Just eleven daysafter polling

BobQ

Just heard Mrs May making a big issue of the fact that eleven days after the election, the future of the country will be determined by who is sitting in the negotiation chair. The implicit message being you can only elect her or we are all doomed.

If it was so damn important that we do not change the PM 11 days before the negotiations start, why has she exposed the country to such a risk purely for party political advantage?

In effect she is gambling with the economic security of the nation.

DiggerUK

Gambling a guaranteed three and a half years in power.....for a mere year and a half extra.....why. Only time will reveal.

But the way events are unfolding, and the lack of wow factor in tory strategy and policy, makes me think that Churchills defeat in 1945 was a good showing at the polls..._

Yah_Boo_Sux

BobQ wrote: »

Just heard Mrs May making a big issue of the fact that eleven days after the election, the future of the country will be determined by who is sitting in the negotiation chair. The implicit message being you can only elect her or we are all doomed.

If it was so damn important that we do not change the PM 11 days before the negotiations start, why has she exposed the country to such a risk purely for party political advantage?

In effect she is gambling with the economic security of the nation.

I can tell you why.


It's in no small part because of the vehement and vocal pro-EU protagonists who just for example insisted that May had no mandate to negotiate Brexit or to organise the negotiation of Brexit.
It's because of the vehement and vocal pro-EU protagonists who insist even now that most of the voting UK do not in fact want Brexit.

Well there ya go - it's thanks to YOU in very large part that Theresa May called a General Election.
Political advantage?
Well you have to say something like that after you've been squawking for the better part of a year, don't you? Or at least, you gotta say something. It's just that no matter what you say, it's not going to improve your pro-EU argument or prevent you from looking as unreasonable as you now do.

If you don't want Brexit, vote LibDem. If you don't want May but want Brexit (and mega-debt for a future UK) vote Corbyn. Roll on June 8th. And don't worry BobQ, I feel certain you will find much to whinge about post-GE too.

Moby

I will find plenty to whinge about as well. Leaving the EU is a disaster for our future and we're leaving the negotiations to the shakiest PM I've seen for years. She clearly does not believe in what she's doing anyway!

prosaver

thats the problem with debates remember Clegg he out shown everyone with his acting skills.. enough said

alewin

Yah_Boo_Sux wrote: »

I can tell you why.


It's in no small part because of the vehement and vocal pro-EU protagonists who just for example insisted that May had no mandate to negotiate Brexit or to organise the negotiation of Brexit.
It's because of the vehement and vocal pro-EU protagonists who insist even now that most of the voting UK do not in fact want Brexit.

Well there ya go - it's thanks to YOU in very large part that Theresa May called a General Election.
Political advantage?
Well you have to say something like that after you've been squawking for the better part of a year, don't you? Or at least, you gotta say something. It's just that no matter what you say, it's not going to improve your pro-EU argument or prevent you from looking as unreasonable as you now do.

If you don't want Brexit, vote LibDem. If you don't want May but want Brexit (and mega-debt for a future UK) vote Corbyn. Roll on June 8th. And don't worry BobQ, I feel certain you will find much to whinge about post-GE too.

Agree with you on everything apart from voting for Corbyn if you want Brexit, he has stated that he will only leave if he gets a good deal with complete tariff free access. The EU know this and will therfore not give him anything close to what he wants so the UK will continue to be a member and pay into the EU coffers which is what the EU want.
Also don't forget that most of the Labour MP's do not want to leave the EU and the vast majority of them do not even want Corbyn as their leader.

With only a 17 seat majority in Parliament and with Labour, SNP and Literal Dems planning to oppose the PM all the way in the negotiations, she felt she had to have an election to gain a stronger hand.

wotsthat

Yah_Boo_Sux wrote: »

I can tell you why.


It's in no small part because of the vehement and vocal pro-EU protagonists who just for example insisted that May had no mandate to negotiate Brexit or to organise the negotiation of Brexit.
It's because of the vehement and vocal pro-EU protagonists who insist even now that most of the voting UK do not in fact want Brexit.

Well there ya go - it's thanks to YOU in very large part that Theresa May called a General Election.
Political advantage?
Well you have to say something like that after you've been squawking for the better part of a year, don't you? Or at least, you gotta say something. It's just that no matter what you say, it's not going to improve your pro-EU argument or prevent you from looking as unreasonable as you now do.

If you don't want Brexit, vote LibDem. If you don't want May but want Brexit (and mega-debt for a future UK) vote Corbyn. Roll on June 8th. And don't worry BobQ, I feel certain you will find much to whinge about post-GE too.

Do you think there would be an election because of the vehement pro-EU squawking if the Tories thought they might lose? No didn't think so.

We're having an election because the Tories think/ thought they had a very large majority in the bag. That's it.

Ballard

Blimey. We haven't even left the EU yet but Remainers have been blamed for the snap election. I can only imagine what'll be said if leaving doesn't go well.

kinger101

Both Labour and Conservatives would have agreed to whatever had been negotiated, because as they continually parrot out "the electorate have spoken".

Really, this was about May having her own manifesto to deliver. Her problem wasn't the House of Commons (although her majority is slim) but the House of Lords. They are less likely to block anything in a manifesto.

I can understand why she has done it. It's about not wanting to continue Cameron's government.

sevenhills

BobQ wrote: »

Just heard Mrs May making a big issue of the fact that eleven days after the election, the future of the country will be determined by who is sitting in the negotiation chair. The implicit message being you can only elect her or we are all doomed.

Will it be the PMs of each country, or specialist negotiators?

IveSeenTheLight

kinger101 wrote: »

I can understand why she has done it. It's about not wanting to continue Cameron's government.

I get this, but then the snap election should have been called when Cameron stood down (or as soon as the Conservatives appointed a leader).

Not 9 months down the road.

There is an argument that a PM stepping down should be an automatic process for a General Election to be held