To think there should not be a snap General Election...

[Flashbangandgone]

...after Theresa May's victory. It seems that the Lib Dems, Greens and even Labour's election coordinator think so, but surely with the UK needing stability after Brexit, Labour being in the worst possible place to be a credible opposition, and the public only recently voting (1 year in GE and weeks ago in referendum) surely it's the last thing we need. Besides, I couldn't stand another months of electioneering...

You might like them to call a GE, mother presumably because you don't vote conservative, but there is no requirement for them to do so. TM is perfectly happy to be PM, why on earth would she jeopardise that?

It looks to me as if the whole thing has been orchestrated

What, so May gets to be PM?

I'll agree the whole situation comes across as a massive fuck up, but orchestrated seems to be stretching it a bit far.

Terrible timing for a general election though given that Labour are in the middle of having a leadership contest of their own.

There's no president for a GE. Neither Major or Brown where voted in.

Much that I disagree with brexit and the referendum. I think a general election is the last thing we need right now.

Let's get some stability before the whole crock of shit that'll be article 50.

I'm all for democracy however, constitutionally, we don't need an election & secondly, Labour's vote will disolve to UKIP. What a scary thought

I do think this is politically illiterate. We vote for an individual MP. The MP stands on a party manifesto (sometimes with personal caveat) which indicates the sort of people they would group with and policies they would vote for. They also indicate that if X gets elected by their own constituents then the parliamentary MPs will follow them. But the order of importance is very much MP, Party, Manifesto, PM.

Now you could argue that Brexit and the unclarity of what the referendum result actually means makes the manifestos irrelevant, so parties should stand for a new mandate. But they won't do that because none of the parties want it and it would be even more disastrous for economic uncertainty.

Don't something like 2/3 of MPs have to give a vote of no confidence in the government? Who's going to do that? Not labour with their own internal problems. Not snp quietly going about their business to ensure another Indyref in their sights.

Mother

How can they realistically rerun the story leadership election when all the candidates, including Boris, are adamant TM should be installed as PM away?!

As for a General Election, even an ardent Labour supporter must surely admit that Labour aren't an alternative Government at the moment... At the very least they need to sort out their civil war before they could possibly be trusted with the country. It would irresponsible to hold a GE now, and would most likely lead to a Tory landslide if that did happen. Personally I wouldn't be averse to that but I suspect most of those calling for a GE would be aghast at the prospect!

Good god - a GE now is a terrible idea. Jeremy Corbyn calling for one is yet more proof that he is a total numpty.

If we have a GE now:

• Labour will be annihilated
• the Libs will stay annihilated
• UKIP will pick up 10-20 seats

-the Tories will have an enormous majority

• there will be far fewer pro-Remain MPs than now

All the really big political mistakes of the last century have happened when the governing party has a large majority and a weak opposition. It is unhealthy. I would much much rather continue with the current parliament.

Teresa v who?

Teresa would win a GE anyway so why bother with the cost and voter apathy?

Labour are a joke at the moment.

Who's going to do that? Not labour with their own internal problems.

Some in Labour have. Corbyn supporting MPs I however agree with other Labour MPs response to that which was that they need to go for a lie down

I disagree. I didn't vote for Theresa May to be PM. I am concerned that she has stated that having sex does not hurt young children. I am concerned that she feels that Sharia law benefits this country.

Everything about this post is awful! 1 - you don't vote for a PM in this country, you vote for an MP. And on to points 2 and 3 where on earth are you getting this information? You need to have valuable sources to back up claims like that!

Re ClaireVoyante's allegation...

There were reports a couple of years ago about a report from the NCCL published in 1976 which expressed the view that children were not harmed by having sex with adults. Patricia Hewitt was general secretary of NCCL when this report was issued. Harriet Harman's husband was chair and she took up the role of legal officer in 1978. Theresa May was not involved at all.

I can find no evidence to support ClaireVoyante's allegation.

I think a snap election would be a bad idea. Labour could have taken a political attack to the Tories & UKIP post-Brexit, but instead of uniting to bring their full force to bear have descended into worse bickering and in-fighting than the Tories managed. Worse, now that the Tories are behind May they are at now appearing more competent than Labour (and I'm a Labour voter).

Also, I can't stand Theresa May's politics but I sincerely doubt she said anything pro-paedophilia (?) (!)

I have never voted Tory but I feel this is not the right time for a General Election. We need leadership and stability - the Brexit screw up has to be dealt with, the more uncertainty for the markets the more pain we will all feel - Labour are a shambles, as are the Libdems, we have no choice but to just get on with what we've got and I think she was the best of a bad lot. I liked her speech in Birmingham yesterday - I just hope she meant what she said, Compassionate Conservatism was nothing more than a pipe dream in David Cameron's Gov - so we'll see..

she was s big voice against Gordon Brown not having a democratic mandate when he became PM in similar circumstances.
Gordon Brown became PM as the result of a stitch up between him and Blair in 1997. It was more like a coronation than a leadership election, everyone knew Blair would resign.
No one expected Cameron to resign and while TM has had massive support there has also been a leadership contest. Its hardly her fault that no other serious contenders wanted to take the poison chalice. I don't think the circumstances are similar at all.
I would like a GE but it would be pretty destabilising, as TM has a similar direction to DCs manifesto from last year I'm not sure its necessary either.

ClaireVoyante is also wrong to say that May feels that Sharia law benefits this country. May's comments were thoroughly misrepresented in the press. She said, "Many British people of different faiths follow religious codes and practices, and benefit a great deal from the guidance they offer. A number of women have reportedly been victims of what appear to be discriminatory decisions taken by Sharia councils, and that is a significant concern. There is only one rule of law in our country, which provides rights and security for every citizen."

The press twisted this to suggest that May singled out Sharia Law for praise. She did not.

By the way, the original comments came at the launch of a review she set up to look into whether Sharia law is operating in a way that discriminates against women and counter to our overall rule of law.

mother I didn't know that, I thought it was assumed his position would be untenable but not that he'd said he would actually resign. My recollection is he refused to discuss anything other than a remain vote. Do you have a link?

It might not have been orchestrated but it certainly seems bizarre that there is nobody there now who was on the leave side

If Boris Johnson had acted decisively after the referendum and spoken about where he wanted to take the country he would probably have become PM. Instead he disappeared because he had nothing to say, ending his hopes of becoming PM this time round and probably permanently.

If Gove had never supported Boris he might have had a chance. Instead his actions came across as treachery, destroying his own hopes.

That left Leadsom as the only Leave campaigner standing. If she was standing for Leader of the Opposition her lack of experience may not have mattered. Standing for PM it did. She sought to counter this with her "stellar" career in the City. It seems that it didn't occur to her that people would investigate her CV and find out the huge gaps between her claims and the truth. Her campaign was finally killed by the Times using the old journalistic trick of reporting faithfully the words she said.

In my view Boris was the Leave side's best hope of gaining leadership of the Conservative party and he flunked it.

I can't see how TM who wanted to remain is best qualified to negotiate with the EU over this mess

She was a reluctant Remainer. She has said that she will set up a specific department to negotiate our exit. I suspect the minister she appoints to head that will be someone who campaigned for Leave. But people often end up negotiating for an outcome they were personally against. I really don't think it has to be someone who wanted to leave negotiating with the EU. Indeed, it is possible someone who wanted to remain might get a better deal as they may take a less antagonistic approach to negotiations.

You know that DC said he would resign if the leave vote won

I don't think he did. I think he specifically said that he wouldn't several times in an attempt to make sure the Leave side could not make the referendum about him personally. The Labour Leave campaign nonetheless ran adverts inviting people to wipe the smile of DC's face by voting Leave.

Having said that, I think most commentators were of the view that, having campaigned so vigorously for Remain, DC would have to resign if Leave won. If he had remained aloof from the campaign it might have been different.

Agree with those who say would be bonkers to call a GE now. The opposition would be annilated. I also agree that May got there fair and square, no way can this be compared with the coronation of previous PMs. Cameron was hugely negligent and derelict of duty to run away from leading after he got us into this mess. To keep along a path of infighting and no leadership wouldvhave totally buggered up our economy. And anyway if Corbyn got into power he'd rush straight into article 50 with no thought like the eejit he is. I hate the Tories but May is one of the more considered and cautious ones, has hopefully learned from her (relatively) vast experience and I hope is the best of a bad bunch to see us through this mess. I don't like that she's more right wing than the last shower but she has said words to the opposite and we need to hold her to those.

They should do it quickly.

The new/current Australian PM made the mistake of waiting 10 months after taking over leadership to call an election. It was one of the worst things he could've done. It allowed ample time for the opposition to find faults in him, his leadership and policies, and allowed ample time for them to make them known to the public. The opinion polls were strongly in favour of the PM initially, but by the time the election rolled around on July 2, the polls had he and the opposition leader neck and neck and it took 10 days for us to get an election result.

Basically, Tory supports should want an election now/ASAP; Labor/Greens should want an election later.