Gordon Brown's supporters have been talking up what, accorduing to them is the Prime Minister's great strength - his years of experience in running the economy. Now there are many holes in this stategy, but there is one which immediately springs to my mind. Isn't it a sad indictment of the Prime Minister and his accolytes, that it requires the worst financial crisis since the Wall Street Crash in order to give a boost to his prospects for survival?
Looking at things from another perspective, the current leadership crisis in the Labour Party also paints a depressing picture for people like me of a party which has allowed itself to be dominated for far too long by two political giants (Blair and Brown). Discovering that Gordon Brown is ill-suited to be Prime Minister is particularly galling because the party has become so emasculated under the influence of the New Labour duocracy of Blair and Brown that there are no heavyweights remaining to challenge the Prime Minister and there is no clear groundswell of support amongst the membership for an alternative vision, or even the same message, presented in a manner which inspires confidence. Not only is there not a clear challenger (unlike in 1994, when Blair was the clear favourite), but neither is there a credible alternative vision to the big business-friendly, timid, cautious on the environement, pro-Establishment technocratic style of governance which Brown seems to have perfected and that voters seem to have shunned.
I wish there was. And so, I suspect, does the public.