Fair points Mike. I like the idea of taking the pee out of a serious candidate (particularly one I personally find objectionable) but maybe it is taking it too far to actually get real votes. Ideally he could withdraw just before the day?

I find it quite rich that Farage is considered a 'serious' candidate whilst Murray is dismissed as a 'celebrity'.
Democracy works thi9s way. Anyone can stand and lose their deposit if they wish Anyone can vote for Al Murray i9f they like.
If you start judging who is 'fit' to stand and who isn't then we are losing a basic element of our system.
If you like Farage then vote for him, if you like Cameron then I suppose you might as well vote Lib-Dem (now there is a travesty of the system you love so!!)

Fair points Mike. I like the idea of taking the pee out of a serious candidate (particularly one I personally find objectionable) but maybe it is taking it too far to actually get real votes. Ideally he could withdraw just before the day?

I find it quite rich that Farage is considered a 'serious' candidate whilst Murray is dismissed as a 'celebrity'.
Democracy works thi9s way. Anyone can stand and lose their deposit if they wish Anyone can vote for Al Murray i9f they like.
If you start judging who is 'fit' to stand and who isn't then we are losing a basic element of our system.
If you like Farage then vote for him, if you like Cameron then I suppose you might as well vote Lib-Dem (now there is a travesty of the system you love so!!)

That also is a fair point regarding the "fit to stand" principle. In this particular case though I would question what Murray's motives are and if they are really beneficial to the democractic process. Presumably his intention is not to win the seat himself, but to take votes away from UKIP (Farage) which will reduce their potential to win. Does anyone realistically think that Farage's vote on election day will be any votes fewer simply because Al Murray is standing as an alternative protest UKIP candidate? UKIP already are the protest candidates!

Perhaps he is campaigning as a "less objectionable" protest candidate. If that's the case, he may take votes away from other minor parties like the Greens (or LibDems ) - and don't tell me that a proportion of Green votes are anything other than simple "protest" votes. Given the current state of play I think anyone considering voting Farage has already made up their mind to do so, or will do so as we go along. I can't see Farage losing any votes - unless he/UKIP self-destructs in some way - certainly not from any external sources. Ironically, by splitting the anti-Farage/UKIP protest vote, Murray's tactics might ultimately result in a Farage/UKIP win...

I try not to be stuffy about politics but I don't know if the waters in general elections should be muddied in this way. It'll make for an interesting count though!

The UK Polling Report website provides a regular average of recent Polls. As of the 15th Jan, they reported:
CON 33%(nc), LAB 33%(-1), LDEM 7%(-1), UKIP 15%(+1), GRN 7%(+1)

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/

Since then, weekend polls show a 1 or 2 point lead for Labour, apart from one that shows a 5 point lead.

Definitely tight.

Guardian/ICM Poll

Labour 33% (nc), Con 30% (+2), LibDem 11% (-3), UKIP 11% (-3), Greens 9% (+4), Others 7% (+1)

Guardian/ICM Poll

Labour 33% (nc), Con 30% (+2), LibDem 11% (-3), UKIP 11% (-3), Greens 9% (+4), Others 7% (+1)

Must be something to do with that latest climate change report

It really looks odds-on for another hung parliament - all the polls and historic trends point to it. For Labour or Tories to get a majority from this position in just a few months looks most unlikely unless something dramatic happens as neither has any ‘momentum’. The Tories are hampered by the boundary changes and votes leeching to UKIP, and Labour look stuffed by their collapse in Scotland and the ‘Ed effect’.

In which case why can’t they treat us like adults and say what they would do with our votes in this most probable of scenarios? Yes, we get it that they’re fighting to win outright (do they really have to keep telling us that?) and we don’t expect detailed negotiating positions to be revealed in public. But don’t potential Tory voters deserve to be told if Cameron would or would not consider doing a deal with UKIP? Don’t potential Labour voters deserve to be told if they’d give cabinet places to Nick Clegg and/or Alex Salmond? Don’t potential SNP voters deserve to be told what their ‘lines in the sand’ are?

I’ll let the Lib Dems off telling us anything because after last time nobody will believe a word of what they say - as soon as the votes are in the boxes we know full well they’ll do anything to get their backsides in the government Jags.

Guardian/ICM Poll

Labour 33% (nc), Con 30% (+2), LibDem 11% (-3), UKIP 11% (-3), Greens 9% (+4), Others 7% (+1)

Must be something to do with that latest climate change report

Well played!

Do people voting for the Greens really know what they are voting for?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/25/terrorist-organisation-membership-no-crime-say-greens

Probably more so than those voting UKIP, Conservative or Labour.

It really looks odds-on for another hung parliament - all the polls and historic trends point to it. For Labour or Tories to get a majority from this position in just a few months looks most unlikely unless something dramatic happens as neither has any ‘momentum’. The Tories are hampered by the boundary changes and votes leeching to UKIP, and Labour look stuffed by their collapse in Scotland and the ‘Ed effect’.

In which case why can’t they treat us like adults and say what they would do with our votes in this most probable of scenarios? Yes, we get it that they’re fighting to win outright (do they really have to keep telling us that?) and we don’t expect detailed negotiating positions to be revealed in public. But don’t potential Tory voters deserve to be told if Cameron would or would not consider doing a deal with UKIP? Don’t potential Labour voters deserve to be told if they’d give cabinet places to Nick Clegg and/or Alex Salmond? Don’t potential SNP voters deserve to be told what their ‘lines in the sand’ are?

I’ll let the Lib Dems off telling us anything because after last time nobody will believe a word of what they say - as soon as the votes are in the boxes we know full well they’ll do anything to get their backsides in the government Jags.

I just wonder if there could be a box on the ballot slip saying that you did (or didn't) give the Party that you vote for 'permission' to become part of a coalition? Not sure if or how it would work but, as you say, thousands who voted for the Lib-Dems in good faith have had five long years to reflect on what that brought about.
e.g. Lots of Labour supporters in West Devon may have voted tactically to keep a Tory MP out.

Probably more so than those voting UKIP, Conservative or Labour.

errrmmm Lib- 'we'll cut tuition fees" -Dems excluded?

They've got voters?