The only way I could vote for Theresa May requires a complete change to The United Kingdom’s system of government.
Mrs May would have to run for presidential office. There would need to be a Lower House of Parliament with MPs appointed to represent existing constituencies and re-elected every two years.
An Upper House chamber of review – a reduced and democratic House of Lords – would be similarly elected and appointed to represent a regional ‘county’ of constituencies with one-third of its membership re-elected by some form of proportional representation every two years.
In other words, for Mrs May to win my support the UK would need to adopt the US system of government.
Yes, I know it has its drawbacks but Washington’s downfall is based on its nineteenth century reliance on religious fundamentalism, American society’s crass, cash-based class system and an infant cashocracy’s juvenile determination that it is Biggest and Best in every international department.
But the very system that throws up a Trump or a Clinton also has the power to delay and deny a president who loses control of one or both houses of Congress. Look at the difficulties experienced by Obama in his second term after the Democrats lost control of both House and Senate.
Republican grandees’ greatest current fear, beyond the madman Trump winning or losing the presidential race, is the result of the ‘under ballots’, the votes that will determine
control of House (an almost impossible task in 2016 for the Democrats) and Senate (a more realistic Democrat target). Their loss of these substantial majorities would weaken their ability to control legislation.
Were I currently to vote for Theresa May I would cast my constituency vote in favour of a candidate who did NOT belong to the Conservative Party and who fought the seat with a pledge to halt the proposed EU Brexit (referendum only an advisory vote, remember).
My Upper House vote, preferably exercised in a system of proportional representation, could then go to a peer whose interests lay outside party politics: a Green, perhaps, or someone who might attract party sponsorship but whose career or area of expertise made him/her a valuable asset to our governing body.
Under the same system I could, just as easily, vote Jeremy Corbyn for president but I would elect a right-of-centre MP and a moderate member to the Upper House.
Hence I would have effectively helped create a consensus parliament, a coalition in which the legislature exercises a series of checks and balances on the executive, which satisfies the electorate’s desire for constituency representation while imposing an elected upper chamber to keep a check on the extravagances of MPs.
After all, our abandonment of the traditional parliamentary election in favour of a Her-or-Him beauty contest is a presidential system in all but the name.
The alternatives? A Tory prime minister supported and urged on by wild-eyed right-wingers or a Labour leftie jabbed into action by a Marxist-Leninist rump. Then there are the Liberal Democrats.