Let's Get Political!

[dogs]

The Tories are going to have a job to find a credible leader out of their line up... May originally got the job as she seemed a safe pair of hand, bit like Rees Mogg's nanny, someone who'd clear up the mess after the naughty boys have gone home.

We had the old strong and stable line at the 17 election.  It needs someone competent in politics... and they're a bit difficult to find. 

I've a nagging feeling that they're going to go for an outsider, not Gove, not Johnson - more likely a Geoffrey Cox.

[pauld]

The Tories are going to have a job to find a credible leader out of their line up... May originally got the job as she seemed a safe pair of hand, bit like Rees Mogg's nanny, someone who'd clear up the mess after the naughty boys have gone home.

We had the old strong and stable line at the 17 election.  It needs someone competent in politics... and they're a bit difficult to find. 

The old rules no longer apply, we're in a post-truth, post-fact world where no-one likes experts or even competence. Johnson it is.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

I've a nagging feeling that they're going to go for an outsider, not Gove, not Johnson - more likely a Geoffrey Cox.

That would be poetic. A cunt followed by a Cox.

[horlock07]

It really does feel like the end of May's tenure, now.  Delicious description of the awfulness of her position by Rafael Behr in the Guardian this morning:

The terms of the extension are not drafted for the prime minister’s benefit. They contain a message from the EU direct to the House of Commons. In crude terms: piss or get off the pot. If you want to leave with a deal, vote for the damned deal. If you are foolish enough to leave without a deal, do not blame us. Have a couple more weeks to think about it. But if you want something else, a referendum or a softer Brexit, work it out soon. And then send someone who isn’t May to talk to us about it.

EU leaders cannot say explicitly that they no longer want to deal with the current prime minister. Urging regime change is beyond the pale of normal diplomacy among democratic states. But there is no effort to conceal the frustration in May or the evacuation of confidence in her as a negotiating partner. The one thing everyone in Brussels, Berlin and Paris had most wanted to avoid from an article 50 extension was giving May a licence to carry on behaving as she has done for what feels like an eternity. They could no longer tolerate the hollow shell of a prime minister shuttling back and forth between Tory hardliners demanding fantasy Brexits and Brussels negotiators who trade in realities.

There is a difference between patience with the prime minister and readiness to help her country navigate through its current crisis. There are still stores of goodwill available for Britain in Brussels, but they cannot be unlocked by May.

I don't see the EU's position as weakness, so much as the 27 heads of state wearily coming together to do her job for her.  The extension is clever politics from them.  They have not budged an inch on the terms of the deal.

As a Remainer, I still think I understand the frustration of Leavers who wonder what might have happened if there was a more resolute Leaver at the top of government.  It's tempting to imagine where we would be now if we had gone all out for a No Deal strategy at the outset (not that there was ever a mandate for that).  But I honestly don't think that it would have made any difference.  Tempting as it might be to blame the entire mess on Theresa May, that's too simplistic.  We were always going to be the junior partner to these negotiations - just as we are always going to be the junior partner in any future EU/UK relationship.  All we are seeing now is the chickens coming home.

Its been suggested from an EU source that yesterday evening went something like...

May asks for extension to 30/6.

EU make a draft offer of extension to the 23/5.

May addresses the EU for 90 minutes.

EU change their offer to 7/5

She is a liability.

To be fair to her (and it pains me to say this) I don't think she or anyone else could have got a better deal for the simple facts that a) the unicorn scattered utopia promised by the Leave campaign was never achievable as it immediately fell foul of the 4 tests and thus the EU was never in a month of sundays going to agree to any of it and b) as the EU have shown now (And has been clear for months if not years) they are prepared to go with a no deal if it avoids throwing Ireland under the bus and retains the EU project, people can witttering on about Farage or Johnson getting a better deal but the only leverage they would have had is to threaten to flounce off and the EU were clear that so be it (plus the EU seems to think that both are monster bellends which would likely not helped).

James O'Brien noted yesterday (I think) 'Revoking Article 50 would only ignore the votes of people who consciously voted for the current chaos - i.e. nobody except a clutch of disaster capitalists and hedge funders.'

We are now a two bit island with a knackered democracy, led by people with authoritarian tendencies, little international power and a completely busted reputation for honesty, if Suez is held up as a national humiliation this goes 1000 time further than that!

[Wobbly Bob]

'Independence Day' if and when it happens must be worth a public holiday at least for the long suffering masses?

[Pax Romana]

The terms of the extension are not drafted for the prime minister’s benefit. They contain a message from the EU direct to the House of Commons. In crude terms: piss or get off the pot. If you want to leave with a deal, vote for the damned deal. If you are foolish enough to leave without a deal, do not blame us. Have a couple more weeks to think about it. But if you want something else, a referendum or a softer Brexit, work it out soon. And then send someone who isn’t May to talk to us about it.

Exactly

[Pax Romana]

James O'Brien noted yesterday (I think) 'Revoking Article 50 would only ignore the votes of people who consciously voted for the current chaos - i.e. nobody except a clutch of disaster capitalists and hedge funders.'

That's a very inaccurate statement.  Mr O'Brien doubtless thinks he has been very clever by inserting the word 'consciously'.  

In fact revoking article 50 would, of course, also be ignoring the votes of the 17.5 million people who are not disaster capitalists or hedge fund managers but nevertheless voted to leave.  Some of them may be dismayed by the current chaos but that does not necessarily mean that they regret their original vote or that we are entitled to ignore that vote.

Revoking article 50 would also be ignoring the wishes of those of us who voted to remain, were dismayed by the decision to leave, but believe that overturning democracy when it doesn't suit you is just plain wrong and furthermore that we are too far gone down this road to turn back without causing even more chaos.  

[chalkies_shorts]

Its also just fodder that leavers are as thick as shit and the current chaos could have been predicted. Yadda, yadda, yadda - feeding the remainer self righteous indignation that other people dare have a different opinion and consequently must be thick as they are incapable of the intellectual superiority of the argument.
It yet again merges the vote to leave with the total fucking ineptitude in trying to do so.

[pauld]

That's a very inaccurate statement.  Mr O'Brien doubtless thinks he has been very clever by inserting the word 'consciously'. 

In fact revoking article 50 would, of course, also be ignoring the votes of the 17.5 million people who are not disaster capitalists or hedge fund managers but nevertheless voted to leave.  Some of them may be dismayed by the current chaos but that does not necessarily mean that they regret their original vote or that we are entitled to ignore that vote.

Revoking article 50 would also be ignoring the wishes of those of us who voted to remain, were dismayed by the decision to leave, but believe that overturning democracy when it doesn't suit you is just plain wrong and furthermore that we are too far gone down this road to turn back without causing even more chaos.   

Completely this

[pauld]

Its also just fodder that leavers are as thick as shit and the current chaos could have been predicted.

They're not the same. I don't think leave voters are thick as shit by any means, but the current chaos was eminently predictable because neither side had a plan as to how to go about leaving. Granted May has made a particular horse's arse of it, but the notion that the oaf Johnson, the charlatan Farage or Rees-Mogg would have done any better is laughable

[chalkies_shorts]

They're not the same. I don't think leave voters are thick as shit by any means, but the current chaos was eminently predictable because neither side had a plan as to how to go about leaving. Granted May has made a particular horse's arse of it, but the notion that the oaf Johnson, the charlatan Farage or Rees-Mogg would have done any better is laughable

We'll never know as May went with a couple of civil servants and excluded everyone lese regardless of whether they had a plan or not. The notion that that the oaf Johnson, the charlatan Farage or Rees-Mogg would have done any worse is equally as laughable

[horlock07]

They're not the same. I don't think leave voters are thick as shit by any means, but the current chaos was eminently predictable because neither side had a plan as to how to go about leaving. Granted May has made a particular horse's arse of it, but the notion that the oaf Johnson, the charlatan Farage or Rees-Mogg would have done any better is laughable

Much as I hate to link the Guardian, this is an interesting yet bleak watch...... https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-but-westminster-a-big-day-in-the-north-video

Sad thing is that the polls still show that the party which has caused much of this are still likely to get voted in should an election be held.

They're not the same. I don't think leave voters are thick as shit by any means, but the current chaos was eminently predictable because neither side had a plan as to how to go about leaving. Granted May has made a particular horse's arse of it, but the notion that the oaf Johnson, the charlatan Farage or Rees-Mogg would have done any better is laughable

Those who you mention have continued to wield such power that their utopia was achievable that may was stuck between a rock and a hard place without the nous or nuance to actually do anything bar pandering to the ERG, whilst they bray in the background persuading people how easy it should be, never putting their necks on the line.

[Batch]

fine. May's deal goes down and we try very quickly to agree a softer brexit and then seek a long extension to implement it.

if we don't get agreement in the house, hard brexit in April.

[pauld]

We'll never know as May went with a couple of civil servants and excluded everyone lese regardless of whether they had a plan or not. The notion that that the oaf Johnson, the charlatan Farage or Rees-Mogg would have done any worse is equally as laughable

That's not exactly a high bar. Given that the ERG have driven much of May's agenda throughout this I think we have a pretty good idea of how they'd have done.

[Ardiles]

Revocation of Article 50 won't happen.  You're along way off having a majority in favour of it, largely for the reasons above.  But I think the reason it's being talked about at all is that May is systematically closing off the debate around alternatives to her 'deal'.  There is a huge body of opinion that is opposed to a No Deal exit...and if you keep damming up possible exit routes (incl Customs arrangements, alignment with Single Market, EEA membership) by hindering indicative votes to ascertain support for these, that water has got to flow somewhere.