of its most profitable arms....guess who will be first in line for the auction? And of course, the nasty things said about non-doms: they'll disappear, as will any mention of fair taxation for foreign based millionaires who like to live in the UK but don't like paying taxes in the UK.

All that remains is for the Conservatve Party's registered offices to be moved to Belize and the official Tory logo changed to a wide brimmed sun hat with blue bottle corks suspended from the rim.

Hoorah! for patriotism and British Democracy.

Who "won" the leaders' debate?

The question might be: did anyone win the leaders' debate? Indeed, can anyone win the leaders debate? What is a win and what is a loss in these particular circumstances?

There's the straight post-debate opinion polls, taken in the immediate aftermath of the debate. These show the first impressions of those who watched the action, and are pored over and puffed by the parties' spinners. According to these, last night's winner was not as clear as last week's, when Nick Clegg was declared ahead of the other two: Cameron second and Brown a distant third.

Last night Brown came up strongly on the rails. From 20% in last week's post-debate polls, to 30% this week. Clegg and Cameron, neck and neck and still narrowly ahead.

So, did Clegg win? Or Cameron? Or Brown win? Or was it a three-way draw?

The BBC is saying the "there is no clear winner".

ConservativeHome and the blog of Lynne Featherstone, LibDem candidate, both emphasise the matter of "momentum". They think that the actual result is less important than the strength and direction of the movement of their favoured candidate. Both of these sources claim that the "momentum" is with their man.

Maybe so, and neither Clegg nor Cameron lost ground (broadly), but the momentum argument is about movement, motion: and the motion, according to these polls is with Gordon Brown. From a distant third, on 20% approval in these polls last week, he has leapt to joint second on around 30%. This is a huge jump and, in terms of movement, it is the most real momentum of any of the three men.

If we carry the analogy further and apply it to a three-horse race, the competitor moving fastest as we approach the final furlong is the competitor with the best chance of catching and overtaking the other two. If we really believe in the argument on "momentum", then Gordon Brown has the momentum, he's moving forward faster and further than his two rivals, (who are, relatively, treading water), and Brown now has a chance, at least, to take the race, an outcome that looked most unlikely this time last week.

P.S.

The results of an ICM poll done after the debate.

1.  Who would be best PM?  GB 35%, Cameron 33% and Clegg 26%.
2.  On the same question amongst C1's GB 39 v DC 27% and Clegg 26%, and C2s  GB 39, DC 33 and NC 22.
3.  On who would make the right decisions ins difficult times  GB 43%, DC 34% and NC, 18%.
4.  47% of all voters think DC is more spin than substance, 54% of C1 voters believe that.
5.  On decisiveness GB now leads DC 38 v33 and Clegg at 25.

So, substance can win over style. And GB is substance while DC and NC are PR.

The Dust Settles

Two items of news: the dust cloud from Iceland closes all airports and the dust settles from the Leaders' debate.

So who is the winner? Well the planes are still grounded, so the traveller and the airlines both lose against nature.

As for the debates, for what it's worth, I thought Clegg won the beauty contest, Brown won the contest of argument and substance and Cameron lost over all.

How that plays over the next few days and whether it has a long term impact on the opinion polls and the real election poll is still to be seen.

If it has an effect, and the Lib Dems pick up and hold on to a few more marginals, the Tories will be the big losers.

And the SNP in Scotland might rue a Lib Dem surge, with two or three holds that the Nats might be targeting.

Of course, there are two more debates to go, so it could all still change. Maybe Nick will bomb and Dave will soar.