It is interesting though how constant leafletting and canvassing does shift opinion. Not just on the public perception of our party but in people’s engagement with politics and its relevance to them.

From my experience, our campaigning drives turnout in elections up. Done well, it increases peoples awareness and understanding of issues. Done badly it plays to people’s worst prejudices.

We need a leader who ensures that we campaign well and liberally. Neither candidate can offer an alternative to the blood sweat and tears of our current campaigning activity, but they need to make it purposeful to our Liberal objectives.

And this is despite campaigners from both sides putting the squeeze on, hoping to elicit noises of support.

Sometimes it is almost like we are in perpetual canvassing mode, rather than in an actual dialogue – after all, the identity of the party leader is no replacement for a unified and motivated party knowing where we are going and how to get there.

I’m a little disappointed at the speed with which many of the membership have made up their minds, as though any factions within the party were barely contained and ready to break out at any moment.

With a bit more patience and a bit more breathing space for the candidates to present their views of the changing nature of current debates we would show ourselves to be more relevant and give more opportunity to engage and reengage with our potential members and supporters as well as our actual members.

This leadership election has been as much a demonstration of the way we do things as it has been a showcase for who we are and what we stand for, so it is a shame that it can still be said there is room for improvement.

If the candidates are being uncontentious, stretching out the campaign won’t make it any more interesting.

What would have made it more interesting? A serious ideological diagreement would have certainly livened things up. If, say, David Laws and Steve Webb had stood, the party would have been forced to answer some serious questions about its direction.

As it is, not much separates Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne ideologically, and no amount of tactical ‘wedge issues’ can alter that fact.

The other thing that might have set things alight would have been a serious challenge by either candidate to the party’s ritualised form of campaigning, with its clapped-out tactics and slogans.

We’re not likely to get that either, since Clegg is stressing that he’s outward-looking and doesn’t want to sound as if he’s navel-gazing, while Huhne can’t afford to offend the activists.

Stephen is however right (@6) when he talks about needing a “clear sense of direction” and a “narrative”.

Politicians of all parties are hamstrung by a neurotic fear of causing offence. If, even at this late stage in the campaign, either candidate fancies livening things up, they might start by making some bold and unashamed Liberal statements that give cheer to our supporters while appalling the average Daily Express reader.

One of the reason’s Brown didn’t go for an early poll was that his party simply wasn’t ready. While fixed terms are a good idea, the fact remains that the date of general elections are broadly predictable. Ming’s resignation wasn’t.

Geoffrey – I certainly never said it was boring. What I do say is that real debate has been limited, and that I’m not sure the contest has moved party thinking forward – which surely a real contest ought to do. Of course the party membership does and should decide party policy – but we also elect a leader to give a clear sense of direction, and to communicate that both internally and externally. Because of the short timespan of the leadership campaign, neither candidate has been able to focus on the big themes which would give the Lib Dems a ‘narrative’ at the next general election – which I think’s a shame because I know both can do it.

The Leadership election is more a dry run for a general election than a period for thoughtful analysis. It allows the party to see how it might be led and GEs are generally 3 weeks not 6.

Considering direction, strategy and policy can surely form a part of that, but no leadership election could be long enough to do that process justice without making the party look rudderless.