Today wasn’t supposed to like this. The Tories and the Lib Dems were supposed to have reached an agreement by now, shaken hands in front of the cameras and we were going to be moving on. The national interest and economic stability was going to be put first.

Instead, the negotiations have gone public. Labour’s deal – a bill to make AV the voting system immediately, without a referendum (assuming they can get it past the commons) has been made public. Brown has stepped down. Labour are doing everything they can to keep the dream of the Rainbow Coalition together. The Lib Dems, on the other hand, have sniffed at the offer from the Tories: A referendum on AV for the British People, and we now know it’s their final offer.

That’s it then. All we can do is wait. But suddenly it feels like the Lib/Con deal is off and the Lib/Lab deal is on, and I’ve completely lost my ability to look at this objectively. Lib Dem activists on Twitter are saying:

Apparently Tories have offered Lib Dems a referendum on Alternative Vote, final offer. Surely, surely, they can’t say yes? (@alexfoster)

@CharlotteGore If that’s their final offer, fuck ‘em, frankly. (@stealthmunchkin)

I’ve just finished on the phone with a Lib Dem that I know that works in a Constituency office. He says at least 3 people will tear up their membership cards if there’s a deal with the Tories. The grassroot Lib Dems are as thrilled with the idea of a coalition as the Tories, and in their contempt for each other we may well yet see tribal party politics prevail.

It’s all getting a bit horrible out there. The hope of a non-partisan Government that puts dealing with the deficit first is a very, very tough thing to just let go of just like that.

The Lib Dem’s dilemma is still an impossible one, but looking from the outside I still have to hope and believe it’s possible for them to do the right thing.

It’s one thing to accept, intellectually, that Labour is capable of winning itself a fourth term. It’s quite another to worry that they might.

Which brings me to today. For the first time I had that same sorry sinking feeling I had when it became obvious that Bush might secure himself a second term.

It’s about imagining the television coverage of the election as the seats come in and the BBC saying, “Well, if Labour are going to win then this seat is exactly the sort of seat they need to hold onto isn’t it?” and the reporter on location says, “Indeed. There’s going to be some smiling faces in Millbank tonight. This seat was crucial for them, and… yes… the Tories are looking very glum here, John.”

In 2004 you had the macho man-with-a-plan Bush junior versus the effete well-its-complicated-really Kerry. Despite the strength of feeling against Bush, the Democratic Party found itself unable to ‘leverage’ it – Kerry was a profoundly charmless character. He was an empty vessel on which to hang anti-Bush sentiment. It’s hard to believe there was a doubt about how that election would turn out – hindsight is a wonderful and terrible thing.

No two elections are alike, of course, and American politics cannot be compared with British politics in any serious way – but I’m starting to wonder just how many people want Cameron? Is there a chance that he could be the Kerry of British Politics – utterly failing to capitalise on an utterly hated incumbent?

My preference for a Tory Government over a 4th Labour terms is a reluctant one – but it’s inspired by the idea that if Labour are rewarded for all they’ve done with another term, they’ll have no hesitation in giving us more of the same – and, in fact, be emboldened to go further.

It’s the little things, of course – the attempts to subvert the Data Protection act, the attempts to rig in the internet in favour of the movie studios, the 90 days detention… but most people don’t give a toss about any of that.

Then there’s the economy – an enormous enlargement of the public sector and regulation on the private sector at the same time as a huge enlargement of debt. No-one seems able to explain convincingly why Britain will avoid the same fate as Japan – who, having hit zero percent interest rates engaged in massive public works with borrowed money… and then spend the next decade without growth because of the burden of that debt.

But most people don’t give a toss about that either. They just want to see the bankers spanked.

And that’s the people who care, obviously, the ones who care enough to have gone looking for answers to the question, “what’s wrong with this country?” – and often fallen foul of theatrical misdirection, showmanship and propaganda. The problem is Global Warming! The problem is dirty businessmen! It’s all the fault of immigrants! Hey man, look at the shiny. See the shiny thing? Look at the shiny thing. Look at it. You want the shiny thing, don’t you? Follow the shiny… follow it… that’s right, follow the shiny…. and you didn’t notice I just stole your watch, did you? No? Wonderful.

And the Tories? Well their answer to the problem, “what’s wrong with this country?” is to point over the benches at Labour. Labour is the problem.

Technically it’s probably true – but guys… seriously? It’s not good enough. It’s like saying ‘the management’ is what’s wrong with a company. Sure, it might be true, but not helpful in figuring out what needs to be done.

The closer to a General Election we get without any serious or interesting policies from the Tories, the more Brown’s accusations that Cameron is a vapid, empty shell begins to stick. They’ve been saying it for years now and, I think, people are starting to believe it. Some will believe anything if you say it often enough. Hell, maybe Brown really is just getting on with the job?

Away from the exciting and interesting world of online Grassroots Tory activism there’s a party facing the public that seems to be determined to feel like having dinner round Nana’s place. Tory Totty and Cameron Cuties ain’t going to win you an election. Not this election.

It’s hard to measure how elated I feel.

A rabble rousing propaganda piece – deployed to great effect in mentally numbing the drones at the Labour Conference – has been chosen as Labour’s new Party Political Broadcast. This news has been met with cheers of delight by all sections of the political bubblesphere.

The video is called, “Against the Odds” and recounts the heroic struggle against reality by Labour over the last 100 years – a battle, it seems, they’ve won. Epic won.

See, Labour’s spent the first ten years of their current period in office waiting for Gordon Brown to take over so they could do some ‘real’ Labour stuff. They knew, or at least believed, that by keeping to the moderate, centre ground (or, “keeping the fucking beardy weirdies off the telly”) they could stay in power. While they weren’t getting everything they wanted it was still better than the Tories.

Now, with their doom inevitable, Labour are now beginning to reflect on their time in office with a sort of dewy eyed nostalgia. It’s been a triumph, a golden era – we are, it seems, extremely lucky to have had them.

Do you see the problem, though? During Blair they bemoaned the lack of progress. Now, with Brown, they’re celebrating all the progress they made.

So the decision to use this video is a significant one. It’s not aimed at Liberal Democrat voters, or Conservative voters, or SNP voters, or Plaid voters, or swing voters or undecided voters. They’re trying to prevent Labour voters dragging the Government down in their suicidal malaise. They’re trying to motivate the core, the True Believers.

The language is that of war – the constant repetition of the word, “fight” and “fighters”. They’re fighting us. They’re fighting you. They’re fighting me. This is a war and they’re motivating their troops to do battle against Labour’s enemies. This sort of rhetoric does for Labour what Sarah Palin did for the Republicans -sending everyone else screaming and running in the opposite direction.

It’s nauseating, profoundly partisan stuff. There’s a schmaltzy Sean Bean-a-like narration invoking the old Hovis advert vision of a simple and pleasantly prolitarian Britain filled with ordinary, common working folk that need to… er…  fight against our enemies and the system that denies us what we deserve, Comrades! Swing voters, beware.

What effect will this Party Political Broadcast have? Absolutely none, obviously – no-one watches the bloody things anyway. It apparently reduces certain Labour activists to tears. For hardened, embittered cynics like me, Against All Odds reduces me to tears of laughter – it begs – no, it demands mockery, it demands parody.

What else could I do? Cue several hours of relentless mockery in one of Labour’s little corners of Twitter. Their celebration of Labour’s triumphs became a hotbed of ego deflating irony and sarcasm:

The Labour Party also abolished slavery, put a man on the moon, started the Enlightenment and – AND – killed Hitler.

Mr Kipling’s exceedingly good cake recipes were stolen from Ramsey MacDonald.

Gordon Brown was immaculately concieved by himself. He *is* the Manse!

We had fun with this one. It went on and on, lots of people got involved and came up with their own brilliant little gems.

As long as Labour’s only strategy for winning back the hearts and minds of the British people is boasting and bragging about their achievements, I think it’s safe to say that this sort of irreverent mockery is how the rest of us can stay sane.

UPDATE: Sara Bedford has done a wonderful fisk of this video here. Highly recommended.

I continue to be amazed that Labour’s own internal financial problems haven’t been a bigger issue.

The issue is one that goes to the heart of their integrity, competence and fitness to Govern.

A pet theory of mine, as yet untested, is that the way parties run themselves internally is probably one of the best indicators we have about what a Government run by that party will be like. I base this on the idea that parties can run their parties however they like so, in effect, it exposes how they view authority, organisation, hierarchy, democracy etc. In addition we can see how they manage their communications, how they manage their own internal processes in drawing up policies, making announcements and finally – and crucially – we can see how they run their finances.

Is it reasonable to believe that an undemocratic, highly centralised, tightly disciplined party with strict processes and chains of command and rules about what people can and can’t say to whom would somehow then produce a decentralised, open, democratic government that values civil liberties? The very idea seems absurd, and in practice – in reality – Labour’s approach to Government appears to mirror their approach to their own internal organisation.

More relevant and important – can you believe that a party with a well documented “spend now, worry later – nothing must get in the way of winning” reckless, scorched earth attitude to funding election campaigns, landing them in serious debt would run the public finances with prudence, care and diligence?

Time has told on this one – Labour have run the public finances with the same ‘whatever it takes to win’ attitude, and has left our public finances mirroring their own.

The Times today runs a story that alleges Ray Collins, Labour’s General Secretary, has attempted to seize assets held by local branches of Labour – not to repay the debts they have, but to be able to borrow more against them. A very ‘Labour’ solution to the problem of impending financial (and electoral) doom. The NEC have stopped this – they fear that if they begin securing more borrowing against all the assets Labour has, they stand to lose absolutely everything.

It is desperate, humiliating stuff.