This snap was taken by someone in Newcastle. It's not a bit of photoshop wizardry, it's genuine grafitti, I'm told.

Other than that, I'm lost for words...

Here's another Twitter election story.

Former Labour MP Kerry McCarthy has Tweeted something this afternoon that could get her into a wee bit of trouble.

The Labour Twitter Czar, who is the candidate for Bristol East, revealed the contents of some postal votes opened in her seat, listing the numbers for each party garnered from a "sample".

I won't repeat the figures (I've censored with an X) because I'm sure there is a legal issue here, but she Tweeted:

“First PVs opened in east Bristol, our sample: Eng Dems X; Greens X; UKIP X; TUSC X; BNP X; Lib Dem X; Tory X; Labour X.” 

(Her message was sent out on Thu, Apr 29th 2010, 14:36)

The Tweet has since been deleted.

She then Tweeted:

"On reflection, I've deleted. It's not counting, just random exercise."

She then later warned other Tweeters not to "compound the error" "My mistake - hands up! But you can't do it either."

"Thoughtlessness!"

I have checked this with the Electoral Commission and they tell me that under the Representation of the People's Act, Section 66, their guidance is as follows:

"Anyone attending the opening of postal votes...is not  permitted to to reveal any information regarding the votes cast on any particular ballot paper and must retain the secrecy of voting."

A spokeswoman for the Electoral Commission told me that the issue would now centre on what Ms McCarthy meant by "a sample". "That would be a matter for the police, if a request was made to them," she said.

Ever since his insult-the-voter masterpiece yesterday, the PM has been saying that he "misunderstood" what the doughty Mrs Duffy said about immigration.

To most of us, hearing their exchanges, there was absolutely nothing to misunderstand.

"You can't say anything about immigrants because they're saying that you're...but all these eastern Europeans what are coming in, where are they flocking from?"

Now, if you were being charitable to the PM, you'd say he may have not been listening properly, just heard the word "immigrants" and tuned out. Not paying full attention to a lifelong Labour voter is pretty unforgiveable politically, but could have given him kind of limp excuse.

Except that it is clear from the videotape that he hadn't tuned out. Brown went on to use his argument about Brits emigrating, after all.

So there is another explanation that is currently doing the rounds. I know this may sound unbelievable but I pass it on nevertheless: that Brown "misheard" the word "flocking" and thought she had said "where are they f*cking from? This, the theory goes, would explain his anger.

Hmmm. Not so sure myself.

Then again, just imagine how much worse this whole row would have been (and that's a heck of a thought experiment, I know) if Brown had said Mrs Duffy was "racist" rather than "bigoted".

The r-word is much, much more toxic. In fact, it's clear from Mrs Duffy's words that she herself stopped short of using it. She was clearly going to say: "You can't say anything about immigrants because they're saying that you're racist if you do".

On the subject of "mishearing", a Labour councillor in Rochdale is actually now saying that 90 per cent of locals he's talked to don't even know what "bigoted" means. He says they thought Brown had said Mrs Duffy was "a sort of bigheaded woman".

Double hmmm.

So, Bank of England Governor Mervyn King is reported to have warned that whoever wins on May 6 will have to make such unpopular cuts that they could be out of power for a generation.

At least that's the account of US economist David Hale, according to Reuters.

“I saw the governor of the Bank of England (Mervyn King) last week when I was in London and he told me whoever wins this election will be out of power for a whole generation because of how tough the fiscal austerity will have to be."

The Bank is refusing to comment but sources say that King and Hale met in March, rather than last week. Still, assuming Hale's words are roughly accurate, is King's analysis right?

Any government that carried out the FT deficit-buster list of cuts - cuts in public sector pay, axeing of free TV licences for the elderly etc - could indeed face strikes and anger, particularly if those cuts were not made clear before an election.

My guess is that George Osborne will actually do some things that won't necessarily cause riots in the streets, but could still add up to big ticket items.

One of the simplest moves would be to increase the pension age even further - having already talked about increasing it from 65 to 66, why not 67 or even 68? At a stroke that would save billions, recognise the reality of people working longer and grasp the nettle of our ageing society. This could be sweetened with tax breaks for those in work.

Similarly, postponing big public infrastructure projects is sure to prove tempting, as well as further job cuts in the public sector.

Merv may be right that all of this could prove too unpopular for words. Yet talk of putting parties out of power for a "generation" sounds like uncharacteristic hyperbole from the Governor.

UPDATE: The Tory plan affects men from 2016 and women from 2020. The timetable for going "further" on cutting the deficit is before 2018, so women's retirement won't help them. However, if you brought forward the retirement age change to 2016 or earlier for both sexes, that could yield extra savings. Will the Conservatives have the nerve to do that though?

Anyone who knows me knows that I'm not a Waugh as in Brideshead. I'm a Waugh as in Lancashire.

More specifically, I'm a Waugh as in Rochdale. It's to Edwin (the dialect poet), not Evelyn (the novelist) that I look for my family roots.

So when I saw my home town suddenly take centre stage in this election today, I couldn't help but feel a sharp pang of pride for Mrs Gillian Duffy.

Everyone else can write reams about Gordon's jaw-dropping lack of political and human empathy today on the campaign trail.

But I can, I hope, give a bit of context to Mrs Duffy's eloquently put concerns.

My accent*  has all but gone and I live in London, but my family still live up north and I visit regularly (not least to see the 'Dale play football..but that's for another post). Let's just say my heart will always belong to Rochdale.

Most Rochdalians are staunchly proud of their birthplace. There's the magnificent, neo-gothic town hall (legend has it that Hitler spared it from bombing because he wanted to use it as a base should his invasion prove successful). There is the crucible of the Co-Operative movement, a place where a small group of traders clubbed together to provide unadulterated and affordable food for the masses. There's the statue that pays tribute to local lad John Bright, one of the fiercest defenders of free trade.  There is a pride in strong women from Gracie Fields in the 1930s (then the highest paid singer in the world) to actress Anna Friel today.

But Rochdalians. like their football team, are also long-suffering. The town's cotton mills have nearly all been closed in the face of cheap foreign imports, as have the spring works and other engineering plants. There are estates where unemployment is among the highest in the country and welfare a way of life.

Yet the social change isn't just in the statistics, it's in the very civic fabric of the town.

The cinema where I queued round the block to watch Star Wars as a kid is now a cavernous, soulless megapub. The local paper has been relocated (thanks to cuts by its London-based Guardian owners) to Manchester. The elegant central Post Office has been closed and a cheap franchise shunted into a shopping centre. Misguided planners built an ugly 'black box' tower block to house the council's** offices, only to decide to demolish it this year.

Worst of all is the way the NHS's heart has been ripped out of the town. It was a Labour government, yes a Labour government (as Neil Kinnock would say) that recently decided to close the Infirmary's children's, maternity and neo-natal units and told locals to go to nearby towns or Manchester instead.

When it comes to race relations, Rochdale has not suffered the riots of Burnley or Oldham. Most people just about rub along despite the best efforts of the BNP. Curry houses on Milkstone Road are popular with all races.

Ironically there is a strong Ukrainian community that has been in place for decades. Yet the influx of new Eastern European migrants has added pressures on those who feel they are shut out of the few jobs there are to go around.

When you look at the list of issues Mrs Duffy raised, she was running through this sense of abandonment that many in Labour's heartlands feel. From fears about tuition fees for the grandchildren to a fear of braving the teenage yobs after 4pm, it adds up to a cry for help from working class Britain.

What is astounding is that Brown didn't seize on her concerns and take each of her points seriously.

Mrs Duffy has done the nation a service in jolting the Prime Minister back into the real world. Let's hope she is now left in peace.

FOOTNOTE:

* My accent was so thick that on my first week at university, a gal from Cheltenham Ladies College couldn't quite understand me. She asked my name. I said "Paaall" (with a very flat vowel). She replied: "How unusual. Is that Scandinavian?"

** The council, like the constituency has swung between Labour and Liberal over the years. There is no love lost between them. In one of the quirkier facts of modern political life, Rochdale a couple of years back had a Labour-Tory coalition because both parties loathed the Lib Dems so much. It was never trumpeted by anyone nationally. Somehow, I don't think that's a coalition that we'll see at Westminster.

In attacking Gillian Duffy as "bigoted", Gordon Brown has just insulted Labour's entire core vote.

Here's the priceless shot of him being replayed his own remarks, while live on Radio 2's Jeremy Vine prog.

No wonder his head is in his hands.

As a Rochdalian, I will post later in more detail on the whole episode.

UPDATE: Maybe Gordon was recalling Ally McLeod in Argentina in 1978..

(via @schofieldkevin)

FURTHER UPDATE: The man in the car who had to feel the force of Brown's outburst was mild-mannered Justin Forsyth. Former Oxfam chap, lovely bloke, must've wondered what on earth had gone on.

Sue Nye is also innocent, it seems. The man who spotted Mrs Duffy yelling at the PM was Labour's candidate Simon Danczuk. He apparently thought it would be a good idea to get her to meet Mr Brown and ushered her forward.

This morning's Labour press conference had us hacks all trying to dig out a few more answers from the Lord of Darkness and others.

But one attendee was digging deep for something else, it seems. I've no idea who this is (whether he's a Labour apparatchik or journo), but he clearly needs a hankie.....

Only a cynic would say that it was Mike White's question that drove the chap to it.

(Rumours have it that the man in question proceeded to do a 'roll-up'..that would of course be revealed on any TV footage).

And yes, before any of you raise it, this is indeed the trivialisation of politics. I do occasionally post on serious stuff too..

HAT-TIP: The eagle-eyed @sachazarb.

UPDATE: Just been told that the mystery man is Simon Latham, from Mandelson's pet think-tank, the Policy Network. Is he the Prince of Darkness's, er, bogeyman?

Classic.

St Vince just can't help being candid.

On Newsnight just now, he refused to rule out means-testing child benefit, stating that it wouldn't be "responsible" to rule out such things for a whole Parliament.

Lots of Brownie points from the IFS, no doubt. But politically, both Philip Hammond and Liam Byrne could see the elephant trap opening up and swiftly DID rule out means testing.

When Peter Mandelson earlier today came up with his cheesy soundbite that the Tories and Lib Dems were planning a "coalition of cuts for our kids", it sounded like allieration gone mad. But maybe he will now just target the Libs - or advise Gordo to go for Clegg on this in the TV debate.

I can imagine the Labour calculators right now tapping away at how much per year an average family will lose under the Cable slaughter of the first born (and every subsequent child born, as they say in the child benefit world).

Labour and the Tories now have a different problem. Having entered the game of which tax rises/means testing they WOULD rule out, they are bound to be asked which other measures they WOULDN'T rule out.

At least we have a bit more clarity, thanks to Chote n Newsnight.

Labour today put out its most negative ad in the campaign yet.

Nightmare on Your Street (geddit?), made by a former director of TV action series 24, depicts a man with a clipboard (he's some kind of representative of a Tory government) knocking on people's doors to tell them the bad news.

A kind of Jehovah's Witness without the laughs, this funereal figure tells various families they've lost their tax credits, child trust funds and - wait for it - cancer treatment appointment.

It's kinda corny, particularly the bit where the mum yells "Haven't you got kids?!" at the grim reaper. But Labour won't mind corny as long as they get their message across.

Perhaps the most controversial scene shows the cancer sufferer in his car, yelling "I haven't got weeks or months!" at the unfeeling automaton. Call me old fashioned, but I found this just a tad tasteless.

It may have made more sense to have the grim reaper turn up to a SureStart to block 'modest and middle income' mums and dads from using it. That would have been in keeping with the 'families' theme.

Given the row over Labour leaflets on cancer treatment, I'm surprised Andrew Lansley hasn't cottoned onto this one yet. Maybe he's waiting for it to be broadcast on TV tomorrow.*

But then again, maybe Peter Mandelson is simply spoiling for a fight. He said today: "The Tories won't like this film because it exposes how their unfair policies would make British families worse off."

If you're in third place, then Fear-Not-Hope is always going to come into play, I guess.

Yet it was another phrase used by Gordon Brown today that made me think this won't be the last ad of its kind. The PM said that David Cameron may well "buckle under the strain of a crisis" if he got into power. What kind of crisis this would be was left hanging in the air. A terror attack on the Tube? Conflict with Iran? Financial market meltdown?

How long will it be before we get Labour's version of Hillary Clinton's infamous 3am advert? "It's 3am and the phone rings in Downing Street. Who do you want to pick it up....?" (I know, cue gags re Gordo and mobiles, but that may not get in the way).

This is a masterpiece of American editing and concision - just 31 secs to the 2m 40 of Labour's harem-scarem ad. Then again, it didn't really do Hillary much good...

I think many people don't mind negative ads as long as they make valid policy points. The question is whether they are in the process either tasteless or ridiculous.

UPDATE: Quick as a flash, @craigelder tells me that Lansley has indeed reacted. Here's a flavour of his quotes:

“This election broadcast is extraordinarily cynical, particularly as it comes so soon after Labour upset so many cancer sufferers by targeting them with scaremongering breast cancer leaflets."

“They have run out of ideas and are now resorting to the tactics of smear and fear in order to bully people into voting for them. In contrast the Conservative Party is fighting a relentlessly positive campaign with a message of hope and change.”

I'm not sure that the Tories own "there's a noose loose in this hoose" broadcast - warning of the dangers of a hung Parliament  -is "relentlessly positive". But you get his point.

From the first moment Gordon Brown called the election on the steps of Downing Street, he made clear that the Cabinet would be front and centre of the Labour campaign. "One of a team, not a team of One," he said.

The strategy was meant to highlight weaknesses in the Tory team - particularly in the wake of focus group feedback about George Osborne and Chris Grayling.

Of course, the leaders' debates have tended to overwhelm this approach, but still the team of ministers has continued to fan out across the country spreading the message.

Almost all of the events have been arranged centrally by the party and of course it is natural that big figures in the Government have been busy.

But activists have been struck by just how active potential future leadership contenders have been.

Ed Balls has already done 30 visits to marginal seats. Alan Johnson, seen by many (former) MPs as the most effective media and street campaigner, is due to do 35 visits by polling day.

David Miliband has done more than 20, while Andy Burnham has done 13 key seats.

Miliband and Balls both caught the eye of CLPs before the election campaign began. In recent months, both have popped up at local party events, dinners and fundraisers. MPs in marginal (and not so marginal) seats were very grateful for the support. Miliband was particularly active, I am told.

It looked for all the world like a Labour equivalent of Michael Heseltine's "rubber chicken circuit", though with pie n chips or curries instead of plastic-tasting poultry. Each man was, of course, impeccably loyal to the PM.

All of the ministers stress that of course the whole point of their current campaign visits is to secure a Labour government under Gordon Brown.

But party insiders are also aware that the campaign also offers each possible future leadership contender a chance to connect with party members and local trade unions as well as voters.

Only today, Mr Miliband was speaking to Usdaw's conference in Blackpool (thereby hitting a couple of key marginals too). He stuck to the current script that tactical voting is not a good idea. "Don't try and game the result.  Vote for what you value.  Vote Labour," was his message.

All of the ministers and their aides deny any ulterior motive other than getting G Brown elected. Yet some, just some, in the party have their eye on a possible leadership contest should the ship go down on May 6.

As it happens I asked Lord Mandelson today whether he thought Ed Balls was good value for the generous 16-1 the bookies were offering on him as next leader. The Dark Lord simply said: "He's very good value...."