Dan Ware like Gillian Duffy is destined for long memory. Of all the hundreds of yesterday's column inches devoted to how Labour / the Tories / UKIP were fighting for Dan's vote, only one column actually got it right. Dan doesn't vote. He was ignoring the election. Dan is part of the majority of the UK electorate who decline to participate in returning politicians to Westminster or elsewhere, on the grounds that "It doesn't matter who you vote for, the same buggers always get in".
Janet Daley in the Telegraph has a pretty good understanding of it all. The Dans of this world - many millions of people in the UK - work, deal in cash a lot, look after themselves and their families and are resentful of Labour's forced equality, Tory toff privilege and the wastrels of the LibDems. And they really don't like politicians. All the party election material that drops through their letter boxes goes straight into the recycling bin, unread. They don't know who their MP is (unless, rarely, he's a 'good bloke' ) and really don't care.
Politicians are creatures of such narcissism and vanity that it is taking them an inordinate amount of time to admit that most people don't want them. They used to ascribe the non-voting of 65% of their constituents as 'apathy' before mobile phones, the internet and social media made it quite clear that people weren't at all apathetic. Now they admit coyly that 'there is a worldwide dissatisfaction with politics' without actually facing the truth that there is actually a deep global rejection of politicians.
We are clearly in transition and our old democratic systems are liable to change. The most fundamental question at the head of the agenda is can we have democracy without politicians? Or, like gut bacteria, are politicians a mildly unpleasant but necessary part of our democratic health? I don't know the answer, but I suspect as we inch towards 2015 that the question won't go away.