User: The Dark Lord

You should've included Russia as an option--they've been fairly consistent recently and we all know the East European countries vote for each other and I think it'll be their turn to win; also the last 7 have been countries' first victories and Russia have never won Eurovision.

England were a shambles, weren't they? Pathetically easy group (again) yet you STILL struggled. Then, other results go in your favour (again), you only need a draw to qualify at 'fortress' Wembley and your precious overpaid 'superstars' managed to mess up big time and it's the MIGHTY Russia who are going to Euro 08.

And Euro 08 will be better off without England. You go into every tournament expecting to win (often before you've even qualified). You then get to the group stage with a pathetically easy group and still struggle (remember Trinidad & Tobago at the World Cup?) often only just making it to the knockout stage. Then when the inevitable happens and you come crashing out after losing to the first decent team you've had to play, you come up with all kinds of pathetic excuses.

Face it, England would have to be twice as good as they are to be half as good as your media keeps telling us.

Good poll, but you seem to misunderstand how the Olympics work. The games are awarded to cities (eg London, Paris, etc.), not countries.

Isn't David Blaine American?

Here in Europe, virtually every country has at least three viable parties (Malta being the exception). This means that governments usually (but not always) have to listen to the people more as there is a real choice, rather than simply a question of which is the lesser of two evils. My point is that if multi-party politics is good enough here it should be available to our friends in the US as well.