http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... ant-shapps

It would be hilarious if either became leader, especially in the wake of a defeat.

A bit of an ape, but he still has more (weird) charisma than the current three leaders put together.

True but still not really suitable as PM.

True........ but still more suitable than the current three leaders put together.

Funny, I thought it was up to the constituents of whichever seat he stands in. No sense of entitlement there then.

Can someone explain to me the "safe seat" thing. I don't understand how some seat attract absolutely no contest to who will win them :S

It's simple demographics. There are constituencies in the UK that have returned MPs from the same political parties at every election for, well, generations in some cases. There are seats where you could put literally almost anyone on the ballot paper and as long as they have the correct party logo next to their name, people would vote for them.

Anyway, campaigning has now become so expensive and centralised - hugely expensive TV ads and pointless 'battle bus' tours for example - that the major parties are all picking and choosing their battles; hardly bothering at all in the 'safe seats' they probably won't win and throwing all their effort at the marginal seats where they might actually be able to change the outcome.

I live in a safe labour seat. At the last general election, I did not get one single candidate or constituency worker knocking on my door and I got one leaflet through the letterbox, from UKIP(!). The main parties basically didn't bother trying to convince me, as they all assumed labour would win anyway. There were stories of people in marginal constituencies coming home every day to a dozen leaflets on their doormat and barely being able to go shopping without running into some party bigwig.

Put simply, politics has devolved down into who can best 'game' the first past the post system to maximise their return in seats that aren't safe for the opposition. There's next to no concern for what the people in safe seats want, because the main parties take them utterly for granted. There has also become this weird kind of 'initiation ritual' thing going on where new PPE graduates who want to become an MP 'fight' a safe seat for the wrong party, knowing they can't win but show their loyalty to the party by doing so anyway. If you look at your candidate's biogs and any of them are under 25 and have had no job outside politics, assume those candidates are going to lose.

UK politics is strange and in many ways utterly broken.

Same story here. Its a Tory safe seat, and none of the other parties (after from UKIP) bother. Labour know they won’t win, so they field a weak candidate, and the LibDems do much the same. Effectively, there’s no point in voting here as the result is a foregone conclusion.

The main parties fight it out in marginal seats, and those are the ones where elections are won or lost, so the campaigns, events and tone of the whole thing are aimed squarely at the demographics of those most likely to vote in those areas.

If you feel disenfranchised by UK politics, then this is why.

Thing is it's an utterly self-fulfilling prophecy. if you assume that seat will vote tory anyway and as labour or lib dem you pitch in with a candidate that nobody knows, who has no idea how to campaign and don't bother spending any money electioneering, of course you're going to lose. You've given the voters of that constituency absolutely no reason to vote for you, because you've effectively told them their vote is worthless. if you can't be arsed to fight for the seat, why should anyone in it vote for you?

It's the most irritating thing about UK politics at the mo and, like most of the irritating things about UK politics, it's something we (actually they) imported from America.

PR systems mostly return coalitions, and those don't seem to have many fans round here.

I think banning airdropped candidates might help. If candidates had to be registered say 5 years in the constituency before being allowed to run, they might be more bothered about the local issues and national campaigning would lose power.

I would dance if the UK were to have more coalition politics but, alas, I seem to be a statistical outlier. The only way I can see to slow the ennui is to bring in some form of PR.

For instance, we could use a single-sheet version of the system that the Tories use to choose their party leader. Oh wait...

Seems like a reasonable idea.

I wouldn't. Nothing seems to get done with coalition governments. Better to have one party in power, let them do stuff, then judge them at the following election.

The current coalition seems to be disproving that particular statement. As a coalition partner the Lib Dems have done themselves no favours, being even more useless than an appendix. We have a de facto Tory government, and they're making the most of it.