As the Conservative Party seems determined to rip itself to shreds, with the former foreign secretary taking time out from what sounds like a very messy divorce to stir trouble, perhaps it is time to look at the various alternatives.
While the status quo may not be many people's taste, it does have the advantage of being the devil that we know. Theresa May seems relatively harmless and is likely to prove malleable in an effort to avoid being drowned like an innocent kitten that has strayed into dangerous waters.
Regardless of the lady's wishes, her future may well be decided within the next week if Jacob Rees-Mogg and his stormtroopers have their way. The general consensus in the media appears to be that this self-important band will then seek to promote the former mayor of London as the next Tory leader and, in their eyes at least, prime minister.
Such an outcome is likely to delight and terrify readers in equal measure. Nobody seems quite sure as to what this jolly toff's policies might be, although given his love of a headline they could be as extreme as those of the president of the United States.
Most accountants probably believe that the Labour Party is ruled by the devil incarnate and its policies will prove extremely damaging to the middle classes ie you and me.
In this light, it is worth spending a little time considering the speech delivered by John McDonnell to the TUC earlier this week.
Rather than high-quality tub-thumping socialism, the shadow chancellor seems to be promoting a number of policies that could have come directly from the mouth of the much maligned but, in retrospect, relatively mild-mannered George Osborne.
In this writer's eyes, you would expect proper Labour Party policy to involve spending the rare moments between regular renditions of the red flag and making the final arrangements to turn the United Kingdom into the United Republic nationalising all significant industries and unionising every workforce in the country.
However, McDonnell confounds such views with his proposal that workers in larger companies should be given the opportunity to share collectively in the benefits of ownership of their company. While an obvious initial reaction was to assume that he meant that the workers should be handed the company lock, stock and barrel; in fact, it appears that he wishes them to share in the profits (not really a true socialist concept) and management of those companies.
As the author of a book entitled Employee Share Schemes, this is music to my ears.
However, the analysis seems a little naïve in that an employee with four shares in shall we say BT will have relatively little say over that company's management. Even if every employee pooled their four shares, they would still come way behind the smallest of pension funds.
Other policy proposals such as outlawing false self-employment are unlikely to scare those in the profession, who might see an opportunity for additional work from those attempting to defend themselves.
The thorny point of taking on the gig economy could prove more controversial but realistically there has to be every chance that any Chancellor of the Exchequer would regard this as an opportunity to bring in some much-needed revenue to bolster our ailing economy.
This columnist has no idea of what might develop over the next few weeks but whatever comes about is almost certain to be quite fascinating, even if there is every chance that in the longer term it could all end in tears.