Alex Massie

Whither Scotland? Well, apart from Labour regaining the two seats it lost in by-elections not a single seat changed hands north of the border. Indeed there was a swing to Labour and I suspect that Brown and Jim Murphy won votes when they warned that a vote for anyone else was a de facto vote for the Conservatives. Such is life and it's remarkable how these ancient ghosts still retain the ability to spook the populace. So why should Cameron speak to Salmond? Well, because he should be able to get the SNP to at least abstain on a putative Tory budget. Cameron has already said that the Scottish government's grant will not be addressed this year (because the budget has already been agreed and passed) and that's a decent starting point for talks.

There's been a sad lack of country music in these parts lately. But now that the campaigning is done, it's time to make amends for that. So here's a country playlist for the election. Like you know, if country music can't explain something most likely it ain't worth explaining... Porter Wagoner and Dolly Parton offer a succinct (if partisan and less than generous) summary of Britain's journey from 1997 to 2010: Holdin' On To Nothin'. Non-Labour voters (and disappointed Labour members) suspect Gordon Brown should be singing: Pretend I Never Happened by Waylon Jennings. On the other hand, Gordon takes his text from Emmylou Harris and Calling My Children Home. Then again, all the pols seem utterly familiar with the Louvin Brothers' and If I Could Only Win Your Love.

Pete asks whether Labour's tactical voting ploy can work. My suspicion is that it cannot and will not. This is not 1997. There is all the difference in the world between voting tactically against a government and voting tactically against the idea of a government that may otherwise come to power. More generally, the advice from Ed Balls and the others that tactical voting is the smart thing to do is an admission that Labour no longer believes it can win. Given the state of the polls that' hardly a startling conclusion but the problem, from Labour's perspective, with conceding it publicly is that it cannot possibly motivate Labour voters to get to the polls. Quite the reverse in fact. The message "Abandon Ship! Save Yourselves!" is no way for the party to hold its nerve.

My thanks to John O'Sullivan for his response to my post on Friday. A post that was so "well hidden" (as he puts it) that it was the top post for four hours and on my blog's front-page all weekend. I'm grateful too that he sees fit to remind me that the current electoral set-up gives Labour a considerable advantage. I wish someone had pointed that out sooner. Just to re-cap: Mr O'Sulivan thinks that the biggest question of this campaign is why the Tories aren't winning by more. To which I'd say that actually they are winning but that there are a number of other factors that prevent us from seeing this clearly. If Cameron beats Brown by seven points in the popular vote he will have beaten Labour by the same margin that Mrs Thatcher prevailed by in 1979.

Earlier today I took issue with John O'Sullivan's take on this election but do not let it be said that his views are the only odd ones available at National Review. Here's Dennis Boyles: I'm sure all good Tories wish Cameron well. But one could argue that a Cameron win might be the worst of all outcomes for the Tories. Call it the sorrow of granted wishes, but if he wins, the Conservatives will run on visionless, unimaginative, timid platforms for years. [...]As I said, party partisans surely would never wish it — and after this last week, it's a very unlikely outcome, anyway — but I ask Jack and Andrew, is it not possible that the best result for Conservatives next Thursday is a narrow Brown win, with Clegg finishing third?

This was hardly a vintage debate even if it is increasingly clear that these men have little regard for one another and that both Cameron and, especially, Brown are irritated by Nick Clegg's stickability. This was actually Clegg's weakest performance. After a good start and the best of the opening statements, Clegg's performance was less focused, less detailed, less persuasive any time he moved away from the Lib Dems' flagship proposal to raise the income tax threshold to £10,000. That may not matter much since this policy has the great advantage of being popular and easy to understand. Elsewhere, Clegg retreated to a cheap populism on bankers bonuses and the like that didn't persuade me of his seriousness even if I suspect it probably pleased many viewers.