My Prediction For the 2010 general election.

I have now factored in the Lib Dem surge. Result prediction as follows;

Tories 315 seats - 10m votes - (35.1%)
Labour 205 seats - 7.9m votes - (27.7%)
Lib Dem 90 seats - 8.1m votes - (28.4%)
UKIP 0 seats - 0.5m votes - (1.8%)
Greens 1 seat - 0.4m votes - (1.4%)
Others (incl Nats) 39 seats - 1.6m votes - (5.6%)

This leaves the Tories 6 short of a majority, with unionist and nationalist support they might just be able to govern without the Lib Dems, which would enable them to avoid a referendum on reform and call another election for the Autumn.

This is what I predicted 3 weeks ago for comparison (with 2005 votes in brackets)

Tories 10m (8.8m) votes - 310 seats
Labour 8.4m (9.6m) votes - 240 seats
LibDem 5.7m (6.0m) votes - 60 seats
UKIP 1.1m (0.6m) votes - 0 seats
Green 0.5m (0.3m) - 1 seat
Others (incl Nats) 1.8m (1.8m)- 39 seats

It's the image stupid!

In 1974, Labour was elected because people were sick of the 3 day week under the Tories and thought Labour better able to control the unions. Thatcher was elected in 1979 because Labour had failed to control the unions. In 1997 new Labour was elected because people were sick of 3m unemployed and sleaze.

...In 2010 Cameron was elected because he could look straight at the camera better than the other two. Sad times indeed.

Have The Leader Debates Been Good For Our Democracy?

In the sense that people now know a lot more about the Lib Dems and some of their policies, then yes. The debates have also got people who usually don't vote to think about politics and maybe turnout will be up by 5% or so this time. So that also has been a success. But there is a down side. The focus of the debates was very narrow and now the novelty has worn off, people will very quickly get bored of them. Also it seems the whole general election campaign has suffered. Coverage has focused far more on how the leaders 'performed' and on their personalities than on party's policies which can only be bad for democracy.

In the long run, I happen to think that unless the format is changed quite considerably to be more like the Question Time format, with a wider range of party leaders involved over the three or more debates, then this new Americanisation of our politics can only be bad. Party's will even more have to think of image and good looks when they chose a leader. Policies will become even less relevant and of course policies really should be the only thing that matters not the least important thing. This can only help the right-wing in the long run. These debates were focussed on three very posh white men 'slugging' it out like a boxing match. It marginalised women and minorities - it was like a first-past-the-post debate. We need to see a wider range of people and politics if we are to engage the widest possible sections of society and make them feel they have a say in our democracy. If the Tories get a majority of seats in this election from just, say 36% of the vote - it will be a travesty of democracy and with the changes the Tories are planning for boundaries, our chance of getting electoral reform might be even further away. Saying that I am more positive about getting a referendum on PR and winning it than I was a month ago.

Who Should I Vote For?

This election and our electoral system have left me in an impossible dilemma. If I could list my preferences in order they would be 1. Green, 2. Labour, 3. Lib Dem. I would not vote for any other party.

The Greens are the closest to my political outlook. They want to see PR, a citizen's income, reduce car use, greater redistribution of wealth and improve overall quality of life. I want to vote for them.

But I live in Hove - a Tory-Labour marginal. Realistically only these two can win here. The best chance of stopping the Tory is to vote Labour.

Yet, Celia Barlow our Labour MP has barely a 450 majority, realistically the seat is almost certainly already lost to the Tories. So out of the losing parties Green, Labour, Lib Dem - I might as well vote for the one I like the best - i.e. Green.

Yet, if the Lib Dems can maximise their vote nationally and even top the poll in votes this will highlight ths absurdity of our present electoral system. If Labour are going to lose this seat anyway then maybe maximising the Lib Dem vote is the best way to put pressure on getting PR.

But the demographics in this area are of a young transient population. A lot of the Tories are old and dying. Labour might still be able to pull off a shock and if people think like me and vote Green and Lib Dem, the Tories might win a seat they might not have done so.

All this talk highlights the dilemma that first-past-the-post puts on voters - who have to try and second guess what everyone else is going to do. It puts barriers in the way of how you want to vote. I would love to vote Green and build their vote here, so that next time they might be in the position the Greens are in in Brighton Pavilion where Caroline Lucas has a real chance of winning.

So should I go with my heart and vote Green, vote Labour in the remote possibility that my vote might keep the Tory out, or vote Lib Dem so they top the vote and PR becomes a national debate as the result highlights how absurd it is to the wider public. I honestly am torn as to what to do. What do you think?

Would Cameron Do A Deal On Electoral Reform?

In a recent interview Cameron defended the indefensible first-past-the-post system, but he left open the door that he might be willing to have a referendum on changing the system.

He did this for tactical reasons. Firstly, he wants to be PM and if a deal on PR with the Lib Dems is the way to do it, then so be it. The Tories would only do this however if they knew that a Lib-Lab deal on PR was on the cards. Secondly, this is good electioneering - trying to soothe any floating voters who are undecided between Lib or Tory.

Also the Tories know that if they are in charge for the referendum it would make it easier to influence the outcome and crucially which system is offered. I imagine the Libs and Tories can come to a deal over a 3 (or even 2) seat STV system. This would set an extremely high threshold for smaller parties to pass of over 25%. A Labour/Lib Dem deal on PR might lead to AV+, AMS or even a 6 seat STV being offered, as Labour would insist on a more proportional system with a lower threshold to allow them to win seats in rural areas.

Cameron would do everything he could to delay a referendum and double cross the Lib Dems - calling an election early if he could to avoid PR. Labour tribalists might also attempt this, but Labour at least does have some high profile advocates of PR amongst its ranks.

It is still possible the Tories are going to get the seats for a majority (especially nor Brown's gaffe has happened and the Con-Lab gap could grow), so lets not get too excited but finally people are beginning to see just how corrupt our system is. Even the general public uninterested in constitutional details can see that something is seriously wrong when a party can win the vote but come last in terms of seats.

Universal Swing Idea Is GIving False Sense Of Security To Labour

A lot of people have now got used to the idea that Labour have an electoral advantage and can come behind the Tories in votes but still do well in seats because of the way Labour can win urban seats with less votes than the Tories get in rural seats. This has nothing to do with the size of the constituencies as the Tories would argue but everything to do with luck and what is called differential turnout - Less people vote in poorer urban areas, so you don't need as many votes.

But the guy who predicted the Obama win to a remarkable level of accuracy has said that Labour are destined to do far worse than the universal swing idea suggests. The Tories are doing much better in the seats they need to win. For this reason 35-36% might just be enough to win them a majority. The rise of the Lib Dems may well have helped them in this task even if the Lib Dems defend all their seats and gain a few from the Tories.

This election is wide open - if the Tories get around 33% then yes, we will have a hung parliament, but if that rises to 35,36,37% then the Tories might just nick a small majority.

It is the gap between Tory and Labour that will make the difference. Labour down on 26 or 27% could be 9 or 10 points behind. For the Tories that would be enough. For this election, all progressives are going to have to hold their breath!

Osborne Says Tory Manifesto Smears Tories

George Osborne has launched a tirade against the writer of the Tory manifesto because it suggests that tax credits and cancer referral guarantees will all be scrapped.

Osborne also said the Tories are running a positive campaign because they are smiling at the camera while smearing Clegg and Labour. Osborne continued on a repetition loop on BBC news for 3 hours that the Tories were positive because they were leaving all the smear campaigns to be done by the Tory press, not them.

David Cameron added vote for us, vote for hope not fear while also warning of armaggeddon if we had a hung parliament or instant death if Clegg got more votes than him.

A Hung Parliament Is What People Want: Coalitions Are Not Indecisive.

David Cameron and Rupert Murdoch can fuck right off. Cameron pretends to be running a positive campaign while with a typically slimy and clever piece of spin smears Labour for allegedly being negative with its perfectly justifiable leaflets pointing out that the Tories give no guarantees on cancer funding, winter fuel payments, bus passes, minimum wage increases etc, etc, in their manifesto (overtones of the Tory media's Jennifer's Ear bullshit if anyone remembers that from 1992). At the same time George Osbourne is 'co-ordinating' the Tory press smear campaign against Clegg which has thankfully fantastically backfired.

The Tories and their establishment friends in the media and business are running scared and are now trying to bully us not to vote for a 'hung parliament' by suggesting their friends in the city just won't wear it - this reminds me of the woman in the Ritz who famously remarked on Labour being elected in 1945 - 'They've gawn an elected a Labour government, the country won't stand for it'! The people are not so easily bullied this time. Why should anyone believe Cameron and co when they squeal 'it's just not fair, it was OUR TURN'. People don't just want any alternative, they want real change - something that is different AND better.

Rather than being indecisive - a coalition might be very decisive indeed - giving people a real say on how their MPs are elected by offering a referendum on the electoral system. The Tories would never do a deal on this (ironically if the Lib Dems get 90-100 seats this time, if may be impossible for first-past-the-post to deliver a majority to any party for the foreseeable future - Lib Dems are very good at defending seats once they win them and they would be in even more close second places to win more seats), but Labour minus Brown in coalition with Clegg would. This single change would do more to get our parliament passing laws people want rather than dithering. We have one of the slowest parliaments in the world for making laws. As the Independent recently pointed out the 12 best countries for controlling the deficit and maintaining decent public services are all run by coalitions. Including Germany, probably one of the most prudent of countries when it comes to finances and they also have one of the most successful economies. Coincidence?

Does Cameron really think that the Tories deserve to govern alone on a pathetic 33% of the vote? Cameron claims our present system allows voters to 'throw out unpopular governments'. Then why could Gordon Brown come third in the vote but have the most seats?

Electoral Reform has become THE issue of the campaign because people have got to hear that the party in first place will only get half the seats of a party coming third. This is so absurd and indefensible that only the insane could believe the Tory line that everything is ok and doesn't need changing.

The Tory vote is still dropping despite the Tory press doing their worst (or maybe because of it). People are sussing out this country's press is neither free nor fair. When four men own 80% of our national press (and most local press too) and are insisting (in fact screaming) that we vote for their man - that is not a definition of a free press that most recognise. People are realising we are little different from the old Soviet Union when it comes to our press. Why should people let this carry on? A win in terms of votes for Clegg (though sadly not seats) will kill this establishment stone dead. Can't wait for the election.

Cameron Is Proving A Hard Sell...Even For Rupert Murdoch

Cons on 33, Libs on 30 and Lab on 27 - this would result in the Tories being about 50 seats short and the Libs getting about 100 seats. If that happens then we could be looking at electoral reform.

Electoral reform is becoming THE issue of this election and it is enormously exciting for PR geeks like me. We have waited a lifetime for this moment and nobody saw this coming.

David Mitchell in the Observer sums up the view that people want change - were not sure about Cameron and have merrily jumped on the Clegg bandwagon - much to the Tory press's anguish.

Even the most politically non astute realise that something is seriously wrong with an electoral system that gives the vote winner half of the seats that the third place party gets.

It is becoming impossible for even the Tories and Cameron to defend this - much as they want to.

How can anyone believe this system 'allows voters to throw the buggers out' when a party in third place gets the most seats. It is preposterous, an obvious two finger salute to voter's wishes, this system is indefensible and so is the alternative vote where the same thing could still happen. Only a more proportional system will solve this problem and the voters are going to demand it.

Cameron might actually end up with about the same percentage of the vote as Michael Howard got in 2005. In such a situation, how can the Tories say they have a mandate to govern. It is still possible they could get a majority of seats on 33% of the vote. It is the gap between Labour and Tory that is critical in the 100-150 Labour/Tory marginals. Cleggmania has made it impossible for the Tories to get the 20 seats they were hoping to take off the Lib Dems, but if Labour voters switch to Lib Dem in these marginals then the Tories might still make it. This would be horrific for most voters and Clegg's prediction of riots in the street could come true if the Tories try to push through their hardline policies.

But it is not just the absurdity of the electoral system that has been exposed by this campaign. The Tory press have been revealed for the nasty supporters of the status quo that they are. Their nice relationship with the establishment whether Tory or Labour (but mostly Tory) has been exposed. Lib Dem supporters are going to have to suffer 2 weeks of the sort of distortion of policy and personality that Labour supporters have had to suffer all the time. The attacks on Clegg have made it obvious where our press stands - firmly up Cameron's...

So here's looking forward to 2 questions on the referendum for PR - firstly - do we want to replace first-past-the-post with a more proportional system. Then if yes, a choice of single-transferable-vote or an open-list system. This would satisfy all the main opponents and campaigners and give a clear result of what people want. Roll on.

The Only Change The Tories Will Give You Will Be The Pennies In Your Pocket Once You Lose Your Job

Vote Conservative if you want to lose your job.

Sky Rig Camera Angles To Make Cameron Look Good And Clegg Look Bad

Watching the Sky News Leaders Debate - We all know the Murdoch controlled Sky News are desperate to call this one for Cameron. I didn't know how they were going to do it - but look at the debate - what is odd?

I immediately noticed whenever Cameron spoke - the direct close ups with lingering giving him plenty of time to look directly into the camera. Whereas whenever Clegg or Brown spoke, the camera jumped all over the place - never giving Clegg more than a brief couple of seconds face on. Very sneaky and clever of the Tory controlled media. Go on time it.

Yesterday, the newspapers proved it was painfully obvious that we don't live in a democracy - but a ' Tory mediocracy'. Not just the Sun, but the Express, Daily Mail, Daily Star and Telegraph led with Clegg attacks - it was funny. Murdoch at least varied his papers a bit by putting a positive Cameron story on the front page of the Times rather than a negative on Clegg. Adam Boulton even had a go at Clegg in the debate - very impartial!!!

This country's media is a joke - it is the Tories treating us as mugs - Cameron is bullshit.

The only change the Tories will bring us is the pennies in our pockets as we all draw the dole!!!

What Voters Saw In That Debate Has Left Them Utterly Confused

Because it bore no relation to what they read in their newspapers everyday. For once people heard a real debate about the issues. It is pretty clear that people want real change and that 80-85% of adults range from completely hostile to reluctant to support the Tories.

The right wing press has softened up a lot of the swing voters to support the Tories, but deep down voters know that Cameron doesn't offer the change they want.

Since the debate, the right wing press has had to move from its preferred tactic of ignoring the Lib Dems and concentrating its fire on Labour, to reluctantly having to attack Clegg and co. And the attack dogs have been relentless, attacking everything from Clegg's supposed non-Englishness to his supposed 'links' to convicted fraudsters and misrepresenting every Lib Dem policy especially on immigration. An amnesty for illegals is even supported by Boris Johnson - their media darling. Lets see the Tories get out of that one!

It is inevitable that these attacks have dimmed support for Clegg and the Lib Dems. But there are two debates left. Against my better judgement the debates have turned out rather good. The many rules have not stifled the debate and actually made the discussions civilised. For once people had a chance to listen to the arguments.

How Sky and Adam Boulton are going to swing the next one for Cameron and the Tories I do not yet know. But you can bet they will try. Because it is exclusively on Sky news it will have a much smaller audience, so the media aftermath led by the right-wing press will have more of a say - this will benefit Cameron. But Clegg has another chance to make an impact - if he takes it again, expect the Tory establishment to be rocked to the core and go into a frenzy of attacks, but even they might not be able to persuade people they didn't see what they saw with their own eyes. This election is going to be pivitol. Either we get the Tories that hardly anyone wants in power yet again and they strengthen the present status quo, or we get a change in political power, ridding us of this electoral system. People are starting to ask - how can a party in the lead in the vote get half the seats of someone in third place? Electoral reform has become an issue - lets hope we can get real change and get rid of this stupid system.

You Have Until 5pm Today To Make Sure You Are Registered To Vote

Get your form to your local authority by then. This website tells you how.

YouGov distort poll for Murdoch's Sun. What A Surprise!

Via Craig Murray, YouGov have admitted suggesting Clegg takes money from criminals but not apparently before asking their polling question. it would be a clear breach of polling rules and a clear attempt to suppress Lib Dem support if it was.

We couldn't really expect anything else from the Tories and their papers. Despicable. This country's media gets more like North Korea every day. What with the Evening Standard's bias in getting Boris elected in London. We now have this. We are heading for a bunch of Tories that endorse this kind of thing, running the country. It is a terrifying prospect.

Rise In Lib Dems Could Cost Caroline Lucas

Ladbrokes have closed odds on for Lucas win from 8/13 to 5/6. In Brighton Pavilion what happens to 4th place Lib Dems vote is crucial. The Lib Dems would have to be polling 45% nationally to win the seat but at their present 30%+ it poses real problems for the Greens. A two way centre-left split with the Lib Dems a poor fourth is likely to still be too much for the Tories, but a three way split could let the Tories win the seat with 27%.

We are resigned to the loss of Hove and Kemptown to the Tories, but Pavilion as well would be disastrous. Nor am I as confident as the Labour leadership that the rise of the Lib Dems will stop the Tories.

Cameron is now as unpopular as William Hague was in 2001 and the Tories have lost 8 points since 'the debate', down now on 33% - around the level Michael Howard got in 2005.

The Lib Dems need two things - a lot of young voters to register and another good performance from Clegg. It is a shame the BBC is doing the Tories dirty work by putting out immigration propaganda. Because Cameron doesn't want to do it himself and show the nasty party has not changed.

Another good debate and if the Lib Dems can get past 35% and take a significant lead and there is no way it can be ignored. Of course the Tory papers (sadly followed by the BBC desperate to please the Tories) have gone full scale to attack the Lib Dems.

Caroline Lucas also needs two things - her name recognition to prevent people voting Lib Dem in Pavilion and people to realise the situation here. Once again our ridiculous electoral system could land us with a Tory government the vast majority do not want.

It is clear people do want change - but Tory change? - these guys are having a laugh. The Tories are THE establishment party - whether it is their policy to keep heriditary peers (cos they all Tory), create hundreds of life peers for their business backers, their defence of an electoral system that gives the most seats to a party coming third and gives the lowest number of seats to the winners of the popular vote (if that is the LIb Dems). The Tories policies on tax are obviously regressive - tax breaks for wealthy married couples and inheritance tax cuts for millionaires. People can see the debates with their own eyes and the Tory policies and Cameron are a posh mess - an Eton mess!

Lucas for Pavilion, Labour in the 100 Tory/Labour marginals and Lib Dem elsewhere. That is the ideal, but people do not have the information to make this choice. The electoral system turns it all into a lottery, electoral roulette. Getting rid of this voting system would make a difference.

The End Of First-Past-The-Post?

A general election where the Lib Dems get 33%, The Tories 32% and Labour 26% could mean Labour getting 250 seats, the Tories 240 and the Lib Dems only 130 (if they are lucky) - so the Lib Dems would get half the seats of a party in THIRD place that they BEAT by 7%. If anything highlights how ridiculous our electoral system is, this is it. People must be baffled when they hear these numbers (It's all to do with the spread of the vote between constituencies). Even the Sun newspaper is finding it hard to defend.

It seems about 200 seats for Labour and 200 for the Tories are pretty much impregnable. But are they?

Well, if the Lib Dems 12 point leap in the polls after the first debate is followed by another 6 or 7 point leap after the second, we are looking at history in the making and surely finally the end of first-past-the-post. Some are suggesting that the Lib Dems might not be in any hurry to scrap the system if suddenly they are the beneficiaries. Well at 33% in the polls they are still likely to get only 20% of the seats. Even 40% of the vote might not give them 40% of the seats, so I doubt the Lib Dems would ever be in favour of FPTP.

The political establishment are terrified. The Tory press are running all sorts of smears on Nick Clegg and criticism of Lib Dem policies. They would prefer to ignore the Lib Dems, but now they can't. The Tory press used to say it was wrong to criticise Cameron for being posh, now NIck Clegg's posh background is under attack by the same commentators. They are throwing everything they can to stop 'the Lib Dems going viral'. Unfortunately even the BBC are trying to play down the Lib Dem lead, when if this was Cameron we would hear nothing else. The Volcanic ash story is helping the media do their best to first downplay cleggmania and secondly completely ignore it.

The Lib Dems have overtaken the Tories into first place, if the momentum from the second debate took them to say a 5 point lead or more, even the Tory media would have a job to downplay that. Yet this is well within the realms of possibilities.

It is clear people do want change - but not the sort of change proposed by Cameron and the Tories. There is plenty of 'soft' vote out there. Twice as many registered electors do not vote as vote for the winning party. A huge potential for change should they switch in large numbers to the Lib Dems. Also it is clear that the Lib Dems are pinching votes intially equally from both Tories and Labour. As they take the lead, if Labour voters feel the Lib Dems can stop the Tories more effectively there could be a collapse in Labour support. Voters clearly do not want Gordon Brown, but nor it seems do they want David Cameron either.

The 'core' vote of Labour has in the past been placed around 28% - the percentage it got in 1983 under Michael Foot. The lowest for the Tories was around 30% under William Hague in 2001. But the recent Euro elections had Labour down at 16% and the Tories (even with Cameron riding high) at 29%. It is clear there are plenty of potential switchers about. People have had enough of both Labour and the Tories - most people want neither. Even the Tory scare mongering of a hung parliament is look ing risky when polls say a majority want exactly that. The Tories new ploy is to say vote Clegg get Brown - that is harder for the Lib Dems to bat away and it will be interesting to see how Clegg handles this and the new pressure he is under.

The next debate will be closer and expect the Tory media to do their utmost to call it for Dave. It is on Sky TV so a lot less people will see the debate first hand and more will rely on the Tory media reports afterwards. It will be easier for the Tory media to rig the reaction. Expect some very dodgy polling afterwards - Sky viewers are much more Conservative - ITV reach out to a much wider and non-political background. Also expect the questions to be rigged to help Dave.

After the Telegraph compared Clegg to Churchill, it is almost impossible for him to live up to those expectations - which is probably why the Telegrapg did it. Much harder to explain is the BBC playing along with the Labservative agenda and even the Guardian seems to giving a lot of column inches to Cameron and his propaganda. The Lib Dem lurch could disappear as quickly as it came, the political and media establishment hope it does, but they are terrified that it won't. If we are to get real change, the people have to defy our Tory press. Lets hope they do.

Tory Press Sets Up Cameron Quote For 2nd Debate

The Telegraph is so transparent. The Tory press are panicking with the Lib Dems heading north of 30% and overtaking the Tories in the Polls. The Mail links their Lib Dem lead story straight to a picture and story of Clegg and talk of a Lib Dem donor allegedly convicted of corruption. The Sun are desperate to avoid talking about the Libs, but know they cannot avoid them, so manipulate a poll about their policies.

Place your bets on Cameron coming out with the line 'You are no Winston Churchill' to Clegg. If I was Clegg I would get in their first by saying from the start that the comparison is ridiculous.

Anyway with the Tories back down at the level of support they had under Michael Howard, lets just hope the 'soft' vote stays with the Lib Dems and doesn't return to Cameron. One thing is sure, this is dangerous times for the old Labservative political elites and their media friends. Murdoch will be upset.

The Tories will turn on Cameron with a ferocity if they fail to get their majority and I really hope that is the case. The majority of people do not want the Tories back in power. Both Labour and Tories deserve to be down below 20%, not just below 30%.

Basically anyone but the Tories. If the Lib Dems can get over 100 seats, then a coalition would have to take them seriously. A 'viral' Lib Dems campaign could yet take the Lib Dems into the high 30s or above. The Tory press will do their best to stop this happening. It petrifies them. Anything that petrifies them has to be good. Lets just hope this vote brings a real electoral system and takes us closer to getting real democracy.

The Nick Clegg Phenomenon

What is going on? My last post is now blown out the water. I have no idea what the latest polls will mean to the results. I do know that this could be a defining moment for our electoral system. To have the 3 main parties vying for first place, within a few points of each other and yet having such ridiculous disparities in the seats allocated is going to really show what sort of failed attempt at a democracy we have. The best news is the Tories back in the low thirties. The Mail on Sunday poll showing the Lib Dems in the lead is truly extraordinary. The Tories wish for change. We might actually get real change if people turn their backs on both the Tories and Labour. Incredible.

Lets just hope the Lib Dems can open up a big lead and lets see the Tories and their press friends try to spin that as a success for plastic Cameron. He has come across as a typical posh Tory because that is precisely what he is. Brown is what he is, and everyone knows what I think of him. Go Nicky!

13,000 Votes Is The Magic Number In The Constituencies That Matter

*UPDATE* Since the latest polls showing the Lib Dems over 30%, this post has dated considerably since I wrote it.

In the 1997 general election, 180 seats changed hand. This was by a big margin a post-war record, helped by boundary changes agreed by the Tories in the nineties that propped up their safest seats but helped Labour collect a number of marginals they wouldn't otherwise have won.

This was an inept 'me first' strategy on constituency boundaries from Tory grandees protecting themselves at the cost to the overall party. The Tories changed this to a more 'socialist' strategy in the reviews before this election and this will help them regain some seats.

In total since 1992, the Tories lost 150 seats to Labour and 30 to the Lib Dems. In 2005 they reclaimed 30 seats back from Labour and 5 from the Lib Dems. So, this leaves around 120 Labour held marginals and 25 Lib Dem marginals that are vulnerable and that the Tories need to win nearly all of these back to get a working majority. These seats effectively are the only ones that matter in this election. Indeed the pattern is that over many decades - only 250 seats (out of 650) will EVER change. Effectively voters in 75-80% of seats are irrelevant to the result.

There are a number of patterns to these vulnerable seats. Psephologists refer to most of them as the METTHs - 'Medium English Towns and Their Hinterlands' - the Bolton and Lutons, Burton and Hastings, Brighton and Crewes etc.

Another noticeable factor is the number of votes required to win these seats. Labour won these seats with nigh on 30,000 votes each seat in 1997, since then their winning vote has dropped to about half that, to around 15,000-18.000. The Tory vote has been remarkably consistent, stuck at around 13,000-17,000 since 1997. The polls suggest this vote will rise by little if anything in 2010. Also demographics suggest this to be the case - the Tory vote is largest amongst the over 55s and 3m of these voters have died since 2005. Of the 4 million new voters, the Tories are not attracting enough to compensate. Despite the Ashcroft millions and Tory press and hence the 'never voted Tory' campaign.

So, the bottom line is that - if the Labour vote drops near to or below 13,000, these seats are almost certainly lost. Remember all the seats average around 68,000 electors - there is little variation from this - despite the Tory squeals about the anomaly of the Western Isles and the Isle of Wight - these are unusual seats and only a handful of seats. Of the 68,000 electors about 38,000 still bother to vote in these tightly fought marginals. Lets look at some examples:-

Bolton North East
LAB 17,506
CON 13,034
LIB 6.079
OTH 1225

Bolton West
LAB 18495
CON 13935
LIB 9074
OTH 966

Brighton Pavilion
LAB 15955
CON 10343
GRN 9252
LIB 7070
OTH 1799

Brighton Kemptown
LAB 15266
CON 13151
LIB 6555
OTH 3391

Hove
LAB 16848
CON 16391
LIB 8106
OTH 3645

Hastings & Rye
LAB 18382
CON 17566
LIB 7055
OTH 2367

Obviously interesting things are happening in Brighton Pavilion with the Greens and local factors will make a difference to results that the national press/ pollsters won't pick up on. I suggest any Lab/Tory marginal where Labour enjoy less than a 3,000 majority will be lost - this means the Tories could gain 80-90 or so of the 120 seats, with maybe 5-10 gains from the Lib Dems. The Tory/LIb Dem fight is going to be harder to predict but I think that the Libs could hold most of these (especially since Nick Clegg seems to be doing well in the TV debates).

The polls are pointing towards national vote shares of CON 37%, LAB 31% and LIB 21% (although this could change after Clegg's performance). Ironically of course a vote for the Lib Dems in most of the 150 seats that matter might actually reduce chances of a hung parliament and increase a Tory win.

Anyway, using these poll figures, the direction of travel of Tory and Labour votes in marginals since 1997 (Tory vote static, Labour losing 20% per election), demographics, local council results and some guesswork I predict the following:-

Turnout will remain the same as 2005 - about 27m will vote out of a possible 45m. 2005 figures in brackets:-

Tories 10m (8.8m) votes - 310 seats
Labour 8.4m (9.6m) votes - 240 seats
LibDem 5.7m (6.0m) votes - 60 seats
UKIP 1.1m (0.6m) votes - 0 seats
Green 0.5m (0.3m) - 1 seat
Others 1.8m (1.8m)- 39 seats

This will leave the Tories 20 or so short of a majority.

So, 13,000 votes is the magic number in a marginal, it seems 10m votes (or just 22% of electorate) is the magic number to get close to a majority of seats (Labour managed it with 9.6m in 2005)

As we can see from the above seat numbers - any talk of a Lib/Lab government is fantasy as they will not have enough seats between them to form a government. Only a Lib/Tory government or a Tory government is possible on current poll numbers.

Locally I predict the following:-

Brighton Pavilion
Green 14,000
Tory 11,000
Lab 10,500
Lib 3,000

Hove
Tory 16,000
Lab 13,000
Grn 7,000
Lib 6,000

Brighton Kemptown
Tory 13,500
Lab 11,000
Grn 8,000
Lib 5,000

Tories Unveil Campaign Song.

David Cameron's policies really add up in this world. Good also to see Nadine Dorries getting a star role. The Tories have done well finding 6 people who will vote Tory who never did before.

Here They Are 'The Top 150' - The Only Seats That Matter

Ok, maybe not all, but barring major upsets in a few seats, these are the only ones that might change and therefore the only ones to have an impact on the result of the general election of 6 May 2010.

Out of the 650 constituencies only these 150 might change hands. This is a major boundary change election which always elicits the biggest movement of seats - the last one was in 1997 and there were 180 gain/losses then.

That is the post-war record - so nearly 80% of seats are pretty much always safe. Welcome to the world of first-past-the-post, it may be a universal franchise but it is not universally an 'equal' franchise and hence it is still far short of being a truly democratic way of choosing a government.

The Tories need to gain around 120 seats to get a majority - a tall order, but a lead nearing 10 points should be enough for that. They are unlikely to lose any seats to Labour and probably not to any other party either although I won't rule out the odd loss to the Lib Dems. So therefore we need not look at any of their current seats - they are effectively safe. The reason for this is that the Tory vote nationally will likely increase by at least 4% - from 33% to 37% or more. More crucially the Labour vote is looking like dropping at least 3% from 35% to 32% or less. The Lib Dem vote may also drop by 2% or more but they may yet avoid that. The Tories are doing better in the marginals - whether that has anything to do with Lord Ashcroft money who knows.

Note - these are percentage movements not necessarily movement in absolute number of votes. Labour 'won' last time with 9.5m votes (out of 45m possible), the crucial figures for the Tories are whether they can beat the 9.6m votes they got in 1997. Remember 1997 was the year the Tories were thrashed, now the same number of votes might put them back in government with a majority. I think this demonstrates how little enthusiasm there is for any of the parties. The Tory press may have succeeded in turning us off Labour (with a lot of help from Labour themselves admittedly) but too many people remember the Tories from last time, to ever go back to voting for them.

It is the Labour-Tory marginals where most changes will occur - the Tories will be looking for a minimum of 100-110 gains here, with the other 10 to 20 or so gains coming from the Lib Dems. The Lib Dems will look to stem their losses to the Tories by picking up 5-10 seats from Labour.

This is my prediction in the Labour-Tory marginals:-

The following 78 seats, have already been lost to the Tories because I think that any Labour majority of less than 3,000 is going to be very difficult to hold on to:-

SOUTH/SOUTH EAST(-9):- Portsmouth.N, Reading.W, Crawley, Hove, Hastings.R, Dartford, B.Kemptown, Chatham, Dover
SOUTH WEST(-2): Dorset S, Plymouth.D
S. LONDON(-5):- Croydon.C, Battersea, Ealing.C, Brentford, Eltham
N. LONDON(-4):- Harrow.E, Westminster.N, Hendon, Poplar-Limehouse
WEST(-7):- Somerset.NE, Stroud, Swindon.S, Swindon.N, Bristol.NW, Gloucester, Kingswood
ESSEX(-6):- Basildon.S, Harlow, Milton-Keynes.S, Milton-Keynes.N, Watford, Stevenage
E.ANGLIA(-4):- Corby, Northampton.S, Great-Yarmouth, Northampton.N
WALES(-4): Cardiff.N, Aberconwy, V.Glamorgan, Carmarthen.W
SEVERN(-7):- Chester.C, Stafford, Redditch, Burton, Tamworth, Worcester, Warrington.S
E.MIDS(-6):- Loughborough, Broxtowe, Derbys.S, High-Peak, Gedling, Leics.NW
W.MIDS(-6):- Stourbridge, B.Edgbaston, Wolverhampton.SW, Halesowen.RR, Dudley.S, Dudley.N
HUMBERSIDE(-3):- Cleethorpes, Lincoln, Brigg-Goole
YORKS(-6):- Calder.V, Colne.V, Bradford.W, Halifax, Elmet-Rothwell, Keighley
G.MANCHESTER(-2):- Bury.N, Bolton.W
LANCS(-6):- Pendle, Sefton.C, Blackpool.NC, Ribble.S, Rossendale-Darwen, Wirral.S
NORTH(-1):- Copeland
SCOTLAND(0):-

The following 22 seats could go either way:-
SOUTH/SOUTH EAST (0):
SOUTH WEST (0):
S. LONDON:
N. LONDON
WEST
ESSEX
E.ANGLIA
WALES
E.MIDS
W.MIDS
HUMBERSIDE
YORKS
G.MANCHESTER
LANCS
NORTH
SCOTLAND