Luke Akehurst spins the Rallings and Thrasher calculator on the BBC web here like there's no tomorrow, no yesterday and no today.
In essence the calculation projects what may have happened with the exact same votes cast in 2005 if the boundaries recommended by the various boundary commissioners were in place. Luke suggests that David Cameron is in the same shape as Michael Foot was all those years ago. But I don't think there's much point in providing an overspun analysis.
The figures show that Michael Howard was in similar shape to Michael Foot, though Mr Foot had thirteen more Scottish seats to shoot at back in the day. So Foot was arguably even worse off.
The numbers are quite encouraging and the loss to Labour's majority is less than the 20-plus that had been reported but 20 months, and two leadership changes with a third on the way, and events dear boy events mean that the table for 2005 on the new boundaries still leaves everything to play for.
The BBC say it's good news for Cameron, the Akehurst says it's good news for Labour. The truth is perhaps somewhere betwixt and between.