Day 1: The day on which Nick Clegg claimed that "it's not a two horse race", and David Cameron forgot about the homosexuals

Tuesday started, unsurprisingly, with Brown and his cabinet lining up in Downing Street to announce what he described as "the worst kept secret of recent years" - the date of the 2010 General Election. We have now been plunged into election frenzy; every news programme has been dominated by political hype. We have even been presented with a live text feed on the BBC website detailing the every move of every one of our prospective Prime Ministers and Cabinet members as they go about their campaigning. This truly is an election in which the Internet will make a difference - if Cameron, Brown or any of their frontbenchers make a gaffe, the world will know within seconds.

Talking of gaffes, "Call me Dave" supposedly made one this morning when he failed to mention gays in a speech; as he speaks without notes, even I, as one of the first to criticise the Tories normally, feel that reading too much into his omission of two words - "gay, straight" - is potentially going overboard. In fact, he did not mention "young" and "old" either, despite this being in the original text - but he has not been jumped on for this. In saying what he did about B&B owners and their right to turn away gay couples, Chris Grayling has caused serious issues for his party leader as the collective eyes of the UK's media are now watching Cameron for any indication that he might give of not being committed to gay rights.

Whilst I certainly have doubts over Cameron's true opinion of homosexuals, I don't think he would have deliberately missed them out after the events of recent days - in fact, he is probably now kicking himself for having done so. In all, since their allegiance with anti-gay parties in Europe, the Tories popularity amongst the gay community has halved from 40% to 20%, according to a survey by website PinkNews.co.uk. Whilst in opposition, the Tories found it easy to shout about their credentials on equality and gay rights; once they found themselves in a perpetual election campaign, they went surprisingly quiet - perhaps in an attempt not to lose their former core voters to minority parties such as the BNP. And now, with Grayling claiming that B&B owners should be allowed to turn away gays, Cameron fluffing up a Gay Times interview and now omitting them altogether from a speech, the Tories have undone much of the good work they had done to turn themselves into the party of equality.

In other electoral news, Nick Clegg (leader of the REAL party of equality) unsurprisingly said "it's not a two-horse race"; although he really does have to make this claim to justify his existence as party leader, he does have a point. I would not go so far as to claim it is a straight three-horse race - it would have been at one point but funnily enough Mr Brown chose not to call the election when even the Lib Dems were challenging him in the polls. However, as Brown and Cameron limp towards the finish line, they may find their "horses" unable to reach the finish line, and it is here when Clegg may find himself with a decision which will change the whole future of our country: to enter coalition, or not to enter coalition. I await with bated breath.

So, the election campaign begins...as if it hadn't already

It's been widely reported this evening that Gordon Brown will officially announce the election for May 6th during tomorrow. I was amused by one newscaster who claimed that "the parties will begin their campaigns" after said announcement. Good Lord, I thought, So what it is it they have been doing all this time? Pre-campaigning, perhaps? In truth, politics is one long campaign, is it not? After all, the primary aim of any political party is to form a government, and I think it's safe to say that "Dave" Cameron did not go into politics to be Leader of the Opposition.

The election is essentially a choice between Labour and "Dave", in other words, a metaphorical rock and hard place. There is really very little to choose between the two parties apart from some minor detail in policy and posturing - it seems likely that the Tories will promote their leader and push their chancellor into the background, whereas Labour will, if they have any sense, do something akin to the opposite. Whatever happens, we are set for a month of even more heightened political speculation, spin and swagger than usual, and in Westminster that is saying a lot.

Although, as the title of this blog might have already given away, I would dearly love to see a Lib Dem government (even in coalition), I realise it's nigh on impossible; even to a staunch liberal such as I, "Nick Clegg PM" is not exactly an appealing prospect. It is Vince Cable I would prefer to see in a Cabinet role; call it bizarre if you like but I simply cannot fathom why anyone would prefer to have a person educated in Modern History (Osborne) or Law (Darling) running their economy over one with a doctorate in Economics (the aforementioned Cable). The recent Chancellors Debate broadcast on Channel 4 showed just how much more competent Cable appears than his rivals - even if Clegg cannot say the same about himself.

Therefore, as a not-quite-independent observer but certainly one whose party will not win the election for itself but for a coalition partner, it will be interesting to watch the progression of the campaigns. I do not claim to be impartial - I am certainly more of a Labour voter than a Tory, if one can be partially either thing - but as it is essentially the Tories' to lose I am starting from my usual position of abject despondency. If I expect the Conservatives to win, I cannot be disappointed. After all, in the words of a certain election campaign past, "Things can only get better".