The Theresa May (UK PM) survival thread

Will she survive the vote of No Confidence? Place your bets, folks!

I hope she’s toast but Tory MPs are generally a bunch of self serving, two-faced … (contd. p97), so who knows?

Theresa May has survived this long on the basis that all the other alternatives - in any party - are far worse. That has not changed.

My prediction is that she’ll be weakened even further but survive. On the other hand, given the recent trend of people doing incredibly stupid things that damage the country for incredibly stupid reasons, I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised if Boris or JRM ended up as PM.

No. I think she is dogmeat.
(How about offering the job to Trump? He is half Scottish after all. And youd’d solve Americas problem as well).

I think she wins the vote, but with such a high number of votes against her that she is irretrievably weakened. Ordinarily, a leader might resign in the face of such opposition, even if it was technically sufficient to allow them to remain, but who knows now.

A quote from Macolm Turnbull in 2013 is topical if you substitute “May” for Rudd" and “Tory” for “Labor”.

I’m certainly an outsider and not all that conversant with UK politics so hopefully someone can enlighten me…

Isn’t this whole thing about buyer’s remorse among the UK electorate concerning Brexit? I don’t know that May surviving AND going forward with Brexit are compatible political events. Is the sentiment among the MPs against a follow up referendum that strong?

It also works to describe his own ousting if you substitute “Turnbull” and “Liberal”

No. It’s about her lack of leadership during the Brexit process. The Brexit thread is elsewhere and I’ve stepped out of it.

Can someone explain what she was supposed to have done that she hasn’t? I’m American, so make it brief and use small words.

And her calling an early election despite repeatedly saying she wouldn’t and then losing several seats, forcing a devil’s bargain with the DUP who are a nasty bunch of paleoreligious troglodytes. And the mass resignations. And the general dishonesty and incompetence of her government overall, at a level that rises above (or perhaps sinks below) the usual political background noise.

May took on a poisoned chalice from Cameron and tried to make Brexit work. The problem was that what was promised by the Leavers (who all buggered off after the referendum) was never achievable, no one could agree what Brexit ought to look like, and the EU had no reason to give the UK anything it wanted (and many reasons not to). All May could do was bluff, bluster and spout meaningless phrases like “Brexit means Brexit”. Her Brexit ministers were likewise at best ineffectual and at most downright incompetent (remember Davis lying about analyses done?). In the end all she could do was try to play a game of chicken by invoking Article 50, and all that has done is to accelerate the progression toward the cliff edge.

As I’m not a Tory my views on what she was “supposed to do” (or not do) probably aren’t fair, but I’d settle for “not call an early election” and “not invoke Article 50 without a clear plan” as two things she could have done differently.

Yup. And behind all that is a lack of competent leadership.

I disagree. It was a golden opportunity for a good leader. She could have been a new Atlee, forging a new United Kingdom. Instead, we’ve had fudge, fumble, and failure.

She has failed to let the British have their cake and eat it too.
Or alternatively she has failed to make reality go away.

Just a thought, but the vote is quite sudden and I wonder how many Tory MPs won’t be able to cast their votes because they are unable to get there? I’m thinking in particular of Scottish MPs, who are likely to vote against May. But there must also be MPs who are abroad.

This initially confused me because Amber Rudd is a Tory MP. :slight_smile:

The vote of confidence seems a bad way to run a country. Something happens, and they dissolve the government and have an election. Who is running the store in between?

When did Parliament take to ridiculing and laughing at the Prime Minister during session?

No, Brexit was never going to work. Unfortunately she’s too stubborn to give up on it, and too sensible to give in to the Hard Brexiteers in her party.

As much as I dislike her (and I agree she’s a terrible leader), she is actually the best they’ve got, and has probably got the best possiible deal for leaving the EU.

The Conservative Party is having a vote of confidence in May as their leader. This isn’t a Vote of Confidence in the House of Commons which is a very different matter. If May loses the Tories will elect a new leader who will become Prime Minister. Think of it like Republican senators having a vote on whether or not to impeach Trump. If Trump goes, another Republican - Pence - steps in; America doesn’t get to vote on another president.

That’s nothing new.

Just to fight ignorance a little, once a General Election is called, MPs lose their seats immediately, but ministers do not lose their offices until they are replaced. This ensures continuity of government. When Brown called a General Election in 2010 he did not stop being Prime Minister until Cameron and Clegg had agreed their pact and Cameron had gone to the Queen.

Why is it better to have a government that can’t control the country and has no democratic legitimacy than to have no government? You need a government. You don’t need a government all the time. The civil service are still there, the military are still there, the police are still there, the NHS is still there, changes in policy and legislation can wait a few weeks.

The chalcolithic.

You’ll get different answer from different people.

Pro-brexit people wanted a good deal, or failing that no deal at all. Like her slogan.

Anti-brexit people didn’t want brexit at all.

Most people wanted a smooth transition.

The Tories wanted to stay in power.

She managed to do none of these things. Most recently she came home with a deal no-one wants, then tried to hide the facts about it and ultimately chicked out and refused to put it to a vote.

That remains to be seen. But the first requirement is a leader determined to make it work. And May fails on both counts.

I would say just the opposite. The vote of non-confidence is essential to clarify if the PM has the support of her party. That’s essential for her to be able to govern. If she doesn’t have her party’s support, then the party needs to replace her right away.

This isn’t a parliamentary vote of confidence, which could trigger an election. This is internal to the party. If they kick her out, they elect a new leader who becomes PM.

However, if things continue to go pear-shaped and Corbyn wins a vote of non-confidence in the Commons, that could result in a general. election.

The government stays in power during the election.

Prime Ministers have always been fair game during Question Period.