Could tactical votes soften the Brexit blow?
"That is a good philosophy for politics!"
What happens if no-one wins? Why are people not voting? What happened in 1974, and why does it matter?
Whether it is the attacks on migrants crossing the Mediterranean or questions about Nick Clegg's heritage, our national debate on immigration has taken a nasty turn.
The Ukip and Lib Dem candidates for Cambridge clash over Europe in a packed debating chamber.
Shadow chancellor says Leader of the House would "talk to all parties" but rejects negotiations on the Budget and defence.
We cannot, therefore, continue to bury our heads in the sand, nor can we hide behind talk of a more comprehensive EU strategy. The simple fact is, unless more boats are sent out to patrol the region and rescue people, more innocent lives, including those of children, will be lost in the days and weeks to come.
No one's talking about deals with the Lib Dems, because there's nothing in their manifesto to scare the Tory or Labour horses.
From Labour's mugs to Cameron's debate dodging, the run up to this election has involved a calculated contempt for openness and honesty.
In 2012, Ed Miliband said it wasn’t “for politicians to lecture people about morality”; he was right. Notwithstanding some politicians’ moral convictions, society cannot agree a moral standard for tax.
Harry Lambert of the New Statesman's May2015.com tells you the ten seats to watch on polling night.
For the best analysis of the 8th of June General Election, subscribe today.
Be well informed. Be a New Statesman reader