So, despite all predictions over the last couple of years the Lib Dems are apparently not electoral history. The Brotish public are nothing if not stupid?

Well, quite.

Anyone is electable, this is obviously a pocket in much the same way as my constiuency, where the electorate feel comfortable with the LibDems compared to the alternatives - they had an MP who was an idiot but that wouldn't persuade enough of them to vote for something else.

it mean nothing in the grander scheme of things.

I think it may come to be seen as meaningful. The voters do not like the 3 main paties. UKIP has become the new LibDems - partly as a protest vote, partly because of their message and partly because they have (relatively speaking) a charismatic leader and one who talks plain English.

What might this mean? It is difficult to say but four of the more obvious options for the Tories are:

- a coup to remove the leadership. Osborne is now seen as a figure of derision even in the right-wing financial press and Tories have always hated Cameron. Gove looks favourite for the leadership.
- keep the leadership, but lurch to the right in order to nullify the UKIP challenge. They have a difficult over the EU though as despite the talk they are not defending the UK's national interest over the cIty.
- no change on the assumption (possibly valid) that a large part of the UKIP vote will switch to them at a General Election, turning a third place in Eastleigh to a hansome majority
- if they keep the leadership and signals remain unchanged over the next year or two to sign a pact with the LibDems to fight the election together "in the national interest". That would enable them to say they have a mandate to finish their project of dismantling the welfare state.

For the LibDems - they will be comforted for the time being. They may feel vindicated to fight the next election alone. Alternatively, both Labour and the Tories may be grovelling to form an alliance with them in order to see off the other major party.

For Labour - shows nothing other than Ed does not look to have a hope in hell of gaining the votes in the South that his party would need to gain electoral victory.

UKIP - all to play for. Keep banging on with the same messages and with the same leader and they could gain seats and even hold the balance of power.

Others - short of a new, well funded party arising and connecting with general public opinion not worth considering.

No chance. They're a lunatic fringe party and I doubt they'll ever hold more than a seat or two in parliament, if that.

They could be very useful in splitting the Conservative vote.
i.e. Tempting the rabid-nutcase-rightwing away from the slightly-less-rabid-nutcase-rightwing.

Spot on, look at the depths they go to for putting someone up for Question Time, Neil Hamilton for christ's sake, a proven liar. Mind you Labour did itself no favours with Ms Eagles, she looked out of her depth and seemed to be thinking of things to say to fill in the time.

That would be nice. At least they'd have served one useful function, in that eventuality.

Labour seems to be doing itself no favours across the board, at the moment.

Can't help but think that the political landscape needs a new substantial left wing party, leaving existing labour and tory parties as the major centre left and centre right parties with the more right wing tories gravitating towards UKIP. That would leave us with four main parties and probably more coalition governments. No place for the lib dems, but as first past the post would probably need replacing too, their legacy would be that albeit indirectly they'd have helped bring about electoral reform. Be interested to see what more knowleagable political types think!