Time to go to the polls - unless Iceland prevents you.

Unfortunately, because of a certain volcanic eruption in a certain country called Iceland, I will be unable to vote in the British Election this week. I did send my proxy in plenty of time, but like thousands of others my vote was caught up in the ash plume (just when did 'plume' become part of normal vocabulary?), and I received a rather passively aggressive email from a lady who I imagine to be retired, with a twin set and pearls, almost accusing me of causing the earth's crust to rupture, making sure the wind would carry the resulting ash towards Europe.

Nevertheless, I have been following the campaign in all of its technicolour glory, perhaps more so since my forced disenfranchisement, and will be very interested to see how things pan out on the 6th. This, more than any other election I can remember (and that isn't too many to be honest), is - almost - anyone's game, with all three main party leaders putting on their best faces for the 'historic' TV debates. Some complain that this style of electioneering turns the campaign into more of a presidential one, rather than for a whole party. That may be the case, but it certainly brings the parties and their policies to a more immediate and pressured environment. I managed to catch the first two debates - the second one almost killed me. The combination of the not-so-subtle-so-far-down-your-throat-it's-coming-out-the-other-end branding from Sky-no-we're-nothing-like-Fox-News, and the awful moderating skills of Adam Boulton - the man with the constant scowl - almost made me snap my laptop in two.

Of course, in a situation like this, it is style over substance and the Big Three have managed this with varying degrees of success. Poor Gordon still hasn't really mastered the art of smiling yet, never mind joke making, and whilst he probably has more content to his speeches than the other two, it is rarely engaging. Mr Cameron, to put it mildly, needs a short, sharp smack if he uses the phrase "in our country" again - ever. He also has Tony Blair Hand Syndrome, and never actually says anything of much import, predictably just disagreeing with anything Gordon and Nick say, trying to fit every cliché and buzz-phrase around his party's policies. Clegg is, by far, the strongest of the three in engaging the audience in what he is saying. By disengaging himself from the other two, and promising completely new directions, he has managed to achieve huge gains for the Liberal Democrats and almost a 'celebrity' status. Whilst, I would (if I could), vote for the Liberal Democrats, I have to admit - perhaps Gordon Brown is the best person to deal with the specific economic problems we have at the moment. I don't know, I'm no expert.

Sadly, it looks like that Cameron and his moral guardians shall be taking office, despite the huge gains by the Lib Dems. Our First Past the Post (FPTP) system has ensured for decades that actual percentages of the vote don't really account for anything. Only the Lib Dems have promised to reform the system to a fairer, proportional one, but sadly that shall probably be a goal that will remain out of reach for a long time to come.

The TV debates, combined with YouTube, internet news, twitter and their ilk have really made this an election of immediacy, and one that more people are interested in than many others in the past - no matter how slight or peripheral that interest is. But it is also important, to realise what news and coverage is of importance and what is electioneering via Rupert Murdoch and his contemporaries.

Bigotgate 2010 is an example of how such a minor error in the context of a national General Election can dominate the agenda for two or three days, and it overshadowed anything else that Gordon Brown or Labour said. And let's be honest, she was a bit of a bigot - she may not be aware of it, but ignorance, or allegiance to the Daily Mail isn't really an excuse is it?

The main controversies coming out of the Conservative closet, so to speak, have been concerned with gay rights and the party stance thereof. It should come as no surprise to anyone that the Tory party includes many members who hold homophobic views, so it may seem strange that David Cameron seems so intent in courting the gay vote. It seems even more incredible now that we know that 'rising star' Philippa Stroud, Head of the Tory's Centre for Social Justice *cough*, has been praying for the curing of and giving 'counselling' to homosexuals through her New Frontiers Church. There have been other examples this week of Tory candidates who seem to be living by outdated and offensive doctrine, and even Cameron himself seems confused about his stance, unable to give a clear party position without falling over his own words. Surely he would have known that he would have been asked questions about gay rights by The Gay Times... you would have thought.

In any case, what will be will be, and the only way Britain can be sure of getting the results that she wants is by going out and voting. If you are registered to vote, you have (almost) no excuse for not using it. Even if it is to simply spoil your paper as a form of protest, the old excuses of it not making a difference, or that none of the parties represent the 'normal person', or that they are all the same, don't really wash anymore. Not that they ever did to be honest. It's just another way of expressing laziness.

It's a cliché, but it's a good one - that if you don't use your vote, you make void your opportunity to complain about pretty much anything for the next four or five years. And seeing as moaning about something is pretty much a British pastime, unless you are ready for some awkwardly silent conversations, then I'd get down to your polling station and tick a box.