Cameron won on points and poise

David Cameron won the debate last night. Not by a mile, but he did OK. A school report would say "much improved this term!". Nick Clegg came second and Gordon Brown limped in a reasonable third. To be fair to the PM, I think he did better than some said he did.

All three seemed to get through OK. However, all clammed up on questions they didn't want to answer. Transparency has some way to go it would appear. Linked to truthfulness, of course.

Cameron was much more relaxed. Nick Clegg had moments when he looked like he was piggy in the middle. And what on earth happened to Gordon Brown's make-up. I thought Phyllis Diller may have had a hand in it.

It's still a three-horse race with several loose horses cantering along beside.

SNP in court battle for TV exposure!

The Scottish National Party thinks it is being hard done by. Alex Salmond reckons he's got just as good a chance of going to see the Queen as the other three who have already partaken in the "Prime Ministerial Debates". Odd notion of equality, I'd say.

"Oh, Mr. Salmond, do you think you can form a government?". "Oh, yes, Your Majesty! I've cobbled together the best ragbag grouping I could get my hands on. None of them will defy my leadership. If I can become Prime Minister, I'll give up on this devolution business. I'll be your best Prime Minister yet. Is it a deal?".

"Well, I don't do deals, Mr.Salmond, but if you have, as you say.....you can command a majority of your peers.....well, we'll see. I will, of course, being speaking with Mr. Brown, Mr. Cameron and Mr. Clegg...all on Privy Council terms, you understand...."

All too much of a daydream, I think. Better stop now before I fantasise as much Salmond does!

Nick Clegg wins the debate

ComRes for ITV asked who won the debate and 30% said Gordon Brown, 30% said David Cameron, and 33% said Nick Clegg. Three-way split and no mistake!

Sky leaders' debate

Just got up from watching the Sky leaders' debate. First reactions are that I was a tad disappointed. At one point I thought I had drifted into Gardeners' Question Time. David Cameron moved up on the points table, though, I thought. Better body image and better presentation. Substance wasn't too bad either.

Now I know that Gordon Brown wants to "deport 'em" - illegal immigrants, that is. Is he borrowing phrases from the BNP or giving them to them? "British jobs for British workers". That one slipped in too.

The audience seemed more animated than last week. Maybe it's the Bristol air. Lastly, I think Adam Boulton overdid the sales pitch for this show. He implied it was going to be a ratings buster, along the lines of some show of Simon Cowell's. I'd like a bit more pepper in the politics. This was more like MasterChef when an aspiring cook gets given praise laced with "but you must pay more attention to your flavours!".

All in all, it was a bit bland tonight. Let's hope the last one will be a bit more punchy.

A three horse race - plus a few nags!

The general election has come alive for politicos. For those who have a vague interest it seems to resemble the barbeque my wife is just now trying to fire up! I am beginning to think that we may have a worse result in democratic terms than we did last time. In 2005 Blair warbled on about a third term victory but he failed to emphasise that only 20% of the electorate had bothered to support him and his cronies. The British electoral system is ideal for two parties. However, if those parties shatter into smaller groupings then the possibility of being governed by a minority is high. It is made even more so if large numbers stay at home twiddling their thumbs.

Nick Clegg has sent the political establishment into fantasyland. What if? How come? They are working out all kinds of scenarios. The bookmakers are now taking bets on Clegg being prime minister outright. If he were to become the top politician I bet he wouldn't have secured it by a real majority. Just like Blair won a landslide on the back of a divided opposition so too could Clegg achieve gold by just getting a better share of the vote than the others. 30% of the turnout could do it. If the turnout was only 55% of the whole, it says a lot for mandates and the like.

However, this is now a three horse race. Any kind of result could ensue. I saw Philip Hammond, Conservative treasury spokesman talking about the need for a Conservative win. Whilst I might agree with him his logic was flawed. The Conservatives are almost as untried in government as the LibDems are. Only Ken Clarke and William Hague have some real knowledge of cabinet. The rest would be starting with a clean sheet of paper. After thirteen years that is the facts of it all. Hammond suggests that the LibDems can't be electable because they've never been in power before. That argument holds no water with the electorate. Conservatives should win on their current message not on their historical activities. In local terms new parties do come to power on a tide of change. The Boston Bypass Independents and Kidderminster Health Concern are two prime examples.

I can see why Adam Boulton is so fired up. He's going to be in charge of round two. And as a referee he may let the verbal punch-ups go on longer than the seconds may like. Be prepared for the same sort of conversation after the contest as Frank Bruno had with the late great Harry Carpenter. "Bit below the belt there, 'Arry!" and other boxing metaphors.

Leaders' Debate - Who won it? Seems it was Nick Clegg!

Just dragged myself away from interminable political opinion making on ITV1. The last speaker being Lord Pearson who has been given a slot for his views. Much of all this has been hyped up and the people most excited about it all are the TV companies and the pollsters. I think the level of excitement offered by the three leaders was less energised.

When this was first mooted (a leaders' debate) everyone thought David Cameron had most to lose as he was the more telegenic and that Gordon Brown had most to gain. In the event both were deemed to have been outshone by Nick Clegg. I think Clegg did well and his natural approach is obviously appealing. David Cameron's political content was mostly sound but his body language seemed at times to give away his nervousness. Gordon Brown got it one fairly good strike about the Conservative posters of himself smiling and Cameron's controlled smirk seemed to suggest he was ill at ease over Brown's newfound Cheshire cat routine. But I think the most telling thing for me was at the very end when they all shook hands. Brown was keen to leave the other two and go to the audience as friendly host thanking his guests. Cameron and Clegg spent few moments in exchanging words. They seemed relaxed in each other's company. Whilst only a fleeting period and one can't read too much into it, it would tend to give a little bit of support to the suggestion that the two could work well in any coalition arrangement.

The pollsters are now crunching the numbers, but they all seem to agree that Nick Clegg was the outright winner. Which will mean that, as William Hague rightly points out, the LibDems will come under greater scrutiny. I hope it will be by proper debate than by a kind of musical chairs game.