Theresa May to resign as UK Prime Minister

[Cardinal]

The UK has been the most monumental demonstration of lack of leadership I've seen in the developed world, and that's coming from someone living in the United States. And it doesn't look like anything is going to get better with May's departure.

 

[Phys251]

I said all along when people were considering which way to vote that perhaps the greatest uncertainty associated with leaving the EU is that no country has ever done it before, so no one can/could predict the exact resulting consequences of a yes vote. It's new ground.

A big reason why Brexit is like watching a train crash in slow motion.....

Particularly the hardening of the Ireland/NI border, which, as I understand, was a major reason that Brexit still hasn't gone through. It's also my understanding that the hard Brexiteers, when told about the possibility of a hard border, and its very likely resurgence of the Troubles, dismiss that very real concern. If so then no wonder nobody respects them.

 

[Phys251]

The UK has been the most monumental demonstration of lack of leadership I've seen in the developed world, and that's coming from someone living in the United States. And it doesn't look like anything is going to get better with May's departure.

Cardinal, do you keep up with the Fragile States Index? It's been both sad and fascinating watching the US and the UK steadily increase on their scales (increase=bad on the FSI) over the last few years.

 

[Jredbaron96]

I'm not from England, so I certainly may be misunderstanding the whole process. But if the Brexit party is polling well, and Farage is the leader of the party... How would Farage not benefit?

Probably the same way May "benefited" from becoming Prime Minister.

 

[buck]

Probably the same way May "benefited" from becoming Prime Minister.

Good point. I'm sure it would be a pita.

 

[Peter King]

Brexit was a good deal, the follow through was muffed to the point it's probably dead. So much for the UK...

Brexit was always going to be a terrible deal. Soft or hard brexit, you can compare it to a 1 pound ball hitting your private parts at 60 miles an hour or a 2 pound ball hitting your private parts at 60, both will be painful but one will just cause a bit less damage than the other one. That is brexit in a nutshell, screwing up your economy moderately or screwing up your economy terribly.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Re: UK set for new PM as Theresa May quits

I disagree. The UK is not as divided as the US. The Conservative UK is as divided but they only account for 30 or so percent of the population. The rest are all in agreement that the Tories suck and are to blame for all the problems we see now. Problem is it is the same Tories who have to call an election which they want to avoid at all costs....

Sent from my Honor 8X using Tapatalk

Yes and no, Pete. Labour are almost as divided. Corbyn wants Brexit too, but for Stalinist ideological reasons, while 60/70% of his party want remain. The Tories will have mainly lost votes to the Brexit party and maybe a few to the Libdems. Labour will lose votes to the Greens/Libdems and a few to the Brexit party. The two main parties will be big losers. The problem is that Farage's Brexit "party" look to take up the UKIP vote, while the remainers voters have to choose between LibDems/Greens or the "Change" party, who were only set up a few weeks ago by sitting MP's abandoning the Tory and Labour parties to try to form a "centrist" grouping, splitting the remain vote three ways..

 

[Peter King]

She's too late leaving by a good margin.

How utterly disgraceful - and thoroughly predictable - that after the people have spoken on Brexit, it still hasn't happened.

Shameful.

That is because almost nobody knew what they were voting about, even less people knew the dire consequences of it and if they knew they lied about it and yes, then there are the other brexiteer lies like the one about how much money would be going into the NHS after brexit.

The utterly disgraceful thing is organizing a referendum where people have no clue about the subject, no clue about what kinda brexit they wanted to achieve and no clue in general about how difficult it would be. And almost half the public and 2 of the 4 countries were actually against Brexit. Northern Ireland voted remain, Scotland voted remain, Gibraltar voted remain, the economic heart of the UK voted remain. In fact almost have (over 48%) voted against Brexit. And that was any brexit whatsoever.

The rest was divided between a hard brexit and a soft brexit.

The choice should have been (for honesty):

1. do you want a hard brexit (and then an honest description of the consequences)

2. do you want a soft brexit and remain part of the common market only (with an honest explanation about how much it would cost and what economic consequences that brought)

3. do you want to remain

That would have been an honest way to put it because nobody in the Brexit camp has a frigging clue as to what the British people want to begin with, hard brexit or soft brexit.

 

[Peter King]

Seriously though, at least the UK hasn't made the incredibly stupid decision to have their clown lead the country.

Not yet, they still might and the people will not get a say in it until the next general election (or when the Union falls apart).

 

[Peter King]

This was expected. I don't envy the next PM.

If it is the Idiot Boris Johnson, then I don't envy the British people.

 

[Peter King]

Yeah, who'd want to let your own country decide it's future, better to let unelected bureaucrats in Brussels dictate your future!

1. they were not deciding the future, they were just blindly doing something about a subject way too important and intricate to be decided by an up or down referendum

2. except Europe does elect it's officials and even the European commission is chosen and ratified by elected officials chosen as representatives of the EU and proposed by their countries governments to work as commissioners. A lot of things in Europe are elected officials. Also, did you vote for the US cabinet ministers or any people under them? Nope, they are also not elected bureaucrats, that is mostly how governments work. You choose your representatives and the rest is done mostly by the bureaucracy. Most of which are there through non elective processes.

 

[Peter King]

Yesterday I voted in European elections to elect politicians to the European parliament.

as did I and in the next few days hundreds of millions more will have the ability to vote for the European Parliament.

 

[Peter King]

You country voted to be vassals to Brussels.

No, they chose to be prosperous, now they voted to kick themselves in the nuts.

 

[Peter King]

Love her or hate her, she has been dealing with an impossible situation. Not surprised by her teary farewell at all.

I did not love her, nor did I hate her. And I felt sorry for her having to say goodbye, but she choose this job knowing full well she was supposed to bring about brexit.

Her first job should have been reach across party lines and ask all MP's to voice their opinion whether they would approve:

- only a hard brexit

- preferred a softer brexit

- only agree to a soft brexit

- like to remain but could be persuaded for the good of the country to agree to a very soft brexit

- only vote for remain

Then and only then could she have made an agreement with the EU that would have a chance to be passed by a multi party agreement over the future of the UK. Then she should have called for a new election to see if the people agreed with her and where candidates could have run on supporting the May's brexit deal or voting against May's brexit deal.

Now she only looked into her party to create a deal that would never have been accepted due to the large number of hard brexit supporters in her own party. The way she chose to solve the brexit riddle by only looking to the right side of the political spectrum was bound to fail.

And while she should have reached out to the other side, she should have chosen anybody in the labor party but Corbin. A terrible leader IMHO and unfit to lead a social democratic party, he should leave and start a socialist party because it sounds like that is what he truly is.

 

[cpwill]

You mean Farrago's fake party, which is actually a limited company? Who knows? It probably took votes off his old party, UKIP. Results Sunday.

Ah. So if Brexit is that unpopular, and it's a fake party, and they're just taking votes from what was already a very minority party, there's no way they outperform Labour or the Tories, I suppose.

Huh.

That's odd.

The Brexit Party appears to be outperforming both the Conservative and Labour parties.

Though, as you say, we'll wait for the official results.

 

[Manc Skipper]

Ah. So if Brexit is that unpopular, and it's a fake party, and they're just taking votes from what was already a very minority party, there's no way they outperform Labour or the Tories, I suppose.

Huh.

That's odd.

The Brexit Party appears to be outperforming both the Conservative and Labour parties.

Though, as you say, we'll wait for the official results.

The Brexit party is a limited company owned by Nigel Farage. It had a board of eight, but four have resigned already. It appears to be registered in the USA. It has no manifesto. It charges £50 for membership, but offers no benefits to members including internal voting rights for candidates. The UK limit for individual contributions to a political party without the donor being named is £500. Donations have been flooding in to the Brexit party to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds, in £499.99 amounts.

 

[cpwill]

The Brexit party is a limited company owned by Nigel Farage. It had a board of eight, but four have resigned already. It appears to be registered in the USA. It has no manifesto. It charges £50 for membership, but offers no benefits to members including internal voting rights for candidates. The UK limit for individual contributions to a political party without the donor being named is £500. Donations have been flooding in to the Brexit party to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds, in £499.99 amounts.

Okedoke.

So, given how Brexit is so deathly unpopular, is it doing well, or doing poorly.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[buck]

The Brexit party is a limited company owned by Nigel Farage. It had a board of eight, but four have resigned already. It appears to be registered in the USA. It has no manifesto. It charges £50 for membership, but offers no benefits to members including internal voting rights for candidates. The UK limit for individual contributions to a political party without the donor being named is £500. Donations have been flooding in to the Brexit party to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds, in £499.99 amounts.

I've heard it's a 25 pound membership fee - and the members will be voting for the representation. At least according to a LBC interview i've heard with Nigel.

 

[Renae]

No, they chose to be prosperous, now they voted to kick themselves in the nuts.

You have your view, I have mine. A decade will tell us who was in error.

 

[Peter King]

You have your view, I have mine. A decade will tell us who was in error.

The damage already done to the UK economy is obvious even now. The damage it has done to their coin is obvious. The idiot Boris Johnson calling for people to get ready for a no deal brexit is insane. People are already stocking up on products they are afraid will no longer be available.

And it will hurt the EU economy to some degree but it will hurt the UK economy much worse. The Banking industry of London/financial capital of Europe will be knocked off it's place by other EU cities. The UK citizens will have to pay more for their products, the EU will most likely not because we can do without UK products, the UK cannot do without EU products. Ooh sure, the UK can import from the US and other countries, but even then the transport costs will rise, customs excises will have to be paid even then. Fresh produce we now import from the UK will start coming more from Ireland or other EU partners we can have free trade with.

The NHS will suffer as a lot of staff come from the EU, pensioners who now live in Spain are going to be hit. They already are as their money (if they weren't smart enough to convert it to Euros) has been taking a huge hit.

A no deal brexit could cost the UK as much as almost 10% of a GDP hit in the next 15 years. The damage according to the bank of England will be likely worse than the damage done by the global economic downturn in 2008 for the UK. While it will not damage the EU economy anywhere near that level. That is not a point of view, that is an economic reality.

And then I am not even talking about the damage it could do to the UK as a whole. It could be that Scotland will have had enough and finally push through independence. Northern Ireland will suddenly risk becoming embroiled in the troubles again if there is a hard border between the it and Ireland. Something from what I understand virtually nobody wants in Northern Ireland.

 

[Sweden]

Particularly the hardening of the Ireland/NI border, which, as I understand, was a major reason that Brexit still hasn't gone through. It's also my understanding that the hard Brexiteers, when told about the possibility of a hard border, and its very likely resurgence of the Troubles, dismiss that very real concern. If so then no wonder nobody respects them.

There is a 'hard border' between the US and and Canada. Does that imply that that the Yanks will start killing the the people who live to their North to try to make them Americans by force? Like War of 1812 Part II?

 

[Sweden]

I think in the end they're going to hold another vote. Most Brits have come to realize they were conned.

No they have not. Every poll shows that if the out referendum was re run the result would be the same-

 

[Sweden]

I'm not from England, so I certainly may be misunderstanding the whole process. But if the Brexit party is polling well, and Farage is the leader of the party... How would Farage not benefit?

I've really only been paying attention to the England elections the past few days and that's mostly from watching youtube videos of Farage on the BBC or UKIP's Sargon of Akkad taking his act on the road and talking to people - which I find very interesting. So, I certainly know there is a whole lot I don't know.

Here is some info about the man who will probably be the UK PM in a couple of months. Boris Johnson vows to take Britain out of the EU on Oct 31 'Brexit deal or no deal'

 

[Sweden]

I'm not from England, so I certainly may be misunderstanding the whole process. But if the Brexit party is polling well, and Farage is the leader of the party... How would Farage not benefit?

I've really only been paying attention to the England elections the past few days and that's mostly from watching youtube videos of Farage on the BBC or UKIP's Sargon of Akkad taking his act on the road and talking to people - which I find very interesting. So, I certainly know there is a whole lot I don't know.

And here is a piece giving some idea why Farages's new party will have almost certainly won more more votes in the EU election than Labour and Conservatives combined.

My week with Farage: Milkshakes, kisses, sold-out rallies, and supporters with a 'blind faith in him to deliver Brexit'

 

[Peter King]

There is a 'hard border' between the US and and Canada. Does that imply that that the Yanks will start killing the the people who live to their North to try to make them Americans by force? Like War of 1812 Part II?

That is total nonsense, really it is. To compare it to the US and Canada border. The Troubles are a thing of the recent past and it is in part dependent on open borders, close off the borders and stock the border with soldiers and the violence will most likely to some degree erupt again.

If the UK institutes border patrols and border crossings etc. etc. etc. it could be seen as going against the spirit of the Good Friday Accords which ended the troubles. A violent struggle of more than 30 years ended only 20 years ago, the wounds are still raw in Northern Ireland and the balance is precarious. It cost more than 3500 lives and to some degree physically injured about 107,000 or so people.

This is not an issue between 2 nations like it is between the US and Canada, this is religion against religion, paramilitary groups against paramilitary groups, neighbor against neighbor. This is more comparable to the Basque freedom issue, not the issue between 2 largely peaceful countries and communities like the US and Canada. This is family against family sometimes. Marrying with the wrong person could make you a target for violence, not something commonly happening if a Canadian marries a US citizen.

This would possibly be a repeat of late 1960 to 1998, this is not ancient history for that region like the war you mentioned.