UKC

May is off

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48395905

I think its a disgrace how Theresa has been treated, by Corbyn not unexpectedly, but by her own party.

I fully expect we will now be in the hands of someone we dont want or need.

F*cking Brexshit indeed!!!

29
 subtle 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

> I fully expect we will now be in the hands of someone we dont want or need.

I though we had been under May!

Will the Labour Party and others now try and force through a general election through a  motion of no confidence in the govt. or will they just sit and wait for the Tories to chose a new leader?

1
 dh73 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

my fury is to do with the lack of democracy in all of this. I do accept that in a general election people vote for a party, but the leader of the party / prospective PM is arguably the most important single person in all of that and most people will take that into account when deciding how to vote. unless they are died in the wool party supporters many people may change who they vote for depending on what direction they think the leader will take the party / how competent they are. this is clearly the case with brexit and the views of the various prospective future PMs on this issue.

given that the identify of the PM is of such importance, why are the political parties allowed to change this without a vote of the whole country? The parliamentary  party / then wider party members make this decision themselves, entirely disenfranchising the majority of the population. this seems wholly unfair to me

4
Andy 1902 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Motion of no confidence will fail unless the Cons elect a new 'leader' who supports a no deal brexit.

 Rob Exile Ward 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Will she ever, ever recognise that her incompetence, stupidity and lack of judgement made an already grim situation situation immeasurably worse? Or will she go to her grave thinking she made the best of a bad job, no-one could have done more, it was all somebody else's fault etc etc etc.

I hope I never meet her hill-walking because I would find it very hard to keep a civil tongue in my head.

8
 gravy 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Are you serious? she has been an absolute disgrace and she should have gone ages ago, I can't recall a single prime minister who has steadfastly remained after resigning event after resigning event.  The only reason she is still there is because of the loathsomeness and paralysis of the alternatives but she is a terrible intersection of nastiness, incompetence and intransigence.

9
In reply to subtle:

> I though we had been under May!

Perhaps, but at least she did her best to gain a consensus (I'm no Tory lifer and tend to be a floating voter) against a backdrop of horrendous behaviour, in my opinion.

> Will the Labour Party and others now try and force through a general election through a  motion of no confidence in the govt. or will they just sit and wait for the Tories to chose a new leader?

I think they should.  I dont want Boris as a leader, and he seems tipped to get the job.  I didnt vote for him and so if the 'will of the people' - as so many f*cknuts keen banging on about - is to always be the way forward then we need to ask the 'people' who they want to lead the country out of this mess and into the great unknown.*

*doubtless they'll cock that up as well.

2
 Robert Durran 24 May 2019
In reply to Andy 1902:

> Motion of no confidence will fail unless the Cons elect a new 'leader' who supports a no deal brexit.

Which is why the parliamentary party will find a way of stabbing Boris and the other hard Brexiteers in the back.

1
In reply to gravy:

> Are you serious? she has been an absolute disgrace and she should have gone ages ago, I can't recall a single prime minister who has steadfastly remained after resigning event after resigning event.  The only reason she is still there is because of the loathsomeness and paralysis of the alternatives but she is a terrible intersection of nastiness, incompetence and intransigence.

Its been a tough job, no doubt.  Could you have done a better job?  Are there any obvious candidates in the government better skilled at bringing home the deal in the best interests of the country?  Name one.  I certainly can't.  She may have been incompetent, but we will not be in the hands of someone much less competent and experienced but likely one which will try less to gain a consensus and one which will be more antagonistic towards the EU and more likely get a worse deal.  Better the devil you know and all that, no?

So if you can't, as you seem to admit in your own text, then she was probably the  best person for the job and was hamstrung by every single other person in the process from her own party and that of Her Majesties Opposition.

15
 thomasadixon 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

She did not do her best to get consensus, she picked a path that she knew didn’t have a consensus in favour and wasted our time trying to force it through.

5
 JayK 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

..........

At the start of June, it'll be the end of May.

Somebody had to say it.... Maybe she has got a sense of humour and she planned it all along!

 Dave Garnett 24 May 2019
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> Or will she go to her grave thinking she made the best of a bad job, no-one could have done more, it was all somebody else's fault etc etc etc.

I must say that find it hard to reconcile her nice words about the 'nasty party' and her 'burning issues' of social inequality with her pandering to the right of her party and her behaviour as Home Secretary - the 'hostile environment', Windrush, the deportation of innocent students caught up in the English language test cheating scandal, the incompetence over Abu Hamza etc etc.   

 DaveHK 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

The phrase 'Prime Minister Boris Johnson' makes me feel physically unwell. 

2
 Harry Jarvis 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

> Which is why the parliamentary party will find a way of stabbing Boris and the other hard Brexiteers in the back.

I fear this is the only hope we have of avoiding a hard Brexiteer as our next PM. There's little doubt that if Johnson makes it to the shortlist of two to be elected by the party membership, he would win comfortably. So, we have to hope that wiser heads will prevail to avoid him making to that shortlist. For all that he has supporters, there are also those who see him as a complete oaf and entirely unsuited for high office. Quite how the balance swings will be revealed in the coming weeks. 

But as as been said, what a bloody disgrace that our democracy has fallen so low that the choice of our PM is in the hands of 300 MPs. 

 the sheep 24 May 2019
In reply to thomasadixon:

I kind of hope she has played a blinder (as a remainer herself) of repeatedly hitting the Brexit ball into the long grass to such an extent that all that remains after a drawn out squabble for leadership is either a no deal exit, which is a no no from the house or revoke article 50 and have a re think.

Very much doubt it though. 

 Tyler 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

All this has been predictable for months so the only new thing to get annoyed about is her starting her speech by saying she has striven make the UK a country that works for everyone not just a privileged few! That's just a f*cking lie.

 Robert Durran 24 May 2019
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> Will she ever, ever recognise that her incompetence, stupidity and lack of judgement made an already grim situation situation immeasurably worse?

Although I think she is culpable for taking on the job in the first place when she must have known that it was an impossible one and that any Brexit would be worse than remain, I doubt anyone could have done much better.

The leave vote happened because the country had been fed endless Eurosceptic/xenophobic distortions and lies for decades, poisoning people's minds against the EU and priming them to swallow the big lies of the referendum and the promise of a fantasy, totally impossible, Brexit. Having now been told that the fantasy is impossible, they're giving two fingers to the country and to the EU by demanding a catastrophic no deal Brexit more out of spite and ignorance than anything else.

The EU have said they will not renegotiate the withdrawal agreement (and in particular the backstop is, quite rightly, going nowhere). I expect we shall drift towards no deal and that at the last minute, parliament will do the responsible thing and revoke Article 50 - I simply can't imagine a parliament in which a majority are remainers will want the blood of a no deal exit on their hands.

Post edited at 10:49
1
 Dave Garnett 24 May 2019
In reply to DaveHK:

> The phrase 'Prime Minister Boris Johnson' makes me feel physically unwell. 

Yes, it sounds as incongruous as President Trump.  What a pair of charmers they will make.

 Tyler 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

> I doubt anyone could have done much better.

If we end up with a second referendum then her dithering will have been a blessing but if we end up with no deal then she will be significantly to blame for allowing the idea of no deal to fester and grow. From the outset the govt should have been clear that no deal is just a nonsense and should never have been entertained, it has already cost us dear economically.

Post edited at 10:55
 Dave Garnett 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

> I expect we shall drift towards no deal and that at the last minute, parliament will do the responsible thing and revoke Article 50 - I simply can't imagine a parliament in which a majority are remainers will want the blood of a no deal exit on their hands.

I hope you're right, although I'm really fearful as to what will ensue.

 gravy 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

"Could you have done a better job?" again are you serious?

Too bloody right I could have done a better job, absolutely no question.

7
pasbury 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

She’s spent three years making mistakes and widening the divide in this country.

Good riddance.

Though what’s coming next god only knows.

Post edited at 11:09
1
 jkarran 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Good riddance to a poor PM. All hail the new and worse PM.

Now the conservatives become briefly possessed by the drunken bombastic spirit of UKIP, elect a wreckers' yes-man then we see if parliament really does have the spine and the power to prevent a no-deal brexit. If so we get no-brexit the most destructive way possible, by parliament revoking A50 without seeking public approval or a new new PM as the new PM is forced by the weight of reality back to May's unsalable compromises then inexorably toward the backbenchers' metaphorical knives.

Halloween looms. An election fixes nothing. We've squandered the extension again. The only way out of this now without our economy and cities in flames is by another public vote. The path to that is still strewn with obstacles ranging from the unchallenged lies we've stewed in these past three years to Macron's impatience and Corbyn's weakness.

Whatever happens next the Conservative party is utterly wrecked and seems likely to suck Labour down with them. What comes next is terrifying, mitigated only slightly by the massive inertia of our broken FPTP electoral system but this could easily be the start of a long and dangerous spiral into populist madness.

jk

Post edited at 11:12
3
 krikoman 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

> I think its a disgrace how Theresa has been treated, by Corbyn not unexpectedly,

How has Corbyn treated her disgracefully!! FFS!

She could have, if she had any semblance of putting the country first, have asked for cross party talks 3 years ago. Instead she waited until the eleventh hour, when she'd tried the same thing at least twice, to get Labour involve. If she hadn't have f*cked them off in the first place, she might not be in the shit we're in now. That's the DISGRACE!

1
 Rob Exile Ward 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

'Although I think she is culpable for taking on the job in the first place when she must have known that it was an impossible one and that any Brexit would be worse than remain, I doubt anyone could have done much better.'

She employed that narcissist David Davis for 2 years while he turned up (occasionally) to meetings without any preparation and without any plan - did she never ask what he thought he was doing, or receive progress reports? She invoked Article 50 with no plan whatsoever how it could be implemented - nobody forced her to do that. She called an election when it was only needed for the sake of her pride and power base - that worked well didn't it? 

She pushed herself forward, she fought for the leadership; possibly the most plain stupid PM we have ever had the misfortune to be governed by, certainly in my lifetime.

 Rob Exile Ward 24 May 2019
In reply to krikoman:

I'm no Corbynite but on this I agree.

pasbury 24 May 2019
In reply to krikoman:

Aye. If she’d just once acknowledged that 48% voted to remain and all that implies we’d not be in this clusterf*ck.

 Yanis Nayu 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

You are drunk. She’s a horrible excuse for her human being, and that hypocritical shite about compromise in her speech? Spare me. The fact that we’re almost certainly going to get somebody worse is an even bigger kick in the teeth. 

1
 Yanis Nayu 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

I would agree that nobody could have done it better, because it was impossible. The deal she struck was actually a pretty good compromise, just one that left everyone unhappy. The blame for all of this lies at Cameron’s door. And now it looks like we’ll have another Eton-educated sociopath as our “leader”. 

1
 MonkeyPuzzle 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

> Its been a tough job, no doubt.  Could you have done a better job?  Are there any obvious candidates in the government better skilled at bringing home the deal in the best interests of the country?  Name one.  I certainly can't.  She may have been incompetent, but we will not be in the hands of someone much less competent and experienced but likely one which will try less to gain a consensus and one which will be more antagonistic towards the EU and more likely get a worse deal.  Better the devil you know and all that, no?

From day one, her modus operandi has been to pretend that 48% of the electorate (even more now) don't exist. The only reliable thing about her is that she is lying whenever she is talking, be it a flat out lie "There won't be a snap election", to mealy-worded statements, which upon any kind of rudimentary inspection have all the substance of vapour. She has acted in a petty, small-minded manner, always to preserve her interests and those of her party way above any good for the nation as a whole and shown zero consideration of actually bringing the country together and, in doing so, has embarrassed us as a nation on the world stage. In short: F*ck her.

> So if you can't, as you seem to admit in your own text, then she was probably the  best person for the job and was hamstrung by every single other person in the process from her own party and that of Her Majesties Opposition.

Being part of a disgrace of a government, doesn't make her "the best person for the job". When presented with a bad situation, being honest will go a long way to maintain any good will, but she doesn't know how to do anything but lie. How fortunate that she's also terrible at that. 

1
 krikoman 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

The disgrace is :-

Grenfell

Windrush

The Nationality tests debacle

The reduction in our police force

The rise in homelessness

Food banks

If she's going to cry, where her tears for these people?

3
 Timmd 24 May 2019
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> I would agree that nobody could have done it better, because it was impossible. The deal she struck was actually a pretty good compromise, just one that left everyone unhappy. The blame for all of this lies at Cameron’s door. And now it looks like we’ll have another Eton-educated sociopath as our “leader”. 

I thought Ian Hislop put it well, in it being a deal which left both Leavers and Remainers unhappy was a sign it was a good compromise, given how close the referendum result was.

Post edited at 12:05
 John2 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

'The leave vote happened because the country had been fed endless Eurosceptic/xenophobic distortions and lies for decades, poisoning people's minds against the EU'

The majority of EU citizens think that the EU is very likely or fairly likely to fall apart in the next 20 years. Its faults are becoming more apparent over time, and to acknowledge them is nothing to do with xenophobia.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/may/15/majority-of-europeans-expect-...

18
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Oh how funny, and totting up the dislikes too. I feel so special.

The whole irony of this thread and its responses is that you all agree with me.  She's made huge mistakes both because of who she is and what she believed was right, what she though she could get through, the people she has employed and the doggedness of her position.    I agree with all of that, as it seems do you. 

Does anyone think on this thread, genuinely, that they could have done a better job or that there was anyone better in the government to do it.  Even the Brexshit ministers were complete garbage.   Gravy seems the only person here who thinks he personally could have done a better job.  Why didnt you send TM your CV when DDavis flounced off?  That consultancy job would have made you millions in after dinner speeches and book writing entitled 'Gravy, the saviour of Brexit; delivering the Impossible' available online and in stores.  Blimey, that hubris is almost as good as Liam Fox and his abilities to pre-negotiate 20 trade deals without any issue, and that's before lunch.

She was stuffed by everyone, trying to deliver a Brexit that delivered for the 'people' whilst ensuring that we and NI were not completely fooked in the process.  Did she fail?  Dear goodness, yes. Was she impeded at every moment? Yes.  Could anyone have done a better job?  Frankly, no.  Where were these magicians of which everyone speaks, able to deliver Brexit which 300 million people + were happy with?  Why werent they employed as Brexit Czar?  Yes, nowhere to be seen.

So, apart from Gravy, who seems the only person on the planet who could have delivered Brexit (but who was probably too busy tackling 3PS so couldn't find the time), where are all the other super heroes?

Now, we have the very real possibility that any new leader will be much more pro-Brexit, who might be more hard line and have much less consideration for those who wish to remain or at least have a Brexit that doesnt screw us over for a generation.

I seem to recall JRM saying that the benefits of Brexit wont be realised for 50 years.  Anyone else buy in to this?  I didnt...

Post edited at 12:38
12
 jimtitt 24 May 2019
In reply to dh73:

> my fury is to do with the lack of democracy in all of this. I do accept that in a general election people vote for a party, but the leader of the party / prospective PM is arguably the most important single person in all of that and most people will take that into account when deciding how to vote. unless they are died in the wool party supporters many people may change who they vote for depending on what direction they think the leader will take the party / how competent they are. this is clearly the case with brexit and the views of the various prospective future PMs on this issue.

> given that the identify of the PM is of such importance, why are the political parties allowed to change this without a vote of the whole country? The parliamentary  party / then wider party members make this decision themselves, entirely disenfranchising the majority of the population. this seems wholly unfair to me


So you end up with a PM who doesn't have the support of their party, sounds great......

In reply to John2:

Yes, it's not perfect but instead of destroying it - why not fix it?

 Tyler 24 May 2019
In reply to Timmd:

> I thought Ian Hislop put it well, in it being a deal which left both Leavers and Remainers unhappy was a sign it was a good compromise, given how close the referendum result was.

I don't think an off the cuff remark by someone on a comedy show should be taken as a sign of anything. The deal was a harder Brexit than anything that had been promised by the leave side in the run up to the referendum, so where was compromise to remain? The leavers who objected to it were fundamental head the balls (remember it might have passed with ERG support) who objected to the back stop because they had lied about it up to that point saying it could be fixed with technology when both they and everyone else knew it could not.

Post edited at 12:14
 earlsdonwhu 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

So now we are even more likely to lurch towards  NoDeal to pander to Farage etc despite the fact that this was not what even the17.4million voted for. SOOOO depressing.

1
 JHiley 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

I have no sympathy for her. She was the only significant figure on the entire political spectrum, from Farage to Corbyn, who opposed guaranteeing EU nationals already here the right to stay. I can respect a Brexiter's political views but not someone threatening to expel people who've legitimately made their home here for the sake of a bargaining chip. In some cases these are people I know and care about personally. If anyone doubted she was serious the Windrush scandal showed she had form. She's scum as far as I'm concerned.

Post edited at 12:16
1
 Tyler 24 May 2019
In reply to John2:

> The majority of EU citizens think that the EU is very likely or fairly likely to fall apart in the next 20 years

Of recent political history has taught us anything it's that an awful lot of citizens of any country are not so hot on critical thinking. 

Post edited at 12:17
1
pasbury 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Couple of thoughts...

Can a new leader seriously continue without asking the Queen for a new parliamentary session? Will a Queens speech get through parliament?

Does the DUP Confidence and Supply agreement automatically continue with a new leader?

If, as seems likely, a more Brexity leader is chosen will any moderates defect or resign the whip?

Looking at the current state of parliament; Conservative + DUP = 323. There are 650 seats, so already they lack a majority. But I expect some of the independents vote with the government? Hence a vote of no confidence could kill the government off at any time.

I can’t see us avoiding another general election in early autumn. With Farage in the ascendant, and a no deal Brexit still our default destination, the next few months make me nervous.

 Robert Durran 24 May 2019
In reply to John2:

> The majority of EU citizens think that the EU is very likely or fairly likely to fall apart in the next 20 years. Its faults are becoming more apparent over time, and to acknowledge them is nothing to do with xenophobia.

I agree that there is a good chance that the EU could fall apart. It is an absolutely terrifying prospect as far as prosperity, cooperation and quite possibly peace is concerned. All the more reason for the UK to remain in the EU and work to reform it where appropriate from the inside.

And of course acknowledging the EU's shortcomings has nothing to do with xenophobia, but if you don't think that xenophobia was not a significant factor in the Leave vote and in the rise of dangerous populism both in the UK and across the continent then you are deluded.

 elsewhere 24 May 2019
In reply to John2:

> 'The leave vote happened because the country had been fed endless Eurosceptic/xenophobic distortions and lies for decades, poisoning people's minds against the EU'

> The majority of EU citizens think that the EU is very likely or fairly likely to fall apart in the next 20 years. Its faults are becoming more apparent over time, and to acknowledge them is nothing to do with xenophobia.

Simultaneously the EU membership has extremely high levels of support (80% or higher in most member states).

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/brexit-eu-survey-italy-irel...

In reply to TheThread:

Dont confuse my musings as in anyway a defence of TM.  I agree with all of her short comings but given the task and the obstacles......

Now we have the prospect of something even worse.

In reply to pasbury:

> Looking at the current state of parliament; Conservative + DUP = 323. There are 650 seats, so already they lack a majority. But I expect some of the independents vote with the government? Hence a vote of no confidence could kill the government off at any time.

Sinn Fein don't vote so take their 7 MPs off and the Con + DUP 323 is a majority.

1
 kipper12 24 May 2019
In reply to dh73:

Politicians have some previous!

How many changes of PM have we seen over the years and not a single one goes to the polls for backing.  More recently we have the small number of MP's who ditched their party, after having taken their backing in time and money to get elected and cant be bothered to resign and force a bye elction to see if their voters still want them as MP.

Nothing new here, sadly

 Suncream 24 May 2019

I'm very confused by this resignation. What happens on 7th June? Today she has announced she will resign on 7th of June, but will remain as PM until July when a new one is chosen. In what sense has she not already resigned?

 stevieb 24 May 2019
In reply to Suncream:

> I'm very confused by this resignation. What happens on 7th June? Today she has announced she will resign on 7th of June, but will remain as PM until July when a new one is chosen. In what sense has she not already resigned?


I think she just wants to officially stay in charge, until after the Donald visit

Removed User 24 May 2019
In reply to DaveHK:

> The phrase 'Prime Minister Boris Johnson' makes me feel physically unwell. 


Why exactly? I don't want him as PM but there are others I'd want even less. He ran London for two terms and the city didn't slide into the English Channel.

It's a funny thing about politics. People are often heard saying that politicians are all talk and no action but those sorts of people are exactly the type that the public end up voting for. Rather than pay attention to what they've achieved or critically consider what they propose to do most people vote for the charismatic ones.

In Scotland we have Nicola Sturgeon whose government has achieved little and failed to implement much but still retain 40% of the vote, in the UK as a whole if tory MPs are cynical enough they'll allow their membership to elect a buffoon with flexible morals and beliefs because they think it'll win them the next election.

May and Brexit are symptoms of the failings of democracy I'm afraid.

Post edited at 12:56
5
pasbury 24 May 2019
In reply to Graeme Alderson:

> Sinn Fein don't vote so take their 7 MPs off and the Con + DUP 323 is a majority.

But, like Mr Croesote’s mints; waffer thin.

 stevieb 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

> So, apart from Gravy, who seems the only person on the planet who could have delivered Brexit (but who was probably too busy tackling 3PS so couldn't find the time), where are all the other super heroes?

I don't think I could have delivered Brexit, but I do think I could've done a better job than Theresa. She screwed up by triggering Article 50 before we had a plan, and by being too controlling of the red lines / withdrawal agreement etc.

The withdrawal agreement should have been David Davis (and Boris, and Fox)'s document. Instead major cabinet minsters get to play the role of the powerless, unable to deliver the one true Brexit.

 Bob Kemp 24 May 2019
In reply to Tyler:

> > The majority of EU citizens think that the EU is very likely or fairly likely to fall apart in the next 20 years

> Of recent political history has taught us anything it's that an awful lot of citizens of any country are not so hot on critical thinking. 

Careful... someone who isn't so hot on critical thinking will be along to accuse you of elitism in a minute.

Post edited at 13:04
1
 krikoman 24 May 2019
In reply to Removed User:

> Why exactly?

Because he's a lying self-aggrandising prick for one.

He thinks he can insult hug swathes of people and not apologise for it, for two.

He's a buffoon who showed the UK on the world stage, for three....

Ken Livingstone made a good fist of being the Mayor of London, maybe he'd make a good PM

1
 dh73 24 May 2019
In reply to jimtitt:

"So you end up with a PM who doesn't have the support of their party, sounds great......"

or pass legislation forcing a GE within a certain amount of time of change of PM...

 krikoman 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

> She was stuffed by everyone, trying to deliver a Brexit that delivered for the 'people' whilst ensuring that we and NI were not completely fooked in the process. 

She wanted the job FFS! She put herself up for it, it wasn't dropped on her desk unannounced, she possitively wanted to be PM and to do the EU "deal". She was shit at it, and she didn't do much other good while she was in power.

Strong and Stable, brought down by he own ego, for the many not for the few, that's be proved to be lies, again she might believe she's left the UK a better place, but that doesn't make it true.

3
 Mike Stretford 24 May 2019
In reply to pasbury:

> But, like Mr Croesote’s mints; waffer thin.

The Cons won by 19 last time, not that wafer thin. It's a binary thing and the opposition will know if they are going to win or not. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_vote_of_confidence_in_the_May_ministry

Post edited at 13:26
Removed User 24 May 2019
In reply to krikoman:

> Because he's a lying self-aggrandising prick for one.

> He thinks he can insult hug swathes of people and not apologise for it, for two.

> He's a buffoon who showed the UK on the world stage, for three....

> Ken Livingstone made a good fist of being the Mayor of London, maybe he'd make a good PM


Yes, nice hyperbole but a bit light on detail.

3
 John2 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

Peace in Europe since the Second World War has been maintained by Germany's inability to maintain a standing army and the American-dominated NATO.

14
 John2 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

I don't deny that many people who voted for Brexit were xenophobes, but I think your idea that the British are uniquely misled in their view of the organisation is Little Englandism at its best.

5
 krikoman 24 May 2019
In reply to Removed User:

> Yes, nice hyperbole but a bit light on detail.


Here's £350m details for you.

https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-says-his-350-million-a-week-b...

Is that enough?

3
 Sir Chasm 24 May 2019
In reply to John2:

> Peace in Europe since the Second World War has been maintained by Germany's inability to maintain a standing army and the American-dominated NATO.

You're saying a third world war has been averted by Germany's lack of army? What's given you the impression that Germany wanted to go to war again?

 Whitters 24 May 2019
In reply to gravy:

> "Could you have done a better job?" again are you serious?

> Too bloody right I could have done a better job, absolutely no question.


How? What deal would you have got through parliament?

1
Removed User 24 May 2019
In reply to krikoman:

Yes we all know he's a liar but that doesn't necessarily make him a bad PM or particularly exceptional to be honest. While he's not someone I want running the country I'm not going to get hysterical about it. There was speculation the other day that he'd offer a second referendum. If he did he'd be doing the country a favour despite his failings.

It's a sad fact of course that people will vote for liars, crooks and hypocrites simply because they identify with them in some way. Democracy needs a rational and well informed electorate. Unfortunately they're not like that.

 Yanis Nayu 24 May 2019
In reply to Timmd:

Cheese trifle. 

 Timmd 24 May 2019
In reply to Tyler:

Good points well made.

Edit: Very good points well made in fact. That will teach me to think more and speak less -tongue in cheek and half not.

Thinking more is always good.

Post edited at 14:54
1
 Robert Durran 24 May 2019
In reply to John2:

> Peace in Europe since the Second World War has been maintained by Germany's inability to maintain a standing army and the American-dominated NATO.

I was thinking about the future. Countries bound closely together with common interests in friendly cooperation are far more likely to remain at peace than ones which are not.

 Robert Durran 24 May 2019
In reply to John2:

> I think your idea that the British are uniquely misled in their view of the organisation is Little Englandism at its best.

I didn't say they were and nor do I think they are. Eurosceptic populism is on the rise all over Europe.

 Bob Kemp 24 May 2019
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> possibly the most plain stupid PM we have ever had the misfortune to be governed by, certainly in my lifetime.

Don't worry; I'm sure we'll have an even stupider one in a couple of months...

 Tyler 24 May 2019
In reply to captain paranoia:

> Don't worry; I'm sure we'll have an even stupider one in a couple of months...

They're like extreme weather events, becoming more frequent as the political climate changes. 

 krikoman 24 May 2019
In reply to Removed User:

> It's a sad fact of course that people will vote for liars, crooks and hypocrites simply because they identify with them in some way. Democracy needs a rational and well informed electorate. Unfortunately they're not like that.

Well I'm informed enough, not to vote for the wanker. And in my eyes that does necessarily make him a bad PM.

 krikoman 24 May 2019
In reply to Whitters:

> How? What deal would you have got through parliament?


It might not be about getting a deal through, it might simply be about how you went about it. Excluding the Labour party, or any other party for that matter, until the eleventh hours, epitomises the ego issues TM had and why many people cold have done a better job.

 HansStuttgart 24 May 2019
In reply to stevieb:

> I don't think I could have delivered Brexit, but I do think I could've done a better job than Theresa. She screwed up by triggering Article 50 before we had a plan, and by being too controlling of the red lines / withdrawal agreement etc.

> The withdrawal agreement should have been David Davis (and Boris, and Fox)'s document. Instead major cabinet minsters get to play the role of the powerless, unable to deliver the one true Brexit.


I agree that that is a more sensible plan. But thereby your prime ministership would have been killed by the conservative party after a couple of months?

May had less options than commonly assumed due to the power balance in the conservative party. But on the other hand her dislike of foreigners seems to be one of her main personal motivations for doing the job this way. So good riddance.

 jkarran 24 May 2019
In reply to John2:

Why would Germany need a massive beligerant army? The EU has bound them so tightly to France they have only one poorly defended flank and a nuclear ally stood right behind them.

Jk

 Pefa 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

> I was thinking about the future. Countries bound closely together with common interests in friendly cooperation are far more likely to remain at peace than ones which are not.

And a better chance of them uniting to attack weaker countries from the safety of how militarily strong the EU is. 

12
 stevieb 24 May 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> I agree that that is a more sensible plan. But thereby your prime ministership would have been killed by the conservative party after a couple of months?

Agreed. If May had said that we needed a plan before article 50, she would not have been elected unopposed 

Roadrunner6 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

> I think its a disgrace how Theresa has been treated, by Corbyn not unexpectedly, but by her own party.

> I fully expect we will now be in the hands of someone we dont want or need.

> F*cking Brexshit indeed!!!

Why? She's been a disgrace herself. She's shown herself to be horrifically self interested.

Deadeye 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

They're all off. That's why it all stinks so much.

 jethro kiernan 24 May 2019
In reply to Robert Durran:

My experience of working in Europe is the block that aligned with the UK such as Holland and Denmark have become more pro European, they are pretty appalled at the cluster f£&@ happening in the The UK.

contrary to what we seem to think Europe isn’t some homogeneous mass all politically aligned, we just haven’t talked about Europe politically in a crown up way so the complexity has bypassed us, we pretty much view Europe in terms of towels on sunbeds etc etc.

most Europeans are pretty pragmatic about The EU at the end of the day

Post edited at 20:01
 wercat 24 May 2019
In reply to John2:

> Peace in Europe since the Second World War has been maintained by Germany's contribution of a standing army, The Bundeswehr, together with advanced weapons development and a major tank force, and the American-dominated NATO.

Agreed

The Leopard series of tanks has proved a valuable contribution, not to mention the excellent standards exhibited at NATO tank gunnery competitions

Post edited at 19:59
1
 John2 24 May 2019
In reply to wercat:

I meant in the postwar period when Germany was in the control of the allied powers. The Bundeswehr was formed some years after the end of the war.

1
 Rob Parsons 24 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

> I think its a disgrace how Theresa has been treated, by Corbyn not unexpectedly, but by her own party.

Can you explain how you think Corbyn has treated her 'disgracefully'?

In reply to Pefa:

> And a better chance of them uniting to attack weaker countries from the safety of how militarily strong the EU is. 

Ah, yeah; the EU Army has done a lot of that over the last 60 years, hasn't it? I don't think a single year has gone past when they haven't been marching into one country or another.

Oh, wait a minute; that's wrong, isn't it?

pasbury 24 May 2019
In reply to John2:

Get back to your Airfix modelling!

 MonkeyPuzzle 25 May 2019
In reply to Pefa:

> And a better chance of them uniting to attack weaker countries from the safety of how militarily strong the EU is. 

Tit.

 Pete Pozman 25 May 2019
In reply to Removed User:

He didn't destroy London but he wasted an awful lot of Londoners` money 

 MargieB 25 May 2019
In reply to dh73:

I agree. Logic would dictate that on June 7 there is no PM atall and I think if there is no confidence by her own party there would certainly be no confidence in Parliament. June 7 should be no confidence in Parliament day, triggering an attempt to form a government, with failure I suspect,  and then a GE. The party political elections of leaders is purely their own affair and is separate from that. 

But would it succeed only in reaction to a No Brexit Boris. ??

I'd go for it on June 7 to argue we have a time of  maximum instability and uncertainty of government, time issues/ deadlines and maybe Boris would give the idea of stability however fragile once in office and the moment would pass. Eu results could influence  if it could be said overally a majority of people voted to remain in EU.

Post edited at 08:27
 MargieB 25 May 2019
In reply to MargieB:

Just looked up that there is no limit to Parliamentary No confidence votes. Think June 7 could be missed chance  and still got other chances.

Parliament's job is to look to the stability of the country not of any particular party.

Post edited at 09:13
 MargieB 25 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

So essentially it is the collapse of everything and to cap it all the WTO conservatives have contrived her departure when maybe more horsetrading might have been in the works, via indicative votes, to gain more compromise. But the hard conservatives have also calculated they can use the system to just replace her and by diktat put in an unelected  No deal,  person. Its gross manipulation of the system. So since the process has collapsed with May's departure, I think Parliament may wake up and decide No confidence is the best option on June 7. The liberal Party can get its leader appointed as well as the Con Party {aptly named now, I feel} for a GE in late August or so. Conversely, How would the electorate feel about an unelected PM? Surely people would be even more divided?

 Oceanrower 25 May 2019
In reply to MargieB:

> How would the electorate feel about an unelected PM?

What? You mean like Theresa May, Gordon Brown, John Major, James Callaghan, Lord Home, Harold Macmillan, Anthony Eden and Winston Churchill?

1
 MargieB 25 May 2019
In reply to Oceanrower:

Theresa may did have an  general election.

But yes, it is about the manipulation of a system. Boris is getting to be PM by default and also on a platform of threatening WTO rules by default .He won't voluntarily call a GE.  It  is outrageous by any democratic standard. And Leavers should be overjoyed by a GE because Boris may well get some votes { Remainers can't complain about GE because we are getting Boris by default anyway} and Remainers can have a vote too and have to take their chances too.

Post edited at 11:57
 wbo 25 May 2019
In reply to MargieB:. Would you complain if they replaced her someone decent?  I agree it's manipulation of the system, but that's how it is  - you've never directly ticked a box next to a list of names - pick the pm?

But hey, as the quote goes - a country gets the government it deserves. ? Maybe this is where the years of angry rhetoric inevitably end? Useless minority government, useless opposition, plenty of vultures.

Didn't the UK reject a form of p.r.?

# I used the word decent advisedly earlier - I don't think many of her potential replacements are decent people and I don't think she was either, neither as a mean spirited, deceitful home secretary nor in her time as pm

Removed User 25 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Running through this concise but arguably partisan article Boris is probably not the worst option for next Prime Minister.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/05/running-replace-theresa-190524164357...

 wercat 25 May 2019
In reply to John2:

Ah I see the point.  But the interwar Reichswehr started preparing for the next war from the early 1920s.  By 1930 a lot of the elements of what would become known as Blitzkrieg had already been devised and tested during large scale exercises.   This arose because they foresaw the need to fight two enemies at once and knew they didn't have the resources to do that.  Therefore it would be necessary to use aggressive new tactics to defeat one enemy decisively before turning to the other front.   Poland was seen as a likely adversary before the Nazis took power.

They (the Staff) already knew what they would do when they got the weapons.

 John2 25 May 2019
In reply to wercat:

Anyway, my real point is that peace being maintained by the EU is idealistic nonsense. Just look at how the Greeks were antagonised by the Germans during their debt crisis.

12
 john arran 25 May 2019
In reply to John2:

> Anyway, my real point is that peace being maintained by the EU is idealistic nonsense. Just look at how the Greeks were antagonised by the Germans during their debt crisis.

Pretty impressive take on reality there, John. How many shots were fired during this crisis, which you've apparently pulled out as an example of one of the best examples of inter-state discord within the EU during the last 40 or more years?

When supposed idealism turns out to be verifiably true over multiple decades, you have to start questioning your objection to it.

 HansStuttgart 25 May 2019
In reply to John2:

> Anyway, my real point is that peace being maintained by the EU is idealistic nonsense. Just look at how the Greeks were antagonised by the Germans during their debt crisis.


Ah, the Greeks again. Please remind me how the Brits reacted to the Greek crisis? If everytime the Greek crisis is presented as an example of the terrible EU in a British discussion, the person raising the topic would donate a tenner in solidarity, the debt would presumably be gone by now.

Anyway, this is a good read about what actually happened:

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/greece/2015-09-14/what-really-happe...

Lots of Brexit lessons in there, btw

Monkeysee 25 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

How pathetic 😂

 Pefa 26 May 2019
In reply to captain paranoia:

> > And a better chance of them uniting to attack weaker countries from the safety of how militarily strong the EU is. 

> Ah, yeah; the EU Army has done a lot of that over the last 60 years, hasn't it? I don't think a single year has gone past when they haven't been marching into one country or another.

> Oh, wait a minute; that's wrong, isn't it?

The EU hasn't had an army but they plan on creating one in the future so your question doesn't apply. 

8
In reply to Pefa:

> The EU hasn't had an army but they plan on creating one in the future so your question doesn't apply.

You really are an obtuse idiot, aren't you?

In reply to krikoman:

> The disgrace is :-

> Grenfell

> Windrush

> The Nationality tests debacle

> The reduction in our police force

> The rise in homelessness

> Food banks

> If she's going to cry, where her tears for these people?

Stupendous red herring there. The thread is about Brexit. Her premiership has been about Brexit. Im no fanboi and these criticisms may well be correct but delivering Brexit has been a poisoned chalice and politicking has occured at every moment.

Question to the thread; who could have done a better job? If any could, why did they not put themselves forward? Given the universal view in UKC that all politicians are self serving twunts, why has this hero not stood forward, delivered a Brexit for all and then guaranteed themselves the top job after the inevitable end of TMs premiership?

Anyone.....?

4
 Yanis Nayu 26 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

I think Brexit was/is an impossible job, but she did it spectacularly badly - increasing rather than trying to ease the division, triggering article 50 etc. She was also nasty and xenophobic and contributed significantly to the toxic environment we now live in. I have not one ounce of sympathy for her - she’s horrible and incompetent. 

1
 HansStuttgart 26 May 2019
In reply to Yanis Nayu:

one of the larger problems to me seems to be the conservative membership. May failed in attracting new members to the party in order to widen the views.

PS. This also holds for the remain/people's vote campaign. If you can gather 1m people to march, it should be doable to find 50-100k pro-EU conservative voters and convince them to join the party and affect its course.

In reply to Yanis Nayu:

> I think Brexit was/is an impossible job, but she did it spectacularly badly - increasing rather than trying to ease the division, triggering article 50 etc. She was also nasty and xenophobic and contributed significantly to the toxic environment we now live in. I have not one ounce of sympathy for her - she’s horrible and incompetent. 

This may be correct but still doesnt answer the question.

I wonder too, whether the dislikes also show a representation of UKC political views.

Post edited at 10:08
 Pefa 26 May 2019
In reply to captain paranoia:

> You really are an obtuse idiot, aren't you?

You are projecting. 

5
 John2 26 May 2019
In reply to john arran:

No one is claiming that any shots were fired, I’m just pointing out that the EU possesses built-in mechanisms for creating serious dissension between its member states.

9
 Rob Exile Ward 26 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

I could have done a better job.

1) Appointed a negotiator who recognised that Brexit should have been a technical matter rather than an opportunity for adversarial grandstanding.

2) Agree a joint position with the EU on the various contraversial issues - settlement, N Ireland, ex pats, frictionless trade.

3) Put that to the Commons before invoking article 50, and if they wouldn't sign up hold another referendum on the basis that the original referendum couldn't be delivered.

2
 jimtitt 26 May 2019
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> I could have done a better job.

> 1) Appointed a negotiator who recognised that Brexit should have been a technical matter rather than an opportunity for adversarial grandstanding.

> 2) Agree a joint position with the EU on the various contraversial issues - settlement, N Ireland, ex pats, frictionless trade.

> 3) Put that to the Commons before invoking article 50, and if they wouldn't sign up hold another referendum on the basis that the original referendum couldn't be delivered.


The EU decided (and told Cameron) in June 2016 "no negotiation with no notification" so your dream of 2) and 3) were non-starters.

cb294 26 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

She did have experts capable of successfully negotiating with the EU, but either sacked them or forced them into resignation, making their job impossible from the outset by starting the negotiation clock without any idea of what would be a ratifiable endpoint domestically.

Merely declaring red lines does not mean that these can be held, which is something May did not appear to understand.

To me, this looks like either blinkered, ideology driven monomania, or rank amateurism, neither of which is forgivable for a politician at that level. As Talleyrand would have said, approaching the entire Brexit process this way was worse than a crime, it was a mistake.

Despite these blunders right at the start, an orderly Brexit could have probably been salvaged. However, appointing "negotiators" who did not even attempt do so, Davis in particular but also Johnson with his constant attempts of bypassing the EU negotiators and talking directly to individual states (when he was not actively insulting his counterparts) pretty much killed this off.

As any child learning to play card games will learn first thing, running the clock down and see who blinks first can work only if your counterparts believe that there is a chance you hold the upper hand. As it turned out, this approach stood no chance with a well prepared EU, failed within parliament, and did not even work within her own party/coalition.

Again, where does one dig up such amateurs?

CB

1
 jkarran 26 May 2019
In reply to HansStuttgart:

> PS. This also holds for the remain/people's vote campaign. If you can gather 1m people to march, it should be doable to find 50-100k pro-EU conservative voters and convince them to join the party and affect its course.

It hardly matters if moderate Conservative voters join the party, you don't win an election by voting for your candidate, you win by choosing the candidates and to do that you need to spend big money bankrolling the party and influencial mps.

Jk

1
 MargieB 26 May 2019
In reply to wbo:

No matter the next person , it is particularly important to have a GE because effective government has broken down and a PM has actually resigned- no confidence and resignation of a PM at this juncture in these broken circumstances warrants a no confindence  in government vote at a Parliamentary level. The system is one of effective governance and that has obviously failed with three defeats and a stalemate. To carry on is to compound the ineffectuality of governance . Brexit happens to be the issue that has brought us to this point. Only in times of war would one avoid a GE because invasion may be imminent and that prohibits the time needed to run a GE..

 krikoman 26 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

> Stupendous red herring there. The thread is about Brexit. Her premiership has been about Brexit. Im no fanboi and these criticisms may well be correct but delivering Brexit has been a poisoned chalice and politicking has occured at every moment.

> Question to the thread; who could have done a better job? If any could, why did they not put themselves forward? Given the universal view in UKC that all politicians are self serving twunts, why has this hero not stood forward, delivered a Brexit for all and then guaranteed themselves the top job after the inevitable end of TMs premiership?

> Anyone.....?

Again it was her doing, she wanted the job, and started badly, triggering artivcle 50 without a plan, put our back against the wall from day one.

The very fact she didn't even realise she couldn't get her own side to follow her is a "disgrace" in her egotistical thinking.

Buying, or at least trying to, the DUP support is a disgrace, pissing our money away on her agenda, for FA.

She tried to do it all on her own, to prove something, god know what. Only acquiescing to cross party talks at the last minute,  this should have been day one, point one!!

Removed User 26 May 2019
In reply to MargieB:

Well maybe but it's not going to happen.

One must also be careful what one wishes for. A GE could put a coalition government led by Boris and Nigel in power until 2024.

 DaveHK 26 May 2019
In reply to Removed User:

> Why exactly? I don't want him as PM but there are others I'd want even less. He ran London for two terms and the city didn't slide into the English Channel.

Because he's a lying, self serving tool. 

In reply to krikoman:

Do you vote labour/lib dem?

 krikoman 26 May 2019
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Tory Why?

 MargieB 27 May 2019
In reply to Removed User:

That is a point but the idea one contorts the situation just in case is not really the issue. It has to be on principle. And the principle is about to be overturned by the Conservatives, now buoyed by the EU results to  put in Boris by default, contort the system, sit like a white haired Buddha and block everything and get WTO rules No deal by default. That is their game.

Nope. It has to be  GE. Each party stating its position . Agreed the First past the post contortion  means it is a loaded system and parties will have to join forces for this particular GE to avoid this  opposition  with smaller parties having not enough  figures and one ahead to get governement by Cons-- It is hazardous and proves how bad the constitution is at the moment but it is the system now.I'd vote for PR as part of any manifesto. But the parties must have clear positions on Brexit and 2nd ref.

 krikoman 27 May 2019
In reply to MargieB:

agreed.

Not sure what the Euro election result is going to mean :-

If we stay then Europe have 28 MEPs looking to be awkward bastards, so maybe Europe wants us out now.

If we leave they loose their jobs and we're fending for ourselves on WTO.

I still think another referendum, is best, it's settled then, but leavers think that's trying to stop leaving.

Although, I from my point of view, the results shows there is a slight remain preference, I'm not so sure it made a remain outcome more likely.

It's a funny old world.

 MargieB 28 May 2019
In reply to krikoman:

Maybe the EU elections have secured a WTO definition of Brexit in the minds of leave voters, afterall they had an opportunity to vote for corbyn or May conservative at the time of voting to suugest a definition of a customs union and no one went for it. Means Boris is a certainty, doesn;t it?


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...