T.May said "no deal is better than a bad deal" having read
this Independent article i have a feeling she is talking about herself not the people who voted leave.
After Theresa May originally used the “no deal” formulation in her
Lancaster House speech in January, many pointed out its foolishness, its lack of realism, for all the reasons outlined above. And she stopped using it for a time. So why is it back?
One interpretation is that this is a negotiating tactic from the Prime Minister. Economic game theory
suggests that if you’re not prepared to signal that you are prepared to walk away from the negotiating table, you reveal that you are the weaker party and can ultimately be rolled over.
But there’s also a possibility that Theresa May and her team are actually describing their own circumstances, rather than those of the country, when they say no deal is better than a bad deal. It’s distinctly possible that a mutually advantageous transitional post-Brexit trade arrangement, probably involving continued UK payments to the EU budget and freedom of movement for EU citizens, would be dismissed as a “bad deal” by the right-wing press and her hardline Brexiteer backbenchers. And they might well turn their guns on the Prime Minister if she signed up to it.
They could topple her, even if that transitional deal were firmly in the economic interests of the British public. That threat is obviously greater if her parliamentary majority, as seems increasingly possible, turns out to be relatively modest. And, for May, the prospect of such a backlash from her media allies and backbenchers might seem worse than the bad deal, even if she fully understands the economic consequences of no deal for the country.
As well as game theory, economists talk of the “principal-agent problem”. This describes how agents can sometimes be incentivised to work in their own interests rather than the principals who commissioned them. May would be the agent and the British people the principal in these Brexit negotiations. We will need to watch very closely whose interests she is really serving
.