Is Cameron refusing the poisoned chalice?

There is an alternative explanation for Cameron's unwillingness to offer a credible alternative to the socialist parties: he actually wants to lose this election.

According to The Times,

Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, has privately warned that whichever leader wins the election next week will be kicked out of power for decades because of the severity of budget cuts they will have to instigate, it was claimed today.

I'm not sure I buy this. Margaret Thatcher was widely despised for the tough action she took to turn the UK economy around, but it didn't stop her from winning her third election in 1987 with 42.2% of the popular vote. In Canada, Jean Chrétien took similarly drastic action and was likewise rewarded by three terms in government and overwhelming popular support.

Of course, it may be that our situation is worse than those faced by Thatcher and Chrétien. Equally, modern Britons are less acquainted with austerity, so are much more likely to resent it. A whole generation has grown up with instant gratification, and faith in the State as a benevolent and reliable provider. Finally, the resentment will be more acute because our politicians have done so little to prepare the public for the cuts ahead. All have underplayed the problems facing our country, and none could be said to have a mandate for cuts.

Interesting times ahead.