May isn't hard line over the EU. The "no deal is better than a bad deal stuff" is obvious positioning. She wants an arrangement. There are a few Tory ex-ministers that have a grudge against her for losing their jobs ( Nicky Morgan, Anna Soubry, and less so Dominic Grieve) but she seems to carry the Tory party. I cannot see that we have a hard-right government now. Austerity came in with Cameron, after Labour left the "no money left, we've spent it all" note
We'll see what these changes look like when they're confirmed and things have shaken down. If the Tory Government make unconscionable cuts to the benefits of the genuinely disabled, I promise to think again - but I won't base my opinions now on Guardian predictions
May will define herself by how she conducts the EU negotiations. You cannot blame her from the warring in her party. It's been going on since before John Major. Her task will be to tread a careful line over the EU and keep her party together. Reading the posts above, you'd think the public really disapprove of her. They don't. Her approval ratings are high in all recent polls taken (and to please you, I won't mention what Corbyn's are like, except to say that Nuttall of UKIP scores higher!)
She's making a massive strategic and tactical error, on several counts. Firstly, she is pandering to a hard line Brexit group (represented in Parliament by the likes of Redwood, Rees-Mogg and Cash, people who's grip on reality is light) because they have just enough numbers to hold her to ransom. The strategy is therefore an intra party led one, not a real world one. Secondly, I don't believe that these people's hatred of everything the EU stands for and every scrap of its work is actually representative of the majority of Brexit voters, so she is trying to satisfy a minority at the cost of the majority. Thirdly, because she will fail, the negotiation will entail compromise which these people will oppose tooth and nail. Above all she will fail on immigration, the one measurable dear to many Brexiters hearts. Many are expecting not just a complete halt to immigration but the disappearance of 'foreign' kids from classrooms and nurses and doctors from hospitals (whether these foreigners are from the EU or not is immaterial I suspect). And there is the issue of competence. Apparently she left any mention of Gibraltar out of her Article 50 letter, despite being told that the EU response was likely to include it, precisely to give Spain an 'easy win' and get the discussions off to a good start. Completely underestimated the rabid response here (mainly from her own side) and in Gibraltar. Likewise with her miscalculation with the clumsy threats about security in her letter, which members of her cabinet immediately had to back track on, but not before winding up many across the channel. I believe in ten years time we will be looking back and lumping together Cameron, who led us into this mess through worrying about his own party, and May, who will **** up the negotiation for precisely the same reason. Two selfish and self centred politicians. Just my opinion of course.
On your points: 1. I don't agree that May is pandering to far right of her party. She wants a fair settlement of monies owed to EU and a free trade deal. But it obvious that if the EU decide to be punitive, we have to walk away and go the WTO route. Personally, I think pragmatism will prevail of both sides. 2. (see 1 above) 3. Immigration - No one with more than two brain cells expects immigration to stop completely or overnight. But once we have control over our borders, voters can hold government to account. 4. Gibraltar. All the facts are not out yet. Apparently Spain asked for it to be left out of the letter and gave some assurances to the UK. It's being reported that Spain then went behind the UK's back to Brussels and hence the inclusion of the matter in the EU response. I expect there's more to come out. In my view it's positioning and it will shake down anyway.
I wasn't. The point you made was a false one however and I therefore pointed it out particularly if it was simply based anecdotally from a few friends.
Not correct. I said to Stan: "Your second paragraph assumes that the split remains at 48% - 52%. I've lost count of the number of people who tell me they voted Remain, but now that we're leaving, want to get it done on the best possible terms and accept there's no turning back. A second referendum simply encourages the EU to give us poor terms in the hope we'll be intimidated into changing course." There's nothing false about any of that. The first two sentences are factually correct, and the third is my opinion based on obvious logic. You may contend that my experience in the second sentence does not represent the picture of the country as a whole. That's your privilege. Neither of us is in a position to establish the actual facts. John Curtis's recent poll (see my post #9480) suggests that the gap between Remain and Leave is growing in favour of Leave. Historically, Curtis has been quite accurate in his predictions - but it's still a poll, and you can take or leave its results.
I simply don't recognise what you describe. The EU and Spain are being completely confrontational over Gibraltar, but all you can see is fault on the British side. The Eu have made threat after threat concerning our exit, but you never notice any of it, How strange.
No, Col, I was just asking people to not use the "What about..." response because it doesn't prove anything and doesn't move the debate along. Yet people seem to think it does. A bit like using personal insults and derogatory nicknames, TBH. I seem to continually touch a nerve with you. I'm sorry about that.
That's true - of course it's my opinion. Who's opinion should I have? To use a different example rather than a political one. If we were talking about benefit fraudsters, would it excuse someone who is caught cheating on their benefits if they could point to someone else and say "What about them, they do it too?" I don't think so. So how could that be a valid response in a discussion about politicians? (Still 1-0 to Villa at half time. Boo).
I'm not interested in returning to the playground. I'm not seven years old. Stop replying to my posts. Insulting me won't change anything. If you can't explain your point of view and need to resort to insults, you'll leave people with the impression that you just can't explain it.
