• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

WI: May resigns in 2017

When she made Johnson her Foreign Secretary, there was an assumption that this was about sidelining him by getting him out of the country and the Brexit Secretary kept him from being involved in that; in the long run, that didn't work because he could be Classic Boris about her Brexit policy and wasn't contaminated by it. If she goes in 2017, a year after his humiliating stabbing from Gove and when he's spent months having dark mutterings about his suckiness as Foreign Secretary, without him getting the benefit of years of May failing while Corbyn exists? I don't see him being leader, he probably doesn't even run.
 
Boris would be a contender, but I dont see MPs nominating him in their droves as they did in 2019. Things hadn't got as desperate as they did in the Euros yet. There was a lot of talk of David Davis as a unity candidate in the days after the 2017 GE. I imagine he runs, and fishes in the same pool as Boris for nominations. Davis became a lot less popular the more he was scrutinised in this period, so I think it's possible Boris could squeeze past him.

The other contender would probably be from the soft remainer part of the party. Amber Rudd was talked up a lot. Hunt, Hancock, or Javid are possibilities if her small majority is too problematic.
 
It's going to be a very different 2017-19 if someone like Davis is in charge and also finds he can't get his Brexit plans through Commons - you can't say David Davis isn't truly a brexiteer and if only a true believer was in charge. But then he also took the view (admittedly when he wasn't in Cabinet anymore) that we should no-deal if it came to it, so he might decide "sod it we're doing that" and actually do it.

At which point I'd assume there'd be an attempted no-confidence vote like in 2019 but it'll run into the same problem that many MPs on the no-conf side don't want PM Corbyn and won't vote if they think they'll get him.
 
Charles EP M. said:
It's going to be a very different 2017-19 if someone like Davis is in charge and also finds he can't get his Brexit plans through Commons - you can't say David Davis isn't truly a brexiteer and if only a true believer was in charge. But then he also took the view (admittedly when he wasn't in Cabinet anymore) that we should no-deal if it came to it, so he might decide "sod it we're doing that" and actually do it.

At which point I'd assume there'd be an attempted no-confidence vote like in 2019 but it'll run into the same problem that many MPs on the no-conf side don't want PM Corbyn and won't vote if they think they'll get him.
Click to expand...
Having David Davis fail to secure, Britain crashes out hard and the Tory Remainers join the TIGUK in bigger numbers sounds like the best scenario for Prime Minister Corbyn with a good Majority.
 
Time Enough said:
Having David Davis fail to secure, Britain crashes out hard and the Tory Remainers join the TIGUK in bigger numbers sounds like the best scenario for Prime Minister Corbyn with a good Majority.
Click to expand...
I’m sure it has been discussed before, but I really wonder how PM Corbyn would have handled Ukraine. He probably wouldn’t have been able to remain as anti-war as he’s now, though even a UK with Germany/Italy or even worse Turkey levels of commitment would influence things in favor of the Russians.
 
Catalunya said:
I’m sure it has been discussed before, but I really wonder how PM Corbyn would have handled Ukraine. He probably wouldn’t have been able to remain as anti-war as he’s now, though even a UK with Germany/Italy or even worse Turkey levels of commitment would influence things in favor of the Russians.
Click to expand...
I suspect he wouldn't be able to resist one or two 'both sides' comments that would attract huge disapproval from almost everyone, but he would ultimately be bounced into supporting strong sanctions by his own party. You might see a tougher line on the financial sector, but more feet dragging on supplying weaponry & troops to reinforce NATO's eastern flank.
 
Nomad said:
I suspect he wouldn't be able to resist one or two 'both sides' comments that would attract huge disapproval from almost everyone, but he would ultimately be bounced into supporting strong sanctions by his own party. You might see a tougher line on the financial sector, but more feet dragging on supplying weaponry & troops to reinforce NATO's eastern flank.
Click to expand...
I don't see him in any world supporting arms sales and he'd be lying through his teeth about there being any risk of Russian invasion right up until its happened. He may well have stopped UK forces training and supplying Ukraine in the years before the invasion as well.

Think there is a very real chance that Ukraine does actually collapse into an insurgency in Corbyn PM timeline.
 
Death's Companion said:
I don't see him in any world supporting arms sales and he'd be lying through his teeth about there being any risk of Russian invasion right up until its happened. He may well have stopped UK forces training and supplying Ukraine in the years before the invasion as well.

Think there is a very real chance that Ukraine does actually collapse into an insurgency in Corbyn PM timeline.
Click to expand...
I don't see Corbyn being sufficiently hands-on with MoD policy to remove trainers from Ukraine. "Stopping arms sales" is much more likely.
 
Death's Companion said:
I don't see him in any world supporting arms sales and he'd be lying through his teeth about there being any risk of Russian invasion right up until its happened. He may well have stopped UK forces training and supplying Ukraine in the years before the invasion as well.

Think there is a very real chance that Ukraine does actually collapse into an insurgency in Corbyn PM timeline.
Click to expand...

I don't think Corbyn being in Downing is enough to make Ukraine collapse. I think Russia's failures in Ukraine are more squarely on its shoulders than it is on the limited training and armament given to Ukrainian troops before the war. Also worth mentioning that the war might not even happen in this ATL considering how many years ahead its POD is. This article paints an interesting perspective on why the war happened specifically when it did.
 
theev said:
I don't think Corbyn being in Downing is enough to make Ukraine collapse. I think Russia's failures in Ukraine are more squarely on its shoulders than it is on the limited training and armament given to Ukrainian troops before the war. Also worth mentioning that the war might not even happen in this ATL considering how many years ahead its POD is. This article paints an interesting perspective on why the war happened specifically when it did.
Click to expand...
This is just the CIA covering their asses after they predicted Russia wouldn’t invade smh.

In all seriousness though, a PM Corbyn only increases the likelihood of Russia invading Ukraine, even if the UK wouldn’t be as isolationist as Corbyn would want due to continuos pressure from the rest of the party.
 
Catalunya said:
I’m sure it has been discussed before, but I really wonder how PM Corbyn would have handled Ukraine. He probably wouldn’t have been able to remain as anti-war as he’s now, though even a UK with Germany/Italy or even worse Turkey levels of commitment would influence things in favor of the Russians.
Click to expand...

According to an interview in the Guardian (I know) on 20 April:

In comments that are likely to inflame further tensions with Labour HQ, Corbyn said he did not blame Nato for the Russian invasion of Ukraine but that it had to be looked at in historical context.
...
The Islington North MP said that people should “look at the process that could happen at the end of the Ukraine war” and questioned: “Do military alliances bring peace?”

This is with the benefit of hindsight post-dating Bucha and etc.

My guess is that we would have hand-wringing, both-sides, criticism of how somehow NATO pushed Russia to this, and that he opposes all types of violence.

Forget arms sales.

When, on April 20, he can say, in effect, he "doesn't blame NATO, but ..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top