E.U: Leave or Stay? Your thoughts.

Ah, i wasn't sure how it worked for each party, TY.

Although even if the Conservative party rules say she must go couldn't she still dig her claws in, i mean legally what recourse would they have, they couldn't just send in the bailiffs and throw her out of no10.

 

She will survive the vote today, but basically if she lost she gets to stay PM until a new leader is elected, so if she refused to get out of No10 the new PM (who would automatically get the entitlement to be in there) would need to have her removed (his house his rules and all that).

 

May wins confidence vote, 200 votes to 117.

 

So as predicted she won, but over 100 votes against her plus she still has the problem of getting her deal (or any deal really) through parliament...

 

You know what? They were. Dominic Cummings deliberately, as a thought-out strategy, avoided any debate in the EU Referendum of what "Leave" actually meant --leave where to, what was the plan-- so that every voter could project their own fantasies and wishes onto it. Brexit was whatever people wanted it to be. People ticked a blank box.

And when Leave won, and the difficult discussion started on what Brexit actually meant --because there can only be one-- nobody wanted to have that discussion. They just wanted OUT. They just wanted the government to "get on with it". So yes, they were arguing for the Brexit Mystery Box. And this is what's inside.

 

JRM sounded like he was trying to claim a victory.

 

So both main party leaders have had confidence votes against them... both have had >100 of their own MPs vote against them.

He lost... he needs to get over it... the will of the party has spoken... etc.

 

Aye, playing by his own rules he should.

Can't really argue against other people having a similar issue with results they feel are just plain wrong.

 

And in both cases with no real consequence, because preserving the party is more important than anything else to them.

 

In a way i'm glad the ERG didn't get to put somebody in place, this fiasco has shown how tactically naive they are.

 

If Labour got rid of Corbyn and brought in lets say for example Luciana Berger on a remain manifesto then the Tories could go suck an egg in a GE if they turned up with a Mogg running on a hard leave manifesto.

 

Sadly I have to disagree, they're twats but they're not naive.

At this point it should be quite clear that the hardline Brexiteers within the Conservative party are a bunch of fantasists and cowards. They believe themselves to be the vanguard of a silent majority, that they only need raise the flag and all will gather behind them. Obviously they're not, Mogg in particular only knows the trick of standing in the peanut gallery heckling, having been thumped in this vote (more Cons backed May here than in either round of the Leadership ballot in 2016) he has reverted to his usual line that she has been undermined and should resign. Despite all of that he is still getting what he wants.

They want a no deal Brexit and they have the advantage, they want to achieve it by preventing any kind of vote or progress on the deal, whether within Parliament or a proper vote by the public. They want that because Brexit will happen on the 29th of March next year deal or no deal, it's the law (literally). Unless May goes and asks for an extension so she can run a second referrendum they win by default. May seems too proud to go and ask for more time, because she knows she'll only get more time by offering a second vote with the word REMAIN in one of the options boxes. Or there's a General Election, but even then you can bet Johnson and Mogg would move heaven and earth to make sure the election takes place after March, or that nobody gets to ask for an extension, leaving the new government days to try and get some kind of deal through parliament.

As a strategy it's genius. It shows a total lack of respect for this country's law, due process and democracy, but this constant burning of time is still genius. Of course if they get what they want the fallout when reality slaps them is going to be both unpleasant and hilarious for us all.

 

So with 117 voting against her and Mrs May saying she's not going to stand in another election it seems the chances of a VonC in the government has increased, the only way for the extremist in the Conservative party to get a new leader would be a GE.

Would they be brave enough to take the chance that a GE would force May to stand down and that a more extreme version of Brexit would win more votes than Labour lead by Corbyn?

EDIT: Then again, after having just read what fix-the-spade has said running the clock down does seems a more likely desire.

 

LOL. And who would have stepped up and done better? BoJo the clown?

Agree on this: Theresa May failed to manage expectations. It was obvious from the start that a realistic middle ground needed to be found on what Brexit meant. Instead she pandered to the hard-right wing and then seemed surprised when the EU took her at her word. She listened to incompetent advisors time and again, called an unnecessary snap election and blew it by trying to take the opportunity of a dead-cert win to push through some unpopular policies, which totally backfired.

The current deal is the best she can manage in maintaining her self-imposed red lines without totally thrashing the economy.

 

In short... this the best you're going to get, both in terms of deal with the EU and in terms PM.

There is no magical mythical better version of either on offer.

 

However, May can threaten them with holding another referendum. Or she can threaten to lean towards an even softer Brexit that gets support from pro-EU MPs on her side and the opposition. She could even pull the "back me or risk a VonC and GE" card. Hell, she could even revoke Article 50 and most MPs in the house would back her. Before she was afraid of these guys and pandering to them. Now they have been revealed as powerless.

She is untouchable for the next year. The ERG hoped to get rid of her while keeping the party in power. Now the only way to get rid of her is to risk a GE.

 

Valid argument.

I guess if I accept they are devoid of all moral responsibility to the lives of those they represent it makes a degree of horrid sense. A failing of mine is thinking too highly of people and believing they have no sense of honour.

Force a crash out due to lack of time as a ballot with crash out/remain I would expect would not work in their favour.

 

A GE would still play to their advantage, it would mean 6 weeks with no government at all, which plays into their hands further. Obviously the risk to them is that somebody sweeps to power on a platform of stopping Brexit entirely or holding a second referrendum. But both of those would need to be voted on by Parliament, which means that after six weeks (mid January from today) they have another 9 weeks to find. If the GE is called in the new year they may only have to find a couple of weeks. It's well within their power to stymie a vote in Parliament by two or three weeks.

I would prefer her to announce a second referrendum and ask for a six month extension on Article 50, but Mrs May is nothing if not stubborn and she seems to have decided that her way is the only way and will trudge on regardless.

 

If i remember correctly the EU have said the only thing that would make them consider extending A50 would be a GE or a second referendum so a GE wouldn't play into the run the clock down crowd.

What i find incredible is that some Conservative MPs are saying it was a good result, Thatcher resigned when she only revived 200 votes and when you remove the MPs who would've been voting to loose their own jobs (140) it means only 60 backbenchers supported her.

 

Well, 52% is an "overwhelming majority" these days...