HUBRIS, as we know, is followed by nemesis.

In these days of an anti-Establishment mood gripping voters here and abroad, it seems inconceivable that a senior politician would seek to adopt an arrogant Establishment approach and expect the electorate to follow blithely behind.

But that is what has happened and Theresa May is now paying the price, possibly at some point with her job.

Having confidently called a general election to bolster her working majority of 17, the Conservative leader’s lack of presence on the campaign trail, her U-turns and her decision not to debate fellow leaders backfired, so that she now is looking to have a working majority of just seven but only thanks to the help of the Democratic Unionist Party, which has 10 MPs.

Arlene Foster, the DUP leader, announced she would be having talks with the Prime Minister this weekend about, not a formal coalition but a so-called confidence and supply arrangement.

This means the Democratic Unionists would support the minority May Government on a policy by policy basis, supporting it in any votes of no confidence and supporting it on supply votes ie those that implement Government spending.

In return, the DUP is likely to extract spending commitments from the Tory government on public spending projects. Given the PM does not want to allow Jeremy Corbyn into Downing Street via the back door, then Mrs May will be very keen to satisfy the DUP’s demands.

After such a disastrous electoral performance, the Tory leader could have expected to have been ousted within hours. But these are not normal times and the Brexit process looms.

Tories will be torn between ditching the pilot within days and allowing Mrs May to begin the talks with Brussels to provide stability and continuity in the early stages.

But after a high-stakes gamble that went disastrously wrong, the PM could be on borrowed time.

George Osborne, sacked as Chancellor when Mrs May took over the Conservative reins, could hardly contain his glee on the television as he engaged in punditry on election night. In his new role as editor of the London Evening Standard he said Mrs May’s “authority is non-existent” after a “disastrous” campaign.

While Mrs May looks set to stay for a while as the Tories do not want a new civil war in the party, which would hand the initiative over to Labour, her role looks decidedly like a caretaker one.

This throws up the question of who would succeed her. At present, there appear to be three possible contenders.

Firstly, David Davis, the Brexit Secretary, who challenged unsuccessfully David Cameron for the leadership but who, this time round, could be seen as a safe pair of hands, who could steady the ship going into the next General Election.

Secondly, Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary, who stood in for Mrs May during the live election TV debate when the PM decided to reject the offer, saying she would rather engage with ordinary voters than her political opponents.

Thirdly, Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, who is known to be desperately keen to become Prime Minister but whose attempt last year to succeed Mr Cameron was sabotaged by his Brexit colleague Michael Gove, the former Justice Secretary. He came to the conclusion that Mr Johnson was simply not up to the job of leading the country.

Mrs May appears to have dropped her “strong and stable” mantra, switching it for “certainty”. But the period ahead looks neither strong, stable nor certain either for the country or the Tory leader, who ignored the first rule of politics: never take the public for granted.