Instead of the second Leaders' Debate that has sent even more people into a catatonic trance we could have had the election yesterday (well, it was Thursday, after all). There will be nothing new or interesting said by any candidate from any party, big or small, between now and May 6. There will certainly be nothing said by any of the main three parties that could even begin to change anybody's mind about the way they intend to vote. They have nothing to say and neither do their acolytes in the media or the blogosphere.
This morning brought me the leaflet of my local UKIP candidate who informed me that it is the only party to vote for because Brussels now decides on our train timetables (a statement that falls considerably short of the truth) and the world has gone mad, which may well be true but remains irrelevant to my voting intentions.
That is, however, of little importance, compared to the idiocy that is being spouted by the various geeks and so-called analysts. I do not think I have lived through an election that has been so little discussed outside the circle of politicians and their hangers-on. In all this time I have overheard just one discussion about what is happening and a few people, knowing that I, too, am a kind of a political geek, have made polite comments to me. Most of those comments seem to have consisted of the fact that they are bored by the whole thing or, as one young lady put it, supremely unenthused.
The more people switch off the process, the more hysterical the media, old and new, gets. According to some, yesterday's uninteresting and unilluminating debate was the most important political event of modern history. There seems to be some division of opinion about who came out best, in itself a sign that there is not a great deal to choose between the three.
Interestingly, the Conservatives, having spent the last few years trying to lassoo the Guardianista vote, are repeating their manoeuvre of last June's European elections that turned out to be completely unsuccessful. It has dawned on them again that there is a large eurosceptic vote out there, which may not go their way. They must try to capture it and, undoubtedly, they will be using Daniel Hannan MEP in their attempts to do so.
At present, their great tactic is to inform us all that in Brussels they are salivating at the thought of Nick Clegg winning as he is one of "them". The truth is, of course, that in Brussels they do not care who will win as nothing much will change.
Ah but David Cameron, as Tim Montgomerie informed us yesterday [scroll down to 8.14 pm], "is the only Eurosceptic in this debate". The other two are defending the EU. And Mr Cameron is saying what? Well, apparently, we want to be in Europe but not run by Europe. That is Eurosceptic? Mr Montgomerie, who was once a star member of Better Off Out, is easily pleased.
I do not think this will work. It didn't last June and it will not now, despite the dynamic of a general election being different from that of the European one. There will be some people who are so anxious to get rid of Brown and his dysfunctional government that they will hold their noses, grit their teeth and put a cross against the Conservative candidate's name. But I do not think that will apply to people who are even half-way knowledgeable about the EU and Britain's membership in it (an ever larger group of people). They are not likely to be taken in by the Boy-King's indignation about Labour and the Lib-Dims depriving the people of Britain of the possibility of voting about the
So do I really care who wins on May 6. My American friend keep asking me that and the answer has to be not really as it will make precious little difference. A hung Parliament sounds like a good idea because the thought of Ministers having to negotiate in order to legislate and MPs actually doing some work and reading those Bills they usually nod through is an appealing thought. Some people say that a hanged Parliament is an even more appealing thought but I couldn't possibly comment.
The worst possible scenario would be the Conservatives losing because of votes going to the Lib-Dims. That may sound like a good plan to people who hate the Boy-King and all that he stands for but a little thought would make it clear that if the Lib-Dims do well, the chances of a new Conservative Party that actually deserves its name arising from the blood-bath that will follow a defeat, will be slim. The Cameroonies will declare triumphantly that the party lost because the project had not gone far enough and the party will not be able to respond. Cameron might even survive.
A Conservative defeat with no clear majority going to anybody because of votes going to UKIP (despite the silliness of some of their candidates) would produce a better result in the long run. In the short run, of course, none of it matters. Only two more weeks to go and I can spend that time concentrating on real politics.