Who will be the next Prime Minister

veronese68

KingstonGraham wrote:

Gove lost in a vote too.

My mistake, I thought he jumped just before the last vote.

surrey_commuter

Coopster the 1st wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

May might want a GE to give her PM'ship legitimacy and momentum, esp given Brexit and all that entails.

She might lose... as of today UKIP would gain a few seats, LibDem might too, Labour might stay the same or gain a few and Tories would lose a few

well, anything is possible but lose a snap autumn election?
certainly Farage would revoke his resignation and remain, the Labour party? who knows? but the country is heavily divided, 17m voted for Brexit out of an electorate of 46m and a uk pop of 65m, her mandate for being PM is zero and it will haunt her, just like it did Gordon Brown, she also has to justify how a remainer is embracing Brexit, given what the remainers said will happen if we leave.

We don't vote for a PM, we vote MP's individually to represent us. We don't need a presidential type election as you seem to think we should have.

Constitutionally that's obviously right but politically and in the eyes of the public there is less respect for a PM who hasn't led their party to GE victory.

Particularly in something as important as Brexit I think a lot of people will be thinking along those lines.

There is no point of having a GE at this moment in time. Nothing has changed on Europe except we are leaving (and that was decided recently on a separate vote)

I could see a referendum to validate the type of Brexit we go for after negotiations have taken place. The reason for not having a GE based on Brexit is how can Labour present their view on how Brexit will work when it is not their negotiations? Even if they are part of cross party exit negotiations.

All Mamba and others are trying to do is somehow get another vote that will mean the referendum result is ignored. Funnily enough this approach is very EU like as in 'you will keep voting until we get the correct answer'.

I would be very surprised if Mamba was a senior member of the Tory party, so posting stuff on here is unlikely to get a new vote.

I am really not sure what people mean by a GE based on Brexit. Would vote for Tories mean out is out WTO terms, Labour going for Norway style deal and LibDems staying in.

mrfpb

Coopster the 1st wrote:

I could see a referendum to validate the type of Brexit we go for after negotiations have taken place. The reason for not having a GE based on Brexit is how can Labour present their view on how Brexit will work when it is not their negotiations? Even if they are part of cross party exit negotiations.

All Mamba and others are trying to do is somehow get another vote that will mean the referendum result is ignored. Funnily enough this approach is very EU like as in 'you will keep voting until we get the correct answer'.

There would be no point having an election to validate the terms of Brexit as votes on any EU deal are always pointless for the reason you outlined - we vote again to get the "correct" result, as MPs did with Mastricht and as the Irish did with Lisbon.

What we get from the EU is a compromise deal of the 28 (now 27) members haggled over past midnight deadlines and agreed at 4:00am, 3 days late because everyone has lost the will to live and just wants to go home. No PM has the will to go back and renegotiate on the basis of the country rejecting it either by referendum or Parliamentary vote.

So a GE on the basis of the terms of Brexit will be pointless. Likewise a vote on what May tells us she will get from Brexit is also pointless, as whatever she says will only be the opening negotiating position and she will come back with less than promised at the GE - possibly leading to a No Confidence vote and another GE.

mrfpb

And on a more positive note, have we got to the natural end of this thread without invoking Godwin's Law? After all the question in the title has been answered.

surrey_commuter

mrfpb wrote:

And on a more positive note, have we got to the natural end of this thread without invoking Godwin's Law? After all the question in the title has been answered.

I would wait until the fat lady sings. To this day people can not agree on whether Hitler won power electorally so there is definitely a comparison to be made

surrey_commuter

mrfpb wrote:

Coopster the 1st wrote:

I could see a referendum to validate the type of Brexit we go for after negotiations have taken place. The reason for not having a GE based on Brexit is how can Labour present their view on how Brexit will work when it is not their negotiations? Even if they are part of cross party exit negotiations.

All Mamba and others are trying to do is somehow get another vote that will mean the referendum result is ignored. Funnily enough this approach is very EU like as in 'you will keep voting until we get the correct answer'.

There would be no point having an election to validate the terms of Brexit as votes on any EU deal are always pointless for the reason you outlined - we vote again to get the "correct" result, as MPs did with Mastricht and as the Irish did with Lisbon.

What we get from the EU is a compromise deal of the 28 (now 27) members haggled over past midnight deadlines and agreed at 4:00am, 3 days late because everyone has lost the will to live and just wants to go home. No PM has the will to go back and renegotiate on the basis of the country rejecting it either by referendum or Parliamentary vote.

So a GE on the basis of the terms of Brexit will be pointless. Likewise a vote on what May tells us she will get from Brexit is also pointless, as whatever she says will only be the opening negotiating position and she will come back with less than promised at the GE - possibly leading to a No Confidence vote and another GE.

Bizarrely I agree.

As you know I do not believe the EU will ever compromise on free movement so if we are going to have another vote it should be to ask whether people want Norway or WTO.

As you also know I do not think the British electorate is equipped to make such a decision and it will become a slanging match about immigration

mrfpb

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Bizarrely I agree.

Not for the first time!

Surrey Commuter wrote:

I would wait until the fat lady sings. To this day people can not agree on whether Hitler won power electorally so there is definitely a comparison to be made

That could be a long wait. I was thinking that now we know who the next PM will be we could continue the bunfight in the EU threads where Godwin's Law was invoked many moons ago.

surrey_commuter

mrfpb wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Bizarrely I agree.

Not for the first time!

Surrey Commuter wrote:

I would wait until the fat lady sings. To this day people can not agree on whether Hitler won power electorally so there is definitely a comparison to be made

That could be a long wait. I was thinking that now we know who the next PM will be we could continue the bunfight in the EU threads where Godwin's Law was invoked many moons ago.

She is not PM yet!! There has been some seriously weird sh1t happen in the last few weeks. If you offered me 500/1 on Gove I would put a couple of quid on.

bobmcstuff

UnICredit on why this is good:

1 - It is widely thought that Theresa May is more likely to seek a “soft Brexit” (sometimes called the “Norwegian plus” option) from the EU, which maintains access to the European single market, including financial services, and some (crucially largely symbolic) restriction on free movement.

2 - It avoids a two-month long leadership campaign and lifts one source of uncertainty in the UK. Leadsom risked splitting the Conservative Party and an early general election, in part because of her hard line on Brexit, and in part because she has little or no experience at the top level of government

I'd take Option 1 - not sure if it's achievable though.

mrfpb

When I first mooted a possible coronation I said the big issue will be delaying Art 50. Delaying from September to New Year seemed reasonable to us (not Merkel). Delaying from July to New Year will seem deliberately obstructive and lose some goodwill (if there is any left) among the other leaders.

Pross

Only point I can see in calling a GE would be if May wants to stay in the EU. She could then try to get a manifesto commitment to ignore the referendum and, if the Tories won, could legitimately remain in the EU. However, given the whole point of the referendum was to get Tory unity and we were never supposed to vote to leave that is obviously never going to happen. Has anyone even worked out if an election can be called now we have fixed terms for a parliament?

mrfpb

Pross wrote:

Only point I can see in calling a GE would be if May wants to stay in the EU. She could then try to get a manifesto commitment to ignore the referendum and, if the Tories won, could legitimately remain in the EU. However, given the whole point of the referendum was to get Tory unity and we were never supposed to vote to leave that is obviously never going to happen. Has anyone even worked out if an election can be called now we have fixed terms for a parliament?

It requires a 60% majority vote if proposed by the government or a no confidence vote going against the government on a simple majority. Given the slim majority it could happen if there are more than a handful of rebels in agreement with the opposition, but given the diverse nature of the opposition parties it's unlikely they would all agree on something to get a vote on.

rick_chasey

May will be PM by EOP Wednesday and there will be no early GE.

Phil Hammond for Treasury is the obvious move on that front.

surrey_commuter

mrfpb wrote:

Pross wrote:

Only point I can see in calling a GE would be if May wants to stay in the EU. She could then try to get a manifesto commitment to ignore the referendum and, if the Tories won, could legitimately remain in the EU. However, given the whole point of the referendum was to get Tory unity and we were never supposed to vote to leave that is obviously never going to happen. Has anyone even worked out if an election can be called now we have fixed terms for a parliament?

It requires a 60% majority vote if proposed by the government or a no confidence vote going against the government on a simple majority. Given the slim majority it could happen if there are more than a handful of rebels in agreement with the opposition, but given the diverse nature of the opposition parties it's unlikely they would all agree on something to get a vote on.

If Tories wanted an early GE they could sort out their own no confidence vote (I thought you needed two)

We are not staying in the EU. The electorate may not have realised they were voting to torpedo the economy but the people you want to renege would have. Why would they have changed their minds?

morstar

I'm sure lots of people (me included) would love a new GE. But unless an overwhelming number of MP's really want to reverse the referendum decision and are happy to risk their political careers in the only legitimate method by which to do it...
It's not going to happen.

mrfpb

Surrey Commuter wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

Pross wrote:

Only point I can see in calling a GE would be if May wants to stay in the EU. She could then try to get a manifesto commitment to ignore the referendum and, if the Tories won, could legitimately remain in the EU. However, given the whole point of the referendum was to get Tory unity and we were never supposed to vote to leave that is obviously never going to happen. Has anyone even worked out if an election can be called now we have fixed terms for a parliament?

It requires a 60% majority vote if proposed by the government or a no confidence vote going against the government on a simple majority. Given the slim majority it could happen if there are more than a handful of rebels in agreement with the opposition, but given the diverse nature of the opposition parties it's unlikely they would all agree on something to get a vote on.

If Tories wanted an early GE they could sort out their own no confidence vote (I thought you needed two)

We are not staying in the EU. The electorate may not have realised they were voting to torpedo the economy but the people you want to renege would have. Why would they have changed their minds?

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ ... ry/SN06111

A no confidence vote doesn't automatically lead to a GE, Parliament gets 14days to sort out a new government and avoid the GE. There are still some in the media talking about "snap elections" but the FPA has effectively ended these. No one is going to push for a GE this year looking at the rules as May can't call one without some support from opposition parties, and Labour won't support one of push for one while their leadership infighting is going on.

rick_chasey

May has said she'd enact A50 in 2017.

Would take a brave minister to do that in a recession....! You want to be in as strong a position as possible.

surrey_commuter

mrfpb wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

Pross wrote:

Only point I can see in calling a GE would be if May wants to stay in the EU. She could then try to get a manifesto commitment to ignore the referendum and, if the Tories won, could legitimately remain in the EU. However, given the whole point of the referendum was to get Tory unity and we were never supposed to vote to leave that is obviously never going to happen. Has anyone even worked out if an election can be called now we have fixed terms for a parliament?

It requires a 60% majority vote if proposed by the government or a no confidence vote going against the government on a simple majority. Given the slim majority it could happen if there are more than a handful of rebels in agreement with the opposition, but given the diverse nature of the opposition parties it's unlikely they would all agree on something to get a vote on.

If Tories wanted an early GE they could sort out their own no confidence vote (I thought you needed two)

We are not staying in the EU. The electorate may not have realised they were voting to torpedo the economy but the people you want to renege would have. Why would they have changed their minds?

http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ ... ry/SN06111

A no confidence vote doesn't automatically lead to a GE, Parliament gets 14days to sort out a new government and avoid the GE. There are still some in the media talking about "snap elections" but the FPA has effectively ended these. No one is going to push for a GE this year looking at the rules as May can't call one without some support from opposition parties, and Labour won't support one of push for one while their leadership infighting is going on.

In theory the Tories could vote down their own govt and then vote against any formed by the opposition.

My own theory is that a sitting PM looks authoritative because of their position and in 2018 there will be a major boundary overhaul which will seriously strengthen their position.

surrey_commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

May has said she'd enact A50 in 2017.

Would take a brave minister to do that in a recession....! You want to be in as strong a position as possible.

Catch 22?

Stevo_666

mrfpb wrote:

And on a more positive note, have we got to the natural end of this thread without invoking Godwin's Law? After all the question in the title has been answered.

Given that the result is done and dusted and peace seems to have broken out in the Tory party, maybe we need thread about the next leader of the opposition

drlodge

Stevo 666 wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

And on a more positive note, have we got to the natural end of this thread without invoking Godwin's Law? After all the question in the title has been answered.

Given that the result is done and dusted and peace seems to have broken out in the Tory party, maybe we need thread about the next leader of the opposition

I think first we need an effective opposition

Stevo_666

drlodge wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

And on a more positive note, have we got to the natural end of this thread without invoking Godwin's Law? After all the question in the title has been answered.

Given that the result is done and dusted and peace seems to have broken out in the Tory party, maybe we need thread about the next leader of the opposition

I think first we need an effective opposition

I think you need to be realistic about these things

pblakeney

drlodge wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

And on a more positive note, have we got to the natural end of this thread without invoking Godwin's Law? After all the question in the title has been answered.

Given that the result is done and dusted and peace seems to have broken out in the Tory party, maybe we need thread about the next leader of the opposition

I think first we need an effective opposition

I think first we need an effective leadership to oppose.

RideOnTime

I think we're starring down at the next general election with a Tory/UKIP/Another very right coalition.
and it ain't a pretty sight.... can they hang on until what 2019 - 2020.

ugo.santalucia

RideOnTime wrote:

I think we're starring down at the next general election with a Tory/UKIP/Another very right coalition.
and it ain't a pretty sight.

You can see it that way, but what exactly was the difference between New Labour and the Cameron's version of the Tories? Beside budget restrictions induced by the credit crunch...

RideOnTime

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RideOnTime wrote:

I think we're starring down at the next general election with a Tory/UKIP/Another very right coalition.
and it ain't a pretty sight.

You can see it that way, but what exactly was the difference between New Labour and the Cameron's version of the Tories? Beside budget restrictions induced by the credit crunch...

a bit of humanity.

mfin

RideOnTime wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RideOnTime wrote:

I think we're starring down at the next general election with a Tory/UKIP/Another very right coalition.
and it ain't a pretty sight.

You can see it that way, but what exactly was the difference between New Labour and the Cameron's version of the Tories? Beside budget restrictions induced by the credit crunch...

a bit of humanity.

Good joke!

pblakeney

RideOnTime wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

RideOnTime wrote:

I think we're starring down at the next general election with a Tory/UKIP/Another very right coalition.
and it ain't a pretty sight.

You can see it that way, but what exactly was the difference between New Labour and the Cameron's version of the Tories? Beside budget restrictions induced by the credit crunch...

a bit of fake humanity.

FTFY

anonymousblackfg

I enjoyed seeing Ham Face saunter back into No.10. "Sam, get your mink coat, we're fcuking off to the Caribbean, no more of this austerity sh1t on Cornwall for the cameras"

ugo.santalucia

anonymousblackfg wrote:

I enjoyed seeing Ham Face saunter back into No.10. "Sam, get your mink coat, we're fcuking off to the Caribbean, no more of this austerity sh1t on Cornwall for the cameras"

If I were Cameron today, I'd be very pleased... 6 years as PM, no major trouble, no deaths and wars to be accountable for, campaigned for EU, but lost to a bunch of lying back-stabbers, got out of no. 10 leaving the country in "safe hands"... 10 years down the line he won't have people trying to put him in jail... it's not a bad outcome, really, given how things go these days