PM won't serve a third term...he's got to win a second first!

A PUZZLING annoucement from the Prime Minister during an 'at home' interview with the BBC, he won't serve a third term at Number 10...

Puzzling because of it's timing, why on earth would you on the verge of the election campaign proper say you only want the job for one more term then you'll be off?

Puzzling because recent history shows PMs who set out their future plans tend to limp along until the end, see Tony Blair after he said in 2004 he wouldn't serve a full third term. He then faced mutiny and uncertainty regularly until he eventually departed in 2007.

Puzzling because the Conservatives love a good old bunfight over the leadership, a vote for the Tories in May will gurantee lots of jostling for position and in-fighting, particularly as Cameron named his chosen three; May, Osborne and Boris. Wonder what Sajid Javid and the other 'rising stars' think about his comments.

And puzzling because technically, the PM hasn't won an election yet, either in 2010 or the upcoming poll. His comments, however well intentioned, could be percieved as arrogance from a man who didn't win a majority in 2010.

Put simply the Conservatives are shooting themselves in the foot at every turn, every good sound bite and economic news they have is undone by strategic mistakes.

The Tories ought to be doing better, Labour are led by a man who simply hasn't sealed the deal with his core Labour vote let alone floating voters, the Lib Dems are near enough finished while the UKIP pint has been watered down in recent weeks.

It's as if the Tories don't understand that to obtain a majority Government they need to do better than 2010, a very hard challenge granted but the circumstances are there.

Cameron should have embarked on his 2010 'meet the people' strategy and debated Miliband head to head. Not doing so has render his 'weak' tag on Miliband virutally redundant.

Labour's task now is to weave a narrative which once again labels Cameron arrogant, point out he failed to win a majority in 2010 and question again why he won't debate his record.

If they are successful then Cameron will indeed not serve a third term, he won't get a second either!

General Election TV Debates – The Solution

This is less of a blog, more of an open letter to all the party leaders and to the broadcasters, a solution to your current ‘dilemma’ over the proposed debates.

STRUCTURE – one debate between David Cameron and Ed Miliband and one between Cameron, Miliband and Clegg. Instead of inviting just Farage to the last one, invite him, Natalie Bennett from the Greens and George Galloway from Respect. It’s not beyond podium builders to come up with seven platforms you know!

Every party which is represented in Westminster and could feasibly field candidates in every constituency across the UK would then have a platform.

SCOTLAND, WALES AND NI – For a party very keen to distance itself from the ‘Westminster elite’, the SNP has spent a lot of time demanding to be in the debates. Why? People in England cannot vote for them. Same with Plaid Cymru and the various Northern Ireland parties, should they have a platform? No.

Instead, why not have country specific debates. I mean wasn’t the whole point of the Scottish devolution vote to ensure the Scottish voice was heard. Why not have a debate between the SNP, Scottish Labour, Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Liberal Democrats? Sky ran one the last time and it proved very successful.

Surely the voters in those countries want to know what the various parties are going to do for the country if returned to Westminster? It’s not about exclusion it’s about issues that matter to those in the respective countries are addressed.

AND IF THEY DON’T AGREE – empty chair them, this applies to the PM if he is indeed ‘chicken’ but also call Miliband’s bluff as well. Quite simply if an invited guest doesn’t turn up, leave the podium empty and let the British public draw their own conclusions.

Simple? Yeah pretty much, so is there any chance you lot can get on and sort it out because frankly there are one or two hugely more important issues affecting us at the moment!

Thornberry isn't a snob, she's just stupid

"It's just one of many pictures I've taken on the campaign trail today. However if you're asking my personal opinion I like to think it shows the proud patriotism which exists in our country and what we shouldn't be afraid to embrace."

IF Emily Thornberry had said the above then tonight; she'd still have a job, the headlines would be about another Tory winning a seat for UKIP having defected and maybe some wavering Labour votes would have felt like their party did understand them after all.

Instead she came out with a stupid 'never seen anything like it' (what a flag?) comment, Ed apparently had a fit of pique and Labour look like a mess....again!

I'm not saying I'd do a better job than Labour's press office but my line is a huge improvement on the shambles which has dominated the airwaves all evening.

Truth be told this is just the latest chapter in a catastrophe of errors from a party which ought to be wiping the floor with the Government.

Cast your minds back, if this was 1996 Labour might be contemplating winning a seat like Rochester and Strood but would certainly be heaping pressure on a PM facing losing another by election to a defecting former MP.

David Cameron ought to have gone to be d this evening petrified at another potentially huge defeat and concerned some disgruntled colleagues might decide a change of leader was necessary.

Instead he lays his head thanking Labour for turning down the heat in the political pressure cooker.

To messers Johnson, Burnham, Cooper, Umunna et al - really? Do you really think this is the best your party can do?

Labour's slim chance of a majority has been shrinking for months. Tonight it disappeared, most probably for good.