Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?


  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
She voted to remain in 2016 – it's what she believed was best for Britain then and I'm sure, if she didn't want to give up her shot at a place in history, she'd still admit it is now too. It remains to be seen how that place in history will be written – but I'm willing to bet "one of the weakest leaders a once strong nation has, and will ever, see" will be in the obituary.

Lets just wait to see who her successors are. May's done a great job rehabilitating Gordon Brown's reputation, who knows what chump we'll end up with in the future that makes us pine for the days of Theresa May.
 
I don't think she called a snap election because she had the UKs best interest at heart.
She called it because she knew that there would be troubled times ahead and needed more of a mandate. Being 20 points ahead in the polls, it was not a bad idea on paper.

I would argue that it was more pragmatism than self-interest. She was clearly urged to do it by civil servants and others.

The campaign she ran though was a total disaster.

I would however, mitigate some of that being down to the near total absence of some Tory big-hitters. Corbyn had a field day. 20 points behind he could promise the earth in the virtually sure knowledge he would ever have to deliver on any of it.

She should have dispatched Hammond and Co much earlier to kick fecking big holes in Labour's policies.
 
I kind of disagree with May being in that list. She's at least takes the time to properly understand the issues and I do think that she genuinely has the country's interest at heart whereas the others most definitely do not.
I can believe she believes she has a mission to deliver 'the will of the people', but her stubbornness in not even considering a second referendum, given how the landscape has changed, is very frustrating.
 
When was the last time you saw UK salaries keep pace with inflation? The only time real wage growth has been lower than it is at present excluding the slumps immediately after the two world wars was the mid 19th century.
5847c87859a3cf22008b5cd0-1133


and that's before we even get onto the 10s or even 100s of thousands who will be out of work as companies scale down their UK operations.

How will the continuing slump in the pound not compound things when the vast majority of items we consume on a daily basis are imported?

How do you figure a slump in housing prices and the ensuing negative equity will not affect the average Joe? How about the devaluation of pension funds and investments dooming people to having to work 10-15 years longer than they should, if they can find the work?

The Rees Moggs, Johnsons and Goves who have hedged their investments against a UK economic crisis will be fine but UK industry and the average Joe will be well and truly fecked.

Phew, so many points to get through...
When was the last time you saw UK salaries keep pace with inflation? - Since last year? Before that, for pretty much every period except the "lost decade" post-2008 crash. What's your point?
That's before we even get onto the 10s or even 100s of thousands who will be out of work as companies scale down their UK operations. - What's that got to do with what we're talking about?
How will the continuing slump in the pound not compound things when the vast majority of items we consume on a daily basis are imported? - Have you understood what we're discussing? We're discussing the prospect of short "crash" (severity unknown) manufactured by Westminster for political gain. The type Owens is talking about in the Guardian. Not the long term effect of Brexit. Continuing devaluation of the pound into the future will indeed cause inflation problems.
How do you figure a slump in housing prices and the ensuing negative equity will not affect the average Joe? - Housing prices are due a correction. Ideally through gradual decrease in real values (rather than nominal) instead of a crash. But the current prices are asset bubbles fuelled by poor regulation and manipulated under-supply. And in the end of the day, they won't affect residential homeowners terribly, mostly the investors in the market. The fundamentals for rents are very strong, so those won't collapse leaving residential home owners in net benefit of owning a home. A home owner caught in negative equity can still rent the home out and move elsewhere (via renting) so long as rents are solid.
How about the devaluation of pension funds and investments dooming people to having to work 10-15 years longer than they should, if they can find the work? - Wut? There are feck all projections over the timeframe you are mentioning, certainly not anything with any degree of accuracy. The stock market (and pension fund asset values) has fully recovered from quite a few major crashes in the last 18 years alone. Not to mention that pension funds invest in many assets including foreign stock exchanges and bonds. They can hedge their exposure, much like any rich person. We have no fecking clue what will happen in the next 20 years or so.
 
Last edited:
I can believe she believes she has a mission to deliver 'the will of the people', but her stubbornness in not even considering a second referendum, given how the landscape has changed, is very frustrating.
As I have said above I think there is a part of her that does not think Brexit is a total disaster. I voted remain but that didn't mean I was totally happy with the EU.
 
What's that got to do with the EU? She wants to be like Belarus?
Human rights and foreigners not exactly some of her favourite things.
She was unhappy that she could not expel terrorists due to ECHR rules. I don't equate a desire not to be governed by the ECHR as being like Belarus.
 
What's that got to do with the EU? She wants to be like Belarus?
Human rights and foreigners not exactly some of her favourite things.

To be honest this one is incredibly disturbing, May made the comment about the ECHR in 2016 and up until this day it doesn't seem that everyone realized that the ECHR wasn't a EU convention and obviously the ECtHR isn't a EU court either. This is really disturbing because clearly high profile leaders have no clue about their job.
 
She was unhappy that she could not expel terrorists due to ECHR rules. I don't equate a desire not to be governed by the ECHR as being like Belarus.

You missed his point. The ECHR isn't the EU, Belarus is the only European country to not be member of the Council of Europe.
 
To be honest this one is incredibly disturbing, May made the comment about the ECHR in 2016 and up until this day it doesn't seem that everyone realized that the ECHR wasn't a EU convention and obviously the ECtHR isn't a EU court either. This is really disturbing because clearly high profile leaders have no clue about their job.
I think May understood the difference because she said the UK should leave the ECHR regardless of the vote on the EU
 
She was unhappy that she could not expel terrorists due to ECHR rules. I don't equate a desire not to be governed by the ECHR as being like Belarus.

As JPRouve says Belarus is the only European country not in it, and they're trying to get in.
It is not an EU institution. She's an idiot or even worse.

To be honest this one is incredibly disturbing, May made the comment about the ECHR in 2016 and up until this day it doesn't seem that everyone realized that the ECHR wasn't a EU convention and obviously the ECtHR isn't a EU court either. This is really disturbing because clearly high profile leaders have no clue about their job.

Yes, it is really concerning.
 
Don't mind Corbyn as PM as long as he has competent people around him.
 
You missed his point. The ECHR isn't the EU, Belarus is the only European country to not be member of the Council of Europe.
I get that my point is that May had issues with 'European Institutions' as home secretary and, I believe, she was therefore not an overly staunch fan of having any institutions outside of Parliament and UK law telling us what we can and can't do.
 
she's not even a fan of parliament having a say if her time as home sec and pm are anything to go on
She's woeful. I want them to knife her for her time as home sec. She's miserable. Made my life when I was trying tyring to get citizenship hell.
 
Don't mind Corbyn as PM as long as he has competent people around him.

If people think Brexit is bad just want until Corbyn gets in. Stuff like capital fight, active sabotage from the civil service and god knows what else will make what we are seeing now seem like child play. Still it's the only way I'm getting the chance of some decent housing.
 
I get that my point is that May had issues with 'European Institutions' as home secretary and, I believe, she was therefore not an overly staunch fan of having any institutions outside of Parliament and UK law telling us what we can and can't do.

I don't know if it was the intent but what you wrote is actually crazy, that's not an issue with European institutions but an issue with International Law and foreign policy as a whole.

If she actually believes that then she isn't fit for politics.
 
Why not get rid of Corbyn and have a competent person as PM?
I don't think he's less competent than the other labour labour colleagues and I agree with a lot of his policies. Although on a personal level, I would suffer if he gets into power.
Also don't like those that make it seem like you're not doing it right if you're not on the Corbyn train.
 
And those people keep a calculator handy.
I think the fiscal fears about a Corbyn government are somewhat exaggerated tbh. He's not going to do all the things he says.
What I most look forward to is the infrastructural spending the country needs and a government that gives a shit about our rail network.
 
Last edited:
I think the fiscal fears about a Corbyn government are somewhat hysterical tbh. He's not going to do all the things he says.
What I most look forward to is the infrastructural spending the country needs and a government that gives a shit about our rail network.
Was just a Diane Abbott joke.
 
I don't know if it was the intent but what you wrote is actually crazy, that's not an issue with European institutions but an issue with International Law and foreign policy as a whole.

If she actually believes that then she isn't fit for politics.

It's a bit harsh to say that anyone who criticises the ECHR isn't fit for politics. There is a lot of criticism aimed at it from numerous quarters. Many saying that at the very least it needs reforming.
 
It's a bit harsh to say that anyone who criticises the ECHR isn't fit for politics. There is a lot of criticism aimed at it from numerous quarters. Many saying that at the very least it needs reforming.

The issue isn't the ECHR, it's the idea that you can interact with other sovereign nations without having to respect rules that governs said interactions.
 
All I am saying is that she is not as much of a remainer as people think.

I have really strong memories of her being a eurosceptic back in the long distant day but I can't find any confirmation online. Maybe I imagined it, but I'm sure she used to be one of that group.
 
She'd join the Black Panthers if it meant keeping her job.