-
The difficulty is that she immediately prejudged what she felt to be the "red lines" - which you also quote (control of laws + borders etc) but it wasn't clear that was what all leave voters want.
As an illustration - if you wanted to vote to leave but have a Norway arrangement, how would you vote? You'd vote out, of course. So it must be the case that the leave vote is a coalition of these different views.
That being the case, she should have started by preaching caution; saying that we can't prejudge where we should get to without more discussion; and seeking cross party consensus.
She did the opposite. She said that the vote had to be interpreted one way only, and then refused to seek opposition buy-in, even after she lost her majority. So many of the issues stem from this approach.
-
How about after 3 years we finally know what is going to happen. Let's vote on it?
-
That is the root of her problem.
She stumbled into the Tory leadership and disdained any cooperation with anyone who did not share the 'Hard Brexit' defined by her Lancaster House speech.
You are reading a single comment by @carson and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
andyfallsoff
Mr_Sworld
mespilus
@carson
everyone is being so critical of her but who else has actually tried to find a way forward that respects the referendum result (in the sense of the issues that mattered to people who voted brexit - control of borders & laws etc) and minimises the political and economic chaos that would follow a no deal departure?