THE most entertaining part of every Tory leadership crisis is the chimp-cage poo-chucking, the passive-aggressive slanging match that delivers some truly delightful and inventive verbal imagery. Back in the early noughties Iain Duncan Smith was warned that the “men in grey suits” were coming for him, and responded that “if they do, they will leave without their trousers”. That, commented a Conservative backbencher, was “fighting talk bordering on the homoerotic”. His predecessor William Hague’s ill-fated appearance in a baseball cap bearing his own surname saw him described as resembling “a child molester on day release”.

The slow, painful fall of Theresa May is similarly providing its share of what we might call descriptive overreach. In recent days the MP Bernard Jenkin, seeking to inspire Mrs May to greater levels of dynamism, said he wanted to “see the leopard leap out of her cage”. His colleague Robert Halfon demanded “policy-making by lion”. One wonders if either man has recently encountered the Prime Minister, who for the past year has more closely resembled a rabbit not just frozen in the headlights but flattened by the oncoming truck.

Not to be outdone, the howlingly strange Jacob Rees-Mogg has declared that “Brexit is more important than anyone other than the Queen”. It’s unclear whether the ambitious Mr Rees-Mogg includes himself in his stark division between the Monarch and all other, lesser human beings (or, indeed, where leopards and lions sit), but one suspects not. Equally his insistence that Mrs May “has my full support” fails to convince, especially when, for some reason, he adds “may the PM live forever, Amen, Amen, Hallelujah, Hallelujah, Amen”.

I don’t wish to alarm you, but it’s entirely possible and perhaps at this stage even likely that Jacob Rees-Mogg will be our next prime minister. Oddschecker.com, which compares the odds across all the leading bookmakers, makes him 6/1 favourite to be the next Conservative leader. He has been top of the bookies’ tree for quite a while now. As the newly chosen leader of the Eurosceptic European Reform Group, made up of 60 backbench Tory MPs, the lanky, double-breasted throwback grows more aggressively outspoken in favour of a hard Brexit, and more popular and credible in the party, by the day.

It could even happen quite quickly. It’s reported that Sir Graham Brady, chairman of the backbench 1922 Committee, almost has the 48 letters from Tory MPs (comprising 15 per cent of the parliamentary party) that would require him to trigger a no-confidence vote in Mrs May. The prospect has left Sir Graham “ashen-faced”. It seems unlikely, given her weak position, that the Prime Minister would survive such a challenge, and the impact on the Brexit negotiations, which are now entering their most sensitive stage, is unknowable.

Even were Mr Rees-Mogg to fall short, the alternatives are hardly more appetising. Boris Johnson, whose lust for glory pervades Westminster like a pea-souper, is second, at 8/1. Third is Andrea Leadsom – yes, Andrea Leadsom – at 10/1. The most promising contender from the Remainer/soft Brexit side, Home Secretary Amber Rudd, would surely struggle to win over a narrow, ageing Tory selectorate that craves a robust exit from the EU regardless of the consequences.

So, Jacob, Boris or Andrea – which of this delectable trio do you fancy to lead Britain through the uncertain years that lie ahead? Or perhaps you like the look of Gavin Williamson, the pushy former fireplace salesman turned Defence Secretary who has the air of a man with a locked room somewhere in his house. Or maybe you’d prefer Labour’s Jeremy Corbyn, a Leaver whose approach to Brexit has been cynically, contemptibly slithery, and who would wreak havoc on our remaining global relationships while also knee-capping our economy.

In this light, and in this company, Mrs May starts to look like less of a bad bet. Her slender, remaining attraction lies not in what she is, but in what she is not. To one side of her sit those who entertain an evidence-free, almost theological belief in a clean break from the EU, who argue there is an eager world out there just waiting for what Mr Johnson will describe in a forthcoming speech as a “bold internationalist, liberal, buccaneering Brexit”. On her other side are those who, like Chancellor Philip Hammond and Ms Rudd, want our departure to be as painless as possible and for us to maintain close future ties to Europe.

At the moment, the Prime Minister serves as a buffer between the two factions. Not a strong buffer, of course – she has been forced to abandon preparations for a third high-profile speech on Brexit over fears it would simply widen existing Cabinet splits. But her removal would mean that one side or other would seize control, and the victors would almost certainly be the hard Brexiters. That imbalance would lead to an open civil war and probably to a rather brutal break with the continent. For all the talk about Labour splitting, it may be the Tories who subsequently find life together intolerable. (On the upside, moderate Conservatives such as Nicky Morgan, Anna Soubry, Justine Greening and Ms Rudd would make an impressive centre-right foundation for any new liberal centrist party).

One can’t help but feel for the Prime Minister. She is rubbish at her job, wholly lacking the emotional intelligence, intellectual flexibility and convening charisma that good PMs need. Further, her political situation is, as the Labour peer Lord Wood puts it, completely impossible: “She is besieged by angry calls to be ‘bolder’ from Tories of all persuasions who fundamentally disagree about what ‘bolder’ means. Inaction is therefore her only survival strategy, which makes her position quite hopeless.”

But here’s the thing. That inaction may just be saving us from something much worse, at a time when there appear to be no good options, or better alternative prime ministers, available. If this come across as a counsel of despair, I can’t deny it, but Mrs May might take the advice of Ronald Reagan: don’t just do something, stand there.