For an outfit supposedly challenging the 'old politics', All4Unity boasts a prodigious sense of entitlement. It speaks proprietorially about 'Unionist' votes*, as if they were its birthright. As if it's everyone else's job to ensure 'Unionist' votes end up in A4U's column.

That's not how elections work. If you're unhappy with the major parties, you're free to set up your own party. But that doesn't entitle you to a single, solitary vote. You have to go out, put the work in and convince voters to support you.

No one owes you their vote. No party is duty-bound to do your electioneering for you. If you think politics is about being handed whatever you want on a plate, God help you if you do end up in Holyrood. It'll be an eye-opener for you.

A4U’s campaign seems to be: the main parties are rubbish, they should tell the electorate to vote for us instead. Okay, well… no. More to the point: for a party criticising how others perform in the constituencies, I notice A4U hasn't put itself forward in a single one of them.

*I say 'Unionist' because, while many of us use it as a shorthand, not all votes for the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems are 'Unionist' votes, just as not all SNP or Green votes are pro-independence votes.

*Some A4U types seem not to understand this point and demand the main parties stand aside for each other in the constituencies. It's an appealing thought to me, too, but unfortunately a non-starter in competitive, multi-party politics. In fact, it doesn't even work as arithmetic.

*Labour standing aside for the Tories in an SNP-held seat would not hand the Tories the seat. It would likely mean the SNP winning a bigger majority. Most Labour voters don't vote Labour for its constitutional stance and, in a straight fight between SNP and Tory, would vote SNP.

Sales patter only gets you so far in politics. You need the goods as well.