He fires Alan Duncan. Why?

Because his No1 priority as with Tony Blair is to appease the media especially the tabloids.

This is a serious mistake.

Media gets it wrong every time.
Media deserts you at the drop of a hat.
Media just wants a good story.

What the hell do we do at the next election?

I reckon - don't vote. Spoil your ballot.

Register a protest vote. Not for the detested BNP or BNP Lite.. sorry, UKip... The only real alternative now is the Green one. They'll be getting my vote.
Alan Duncan is a good bloke, if prone to the odd strange moment {like on Question Time in 2003 when he defended the invasion of Iraq by suggesting - rather oddly, I thought - that Saddam had sarin gas and was prepared to use it on the London Underground}, but by and large is as sensible and straight as any mainstream politician is likely ever to be. Honest enough to be the first openly gay Tory MP* and a sense of humour. Cameron simply wants be Blair Mk II. And the depressing thing is that the electorate don't seem to have learned that Mk I should have made the brand disreputable. But, hey ho. Selfish politicians with no vision for selfish people with no vision.
Whatever happened to principles?

* Edit Piece.
I apologise to the brilliant Matthew Parris who was, of course, really the first openly gay Tory MP. I should have written "the first openly gay shadow cabinet minister". Come back, Matthew. Please.

I'd vote Lib Dem as I did last time (because they opposed the war from the start) since I like Cable but a) they don't stand a chance and b) I can't stand Nick Clegg (even his name annoys me - he sounds like a character in Porridge).

There is one politician who is head and shoulders above the rest, and that person is WILLIAM HAGUE. For that reason alone, I shall probably vote Conservative, and hope that he will be in a position of power, even though he will probably not be "the boss"!

Alan Duncan has put his foot in it numerous times, not just regarding expenses. Politicians do need to have a bit of tact and intelect. He seems to posess neither. I think this demotion has been on the cards a long time and his recent remarks were just the final straw. I doubt it was made to appease the media. If so, it would have been done when he was in the headlines.

Don't worry though, JK. If enough people follow your advice then we'll have another four years of Brown and co., so Cameran won't be in office. Labour's plan to divided the opposition vote is working fine.

One of the great shames of voting in the UK is that it isn't compulsorary as in Oz-something I at first disagreed with but with it's preferential system , overall the electorate gets who they want.

It's also enabled the Upper House , the Senate to get enough Greens in to hold the balance of power and really keep the wackos in check.

Amazingly , every election also comes down to around both parties trying to change the minds of under half a million voters who can swing it one way or the other.

Mind you=as usual the tabloids can influence way out of proportion.

Our democracy is a sham ( like in Afganistan )

Vote for the best constituency MP you can get regardless of party.

My feeling is this - as long as no one votes for BROWN's New Labour lite party - we will be ok. If BROWN gets back in he will destroy the country.

Cameron may be a bit naff - but he is still 1000000000000000000000 times better than BROWN. And at the end of the day that is the choice we have. Not much of a choice but no other party will win. That is why I say we have a limited democracy and it is a sham.

We have effectively a two party state but only because we, the voters, have made it that way. There are several parties who field enough candidates to form a government, so to claim that our democracy is a sham is a little strong. We have the option to elect an entirely new party to government if we want to, but most automatically go for the main parties out of habit. This happens at all levels. I once stood for council against a man who the voters were constantly complaining about. He beat me decisively. When I asked a few people who admitted voting for him why they did so despite having previously said he was useless, they told me it was because he'd been there so long - "better the devil you know" kinda attitude.

BUT ... in Hartlepool they did break the pattern by electing the football team mascot. So anything can happen if we can be bothered to make it happen.

It is a sham. Two parties that can win. That is the fact of the matter. The system is organised so that is the way.

In the USA where it is worse - can you believe that the SAME FAMILIES provide the Presidents and Vice Presidents.....

The Clintons and Bushes run the Presidency as a family concern.

As a country of over 300 million people it shows how bankrupt of any real democracy that country actually is.

When Saddam Hussain ran Iraq in the same way he was killed and his "heirs".

Democracy is a sham. We dont vote for policies and none of us for instance wanted to go to war - yet we are there. No one really wants to be in Afganistan - yet we are. None of us wanted to bail out the bankers - yet we did at the expense of the poorest in our society.

I vote because it is all we have got but democracy has always been in the hand of the rich. Now they fund "their" leaders who dance their tune.

It is no conincidence that MANDY and OSBORNE are funded by the Rothschilds and carry out their policies. That is the reality of our political system. You want the proof - they holiday together on yachts with other Oligarchs from the NWO.