It would appear the powers that be want you to imagine a future without the Greens. This is the future the BBC is prefiguring with its decision to exclude us from the election debates. By doing so, they create a self-fulfilling prophecy: Greens are not a serious electoral option and our contribution therefore means nothing.
Once again a (barely) ruling Conservative party looks set to self-implode over arguments about Britain's role in the EU.
Domestic violence has long been a hidden issue, not central to political debate, muddled by misplaced shame and a response by the media and even frontline services which far too often disbelieves and blames the victim. The public are now realising we can't go on tolerating a situation in which an average of two women a week are killed by their current or former partner.
No-one is short on an opinion about Ed Miliband and the way that he is leading the Labour Party. After the media storm at the weekend about a plot to oust him, things have gone quieter but the media are still desperate to see leadership blood...
For Cameron to say, in response to the Wanless report, "It is important that it says that there wasn't a cover-up. Some of the people who've been looking for conspiracy theories will have to look elsewhere" seems astonishingly callous and shows little respect for survivors.
Let's face it - politics is not exciting anymore. In fact it's rather depressing. Look across the political spectrum and you'll find a mass of faceless politicians whose inspiration is derived from focus groups and lobbyists. They stand for winning elections and little else; perhaps why it's hard to discern what ideological substance each party consists of.
Today's announcement on new road building from the Prime Minister is further confirmation that this government is driving us into an economic, social and environmental cul-de-sac.
As I have detailed previously to my loyal and widespread following, my loyalties to the once proud and unbowed David Cameron have taken a turn for the faltering, since I became au fait with the silver fox, and silver tongued, plain speaker Nigel Farage...
Until we, as a society, change, not just the way we act but, the way we think, the disenchanted will have nowhere else to go but #MillionMaskMarch and Russell Brand - too culturally and intellectually blinkered to see that revolution may be the method, but it is never the solution.
The notion that men should fear the end of sexism is as absurd and repellent as the notion that white people should fear the end of racism, or straight people should fear the end of homophobia. But should David Cameron fear feminism? Well probably yes.
Climate change demands a collective response. We can't expect other countries to act if we don't. And as UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said: "Science has spoken. There is no ambiguity in their message. Leaders must act; time is not on our side."
There is a general consensus that politics needs to have more transparency, integrity and accountability. Further devolution will be welcomed as regions would be able to allocate money where they think it is most needed. There will also be opportunities for more people to get involved in politics at a local level.
There is an empty stage at the core of British politics, and Russell Brand has been allowed to step on to it. From that position he has aired views ranging from the preposterous to the blindingly obvious. All the while he has shown a brazen willingness to speak truth, or at least his version of it, to power.
I have rarely felt so ashamed, or so angry. David Cameron, it seems, regards it as a "moral duty" to cut taxes - but not to save desperate migrants from drowning in the Mediterranean. By comparison, Marie Antoinette ("let them eat cake") was compassion incarnate.
When people legitimately challenged Andrew's point of view - providing him with logic, evidence and counter-argument - Andrew did what any Ukip-loving coward does - he hid behind a paranoid and imagined claim of persecution to avoid responding to the challenges leveled his way.
I suspect most of us want to see an effective international aid programme. But only by addressing some of the institutional processes by which money is awarded and projects assessed are we likely to feel as confident as we ought that British international aid is making the difference it should, and difference it could.