For what it’s worth my hunch is that we are looking at a Tory / Lib Dem coalition with a class war programme after the election. Polling evidence on this site seems to favour a Labour / Lib Dem coalition with a slightly less vicious class war agenda. Here are Alan Thornett’s reflections on the current situation

The first two TV leadership debates — which were unprecedented 90 minute slots of primetime TV with a huge audience — have produced an earthquake in the election campaign. The Lib Dems surged by 14 points in the polls after the first debate and became the front runner in a Westminster election for the first time in living memory. They scored heavily amongst young people and attracted people from across the political spectrum. After the first debate there was a surge in electoral registrations.

If the Lib Dem rise in the polls holds we will have gone from a position where the most likely result was a narrow Tory win (six months ago it looked like a Tory landslide) to a situation where anything can happen — and a hung Parliament the most likely outcome. Not only have the wheels come off the Tory campaign but the corrupt two party system on which the whole edifice of Westminster politics rests has been called into question — if only by the prospect of a three party system.

After the first debate the Tories and the Tory press heavily targeted Clegg and the Lib Dems but with limited success. Although the polls narrowed after the second debate the Lib Dems were still in front with Labour trailing. The nightmare now for the Tories, however, is that the Lib Dem lead might well consolidate or could even strengthen as people see it as a means of putting the boot into Labour and the Tories — though in practice this might hurt the Tories more.

In my estimation Brown had the edge in both debates (within his own terms of course) particularly on the economy, and in spite of his appalling position on Iraq and Afghanistan, though this was clearly not the general perception. This would means that he has the potential, with next weeks debate centring on the economy, to improve his position.

What remains, however, is extreme volatility and there appears to be two main reasons for it. The first is the long-term de-politicisation of politics which has reduced the ideological commitment to the establishment parties and built volatility into the system. The second is the deep resentment at the corruption in Parliament which has not subsided and which been waiting to find a way of expressing itself. Clegg has been perceived as a non-establishment politician, though he is nothing of the sort of course, and has therefore become the vehicle for the protest vote, with little regard to the policies the Lib Dems are putting forward.

This has been helped by the fact that the Tory campaign has been shot through with glaring contradictions from the outset — particularly on the economy. They went into the campaign saying that they would make the biggest cuts in the fastest time (never a great election winner) and then switched to attacking Labour’s NI rise, trying to give the impression that their main concern was to protect jobs.

The Lib Dems do have a few radical policies which can attract votes in themselves. Raising the income tax threshold to £10,000 is one, which would help a lot of low-paid workers and cancelling Trident is another. They would keep Britain’s nuclear capacity, of course, but cancelling Trident is clearly outside of establishment policy. They have something better to say than Labour or the Tories on the invasion of Iraq and are in favour of some kind of amnesty for illegal migrants after 10 years — which is better than the Tory cap or the Labour points system. They are indistinguishable from New Labour, however, when it comes to cuts, privatisation and the war in Afghanistan. And they have policies, such as on the EU, which most of their potential new voters would probably disagree with.

From the point of view of politicising the election and opening up the campaign we should welcome these leadership debates. They are deeply undemocratic, however, in the way they exclude the small and smaller parties. They have helped — along with the 24 hour media — to produce the most TV dominated election campaign ever and with only three political parties involved in it. The printed media, including the Murdoch press, has also been consigned to the sidelines with less influence in the election than ever before.

All this creates a big problem for the small parties. Once the polls narrowed at the beginning of the year there was always going to be a squeeze on the small parties as it became a close contest between Tories and Labour. This has been compounded by the leadership debates and the TV impact. It is a factor which will affect the right as well as the left in this election, taking votes from UKIP and the BNP. This does not make the BNP any less dangerous but it could reduce their votes in this election to some extent. UKIP are more vulnerable because their vote is softer than that of the BNP.

The left, however, is more vulnerable than the right in this situation. Even the Greens — the left party with the strongest profile — are finding it difficult to break through this. The socialist left, which entered the election from a weak and fragmented position, also has a problem. Only Respect has a chance of winning Westminster seats and maybe it still can — it has strong campaigns in Birmingham and East London — but it is harder now than at the start of the campaign. TUSC has been unable to make any impact whatsoever at national level and will struggle to do so before polling day — though some of the local TUSC campaigns may manage to make a better impact.

One thing the election result could well do is expose the grossly undemocratic nature of the electoral system. The Tories new slogan of ‘Vote Clegg and Get Brown’ exposes this problem. Labour could well get the highest number of seats and be in a position to form a government having come second or even third in their share of the vote. The result could well be a constitutional crisis which could provide the opportunity for a battle around electoral reform.

Meanwhile it is imperative that the left — across the board — steps up its campaigning and fights for the best possible result in what is still clearly (or even more) a watershed election. The prospect of a hung Parliament or very small Government majorities puts a further premium on those left of Labour candidates who are in with a chance of winning such as Salma Yaqoob, Abjol Miah and George Galloway of Respect or Caroline Lucas of the Green Party.