Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Punters could still be under-rating the chances of No Deal

124

Comments

  • Essexit said:

    Essexit said:


    It was, an animal irrational impulse propelled primarily by emotion. The many claims of Leavers have been falsified by events but far from reconsidering in the light of new evidence they have become still more emotionally attached to the totem of Brexit. No sacrifice is too great to secure it. Of course it’s an irrational impulse.

    Now Leave voters are animals? (I mean obviously we are, all humans are animals, but you meant it as an insult.) It's not irrational to have a different set of priorities to you or to politicians whose only goal is short-term GDP maximisation.

    As ffor Leave.
    “Some Leavers”. shortages.

    The reaction of some Leavers to what Donald Tusk said and those who just want to get angry.

    Tusk chose his words carefully, but he knew what he was saying. I think your preferred term for it is a 'dog whistle'. The only cultists identified are the Remainers who cheered what he said.
    Find a form of words which Donald Tusk could have used to criticise the leaders of the Leave campaign that you would find acceptable. Or are they beyond criticism, living saints at whose feet we should all prostrate ourselves?

    The snowflakery that Leavers are now demonstrating is beyond parody.

    It's political correctness gone mad. Tusk made the mistake of saying what he really thought about the Bumbling Buccaneers. We all pretend we want politicians to speak their minds. We absolutely hate it when they do.

    Tusk's comments were entirely inappropriate and totally ill advised and have very probably increased the chances of a No Deal Brexit.

    The only reason you're defending them is you agree with him, and like the cut of his jib.

    Had similar comments been made the other way round by May, Hunt or Barclay you'd have been amongst the first on here to condemn them.

    Yes, I agree with him 100%. The Bumbling Buccaneers were and are utterly clueless, and as a result they have set in train a process that will cause immense harm to the UK and the rest of Europe for a very long time, but the UK most of all. Did you hear the one about the Leave-backing cabinet minister who gave a £14 million ferry contract to a company that had no ferries?

    And it is true that I also condemned Hunt when he likened the EU to a Soviet prison, Johnson when he talked about it being akin to Nazi Germany and May when she attacked citizens of nowhere.

    You have me bang to rights.

    Yep, you're a hypocrite.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880

    Dura_Ace said:

    I wonder what mad name Farage is going to give his new party. New Party? Fine Farage? Veritas?

    It's already been officially registered as "the Brexit Party".
    Disappointingly prosaic.
  • Essexit said:

    Essexit said:

    Essexit said:

    Essexit said:



    Now Leave voters are animals? (I mean obviously we are, all humans are animals, but you meant it as an insult.) It's not irrational to have a different set of priorities to you or to politicians whose only goal is short-term GDP maximisation.

    As for new evidence, Remain has produced the same stories it did during the referendum campaign while the economy has continued to chug along quite nicely. Maybe the EU hasn't made a good deal quickly in the manner that some Leavers hoped - but the contempt and nastiness of characters like Donald Tusk is in itself a further argument for Leave.

    “Some Leavers”.

    The reaction of some Leavers to what Donald Tusk said is a handy identifier of the cultists, demonstrating the difference between those who can read and those who just want to get angry.
    Well obviously none of us. Supermarkets warning of something isn't the same as it actually happening though. Dealing with things which actually have happened - Remainer politicians hyped up the idea of a spike in unemployment just from a *vote* to Leave.

    Tusk chose his words carefully, but he knew what he was saying. I think your preferred term for it is a 'dog whistle'. The only cultists identified are the Remainers who cheered what he said.
    Find a form of words which Donald Tusk could have used to criticise the leaders of the Leave campaign that you would find acceptable. Or are they beyond criticism, living saints at whose feet we should all prostrate ourselves?

    The snowflakery that Leavers are now demonstrating is beyond parody.
    If he's serious about getting a positive deal and the UK and EU moving forward, engaging in that sort of rhetoric was plain stupid full stop.
    The bad man said nasty things about your heroes? Grow up.
    He said nasty things about me as well, given that I campaigned for Brexit. By implication, he also insulted voters who (in his worldview) were misled because they're too stupid to know what they're doing.

    Also, I was appealing to his self-interest in the comment you're responding to. He can think what he likes but if a deal is in the EU's interests it's daft of him to jeopardise that.
    It was a deliberate insult to all Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.
    Bloody Federasts, eh!
    You are totally unqualified to comment since you insult any unionist you find by using sectarian language.
    Examples please..
  • Scott_P said:

    It was a deliberate insult to all Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.

    "Citizens of nowhere" was a deliberate insult to all non-Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.
    Bingo! There we go.

    We divide on such speeches on partisan lines.

    Lesson? It's never constructive or helpful and words should be chosen very carefully, particularly in delicate diplomatic negotiations.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891

    Dura_Ace said:

    OllyT said:

    blockquote>

    Tusk, so far as I could understand, set out to attacked the Leaders of the Leave campaign, particularly those who were promising unicorns and free money.
    Not the voters.

    CR is dying to be offended, the facts of what Tusk actually said don't really matter.
    The time he got triggered by an anti-Brexit article in Ronnie Scott's was funny.
    Fuck off.
    Classy
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,233

    Awb683 said:

    'No Deal is intolerable' - by no means!!

    "No deal" means "No deal on March 29th 2019" - there will be lots of deals after that - some no doubt will be pragmatic in that the working relationship with other EU countries will come under a 'Gentleman's agreement' - assuming the EU and UK still has gentlemen.

    In fact the attitude of the EU to the UK post a no-deal Brexit will be a strong indicator as to whether they wish to regard us a a third party with whom they wish to trade to the mutual benefit of both, are 'stupid' or 'bandits' - as per the comment below.
    I'm not sure that's true. IIRC the no-deal mitigation procedures being put into effect by the EU do not require UK consent (by definition) and it's entirely plausible that they will remain in place, not requiring a further agreement. Surely the belief that all we have to do is wait and other countries will barge down the door with offers had been tested to destruction by now?
  • Scott_P said:

    It was a deliberate insult to all Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.

    "Citizens of nowhere" was a deliberate insult to all non-Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.
    Bingo! There we go.

    We divide on such speeches on partisan lines.

    Lesson? It's never constructive or helpful and words should be chosen very carefully, particularly in delicate diplomatic negotiations.
    Donald Tusk’s words were chosen very carefully to make a precise point. You just don’t like the precise point.
  • Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I wonder what mad name Farage is going to give his new party. New Party? Fine Farage? Veritas?

    It's already been officially registered as "the Brexit Party".
    Disappointingly prosaic.
    From a branding perspective it's an achievement for everyone to be sick of hearing about it before it's even launched.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    I wonder what mad name Farage is going to give his new party. New Party? Fine Farage? Veritas?

    It's already been officially registered as "the Brexit Party".
    Disappointingly prosaic.
    'Take back control harder'
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.

    Malky would win at a canter
  • Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.

    It would be keenly contested.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Scott_P said:

    Malky would win at a canter

    It would be keenly contested.

    Clearly a betting opportunity...
  • Scott_P said:

    It was a deliberate insult to all Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.

    "Citizens of nowhere" was a deliberate insult to all non-Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.
    Bingo! There we go.

    We divide on such speeches on partisan lines.

    Lesson? It's never constructive or helpful and words should be chosen very carefully, particularly in delicate diplomatic negotiations.
    Donald Tusk’s words were chosen very carefully to make a precise point. You just don’t like the precise point.
    The point was ambiguous and dog whistled, the choice of words retarded and the timing stupid.

    You like it because you hate Leavers.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009
    viewcode said:

    One mistake in David's article is not to distinguish between the withdrawal agreement and the political declaration. Both "May's deal" and "A different deal" still involve the same withdrawal agreement, but the EU have been very open to rewriting the political declaration.

    Its not a mistake. The political declaration is non binding fluff that is y the EU are very open to rewriting it.

    The actual brass tacks are all in the WA.
    I suspect this will crop up again and again, so I'll have to deal with this now. In the 2009 Lisbon Ii referendum a declaration altering the deal was similarly attacked for being solely political. Yet it was eventually transposed unchangef into a treaty when one became available (when Croatia joined the EU IIRC). So there is precedent for their word being good on this.
    But in legal terms there's no doubt that the Political Declaration is non-binding, is there? If that's the case, just because in a particular case a declaration was later made binding, is neither here nor there.
  • Essexit said:

    Essexit said:

    Essexit said:

    Essexit said:



    Now Leave voters are animals? (I mean obviously we are, all humans are animals, but you meant it as an insult.) It's not irrational to have a different set of priorities to you or to politicians whose only goal is short-term GDP maximisation.

    As for new evidence, Remain has produced the same stories it did during the referendum campaign while the economy has continued to chug along quite nicely. Maybe the EU hasn't made a good deal quickly in the manner that some Leavers hoped - but the contempt and nastiness of characters like Donald Tusk is in itself a further argument for Leave.

    “Some Leavers”.

    The reaction of some Leavers to what Donald Tusk said is a handy identifier of the cultists, demonstrating the difference between those who can read and those who just want to get angry.
    Well obviously none of us. Supermarkets warning of something isn't the same as it actually happening though.

    Tusk chose his words carefully, but he knew what he was saying. I think your preferred term for it is a 'dog whistle'. The only cultists identified are the Remainers who cheered what he said.
    Find a form of words which Donald Tusk could have used to criticise the leaders of the Leave campaign that you would find acceptable. Or are they beyond criticism, living saints at whose feet we should all prostrate ourselves?

    The snowflakery that Leavers are now demonstrating is beyond parody.
    If he's serious about getting a positive deal and the UK and EU moving forward, engaging in that sort of rhetoric was plain stupid full stop.
    The bad man said nasty things about your heroes? Grow up.
    He said nasty things about me as well, given that I campaigned for Brexit. By implication, he also insulted voters who (in his worldview) were misled because they're too stupid to know what they're doing.

    Also, I was appealing to his self-interest in the comment you're responding to. He can think what he likes but if a deal is in the EU's interests it's daft of him to jeopardise that.
    It was a deliberate insult to all Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.
    Bloody Federasts, eh!
    You are totally unqualified to comment since you insult any unionist you find by using sectarian language.
    Examples please..
    Your posts are littered with examples. You are well known for it.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Sadly the all consuming Brexit debacle has deprived us of the opportunity to congratulate the SNP for coming up with a policy more unpopular than the death tax.

    They are going to tax doctors and nurses for parking at work.

    Awesome job!
  • Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.

    It would be keenly contested.
    Brexit has driven most PBers insane, no matter how they voted. I fear that when (if?) Brexit becomes something that doesn't dominate the site, PB will be irreparably damaged.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009
    edited February 2019
    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
  • Anyway, I have better things to do with my day and I'm off to watch the rugby with friends.

    Much better than trading insults with a bunch of Remainiac losers on here.

    Have a nice day.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,880
    Scott_P said:

    Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.

    Malky would win at a canter
    Winning second place to MG in a being angry competition is still a glittering prize. Modric isn't quite as good as Messi but he's still fucking brilliant.
  • Scott_P said:
    As much as I ain't a fan of Tusk, his comment aptly fits the morons who thought a ferryless ferry company was ever going to be a good look.

  • Your posts are littered with examples. You are well known for it.

    You should then be able to find extensive examples from the litter then, or we're back to your mythologsing & manufactured outrage.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009
    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    And I notice that where Scott_P has quoted my comments, he's actually edited them to disguise that fact. Sorry, but editing comments just to try to "win" an online discussion is just stupid. People should have better things to do with their lives.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.

    It would be keenly contested.
    Brexit has driven most PBers insane, no matter how they voted. I fear that when (if?) Brexit becomes something that doesn't dominate the site, PB will be irreparably damaged.
    I think it already has been, but no worse than the rest of the country.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Chris said:

    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    And you were wrong, every time.

    Let me try a different tack. You can't unexpire a chicken, after you have cut it's head off.

    With me so far?

    The current agreements expire under certain conditions. The conditions for expiry can not be altered. We can't have left the EU, and not have left the EU. The agreements that expire when we leave the EU can not be unexpired after we have left the EU.

    We can sign new agreements. You can buy a new chicken.

    The agreement will not be, cannot be, the same agreement that expired. It may look similar. It may have several important and useful qualities of previous agreements.

    It is not the same agreement/chicken, and it will not be a clone. The new agreement can't be exactly the same as the old. The conditions under which it operates are different.
  • Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.

    It would be keenly contested.
    Brexit has driven most PBers insane, no matter how they voted. I fear that when (if?) Brexit becomes something that doesn't dominate the site, PB will be irreparably damaged.
    I think it already has been, but no worse than the rest of the country.
    By both sides.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Chris said:

    Sorry, but editing comments just to try to "win" an online discussion is just stupid. People should have better things to do with their lives.

    LOL
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527

    Regarding the chat on the previous thread, depending on who is playing, I'm either British, English, or Yorkshire, and am happy with all three.

    Tomorrow afternoon I'll be at peak Englishman.

    And when you are renewing your Lancashire membership???

    Anyway, I am a Geordie, from the north east, English and British. Next up is being a human - European doesn't come in to it.
    I suspect that many people from the north east feel a greater affinity with Scotland or Wales than with - say - Surrey, Sussex or Hampshire. I always think of myself as British and am not inclined to think of England, Wales & Scotland as separate nations - certainly no more so than Bavaria, Saxony, the Rhineland & Hesse etc.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,911

    Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.

    It would be keenly contested.
    Brexit has driven most PBers insane, no matter how they voted. I fear that when (if?) Brexit becomes something that doesn't dominate the site, PB will be irreparably damaged.
    I think it already has been, but no worse than the rest of the country.
    It has become the fault line in British politics.

    I would be very interested in what would happen to people's party political allegiances if, overnight, Labour became the staunchest defenders of Brexit and the Conservatives adamant advocates of Remain.

  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256

    Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.

    It would be keenly contested.
    Brexit has driven most PBers insane, no matter how they voted. I fear that when (if?) Brexit becomes something that doesn't dominate the site, PB will be irreparably damaged.
    I think it already has been, but no worse than the rest of the country.
    By both sides.
    I am not assigning blame, just commenting.
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,059
    edited February 2019

    Are the PB awards ever coming back? We definitely need a 'consistently angry, most easily triggered' category.

    It would be keenly contested.
    Brexit has driven most PBers insane, no matter how they voted. I fear that when (if?) Brexit becomes something that doesn't dominate the site, PB will be irreparably damaged.
    I think it already has been, but no worse than the rest of the country.
    By both sides.
    I am not assigning blame, just commenting.
    Yup, the country is in a bleak place. The divisions were always there but Brexit has magnified them. They may never be fully healed.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009
    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    Why not? How else are trading arrangements made, other than by signing agreements?
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Enough for one day....

    Later peeps!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009
    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    And you were wrong, every time.

    Let me try a different tack. You can't unexpire a chicken, after you have cut it's head off.

    With me so far?

    The current agreements expire under certain conditions. The conditions for expiry can not be altered. We can't have left the EU, and not have left the EU. The agreements that expire when we leave the EU can not be unexpired after we have left the EU.

    We can sign new agreements. You can buy a new chicken.

    The agreement will not be, cannot be, the same agreement that expired. It may look similar. It may have several important and useful qualities of previous agreements.

    It is not the same agreement/chicken, and it will not be a clone. The new agreement can't be exactly the same as the old. The conditions under which it operates are different.
    What I'm trying to get into your thick skull, and what I've said in every single one of my comments, is that even though it may not legally be the same agreement, if both parties choose to agree to it, it can be substantially the same.

    But at this time I give up. You're either too stupid or too dishonest to be worth talking to.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    That's not true, during the transition we remain (largely) covered by existing EU arrangements
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    Precisely. We're not talking about the UK remaining in the EU. We're talking about what happens after we've left the EU. And the arrangement about that situation can be whatever the UK and the EU consider to be in their mutual best interests, whether the arrangement is made before Brexit or after Brexit.
  • OllyT said:



    It's political correctness gone mad. Tusk made the mistake of saying what he really thought about the Bumbling Buccaneers. We all pretend we want politicians to speak their minds. We absolutely hate it when they do.

    You say bumbling but they are close to getting what they sought. And you keep using the word Buccaneers as if it's an insult. It's not.

    A.global Buccaneering Britain has a better future than a sclerotic and parochial Europe.
    But where is this buccaneering spirit of which you speak? I talk to a large cross section of people in a week and the current expectation of Brexit seems to range from it's a f***ing disaster to it might not be all that bad.
    Considering the non stop doom and gloom utterances we have had for the last 3 years I would suggest it might not be all that bad demonstrates a bit of buccaneering spirit.
    We are not all cowering seeking to sue for peace.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789
    edited February 2019
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    That's not true, during the transition we remain (largely) covered by existing EU arrangements
    Only by relying on goodwill. The EU is asking third countries to treat the UK as if it were still a member of the EU during transition.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,774
    Chris said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    Why not? How else are trading arrangements made, other than by signing agreements?
    Because the agreements are with third parties. Once we cease having a deal with - say - Canada, then the UK and the EU cannot simply agree to make the UK party to the agreement
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    Everyone knows that Mrs May is bluffing over No Deal. She's probably told Rudd and Gauke which is they are still in the cabinet. But accidents can happen so I would put the chance of No Deal at around 10%. (Chance of her deal going through on time is zero.)

    The mechanisms for avoiding No Deal are:

    1. Revoke - less than 10% chance
    2. Wrench the steering wheel from her hand - 10% chance
    3. Kick the Can - 70% chance

    Kick the Can only defers the cliff edge of course, but it opens up opportunities for a deal of some kind, or a GE or a 2nd referendum. And if all these fail, there's always Kick the Can again.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575

    Scott_P said:

    It was a deliberate insult to all Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.

    "Citizens of nowhere" was a deliberate insult to all non-Leave voters that was heard loud and clear.
    Bingo! There we go.

    We divide on such speeches on partisan lines.

    Lesson? It's never constructive or helpful and words should be chosen very carefully, particularly in delicate diplomatic negotiations.
    Donald Tusk’s words were chosen very carefully to make a precise point. You just don’t like the precise point.
    And yet they simultaneously offended large swaths of leavers, encouraged no deal Brexiteers, and dismayed a number of remainers and those hoping for a deal.

    If you’re aiming to make a precise point, avoiding charged language and ambiguity around whom it is directed at are good starting points.

    I have a deal of sympathy with his sentiments, but I thought it extremely foolish.

  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    That is an excellent article - though though I cannot agree with Max Weber's assertion that Britain was ' a working democracy' in the years before January 1919 given that the franchise had been restricted to circa 60% of the male population. That is as ludicrous as describing Apartheid South Africa as a 'working democracy' because elections were held on a regular basis.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Chris said:

    What I'm trying to get into your thick skull, and what I've said in every single one of my comments, is that even though it may not legally be the same agreement, if both parties choose to agree to it, it can be substantially the same.

    And every single time you were wrong.

    I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    Barnesian said:

    Everyone knows that Mrs May is bluffing over No Deal. She's probably told Rudd and Gauke which is they are still in the cabinet. But accidents can happen so I would put the chance of No Deal at around 10%. (Chance of her deal going through on time is zero.)

    The mechanisms for avoiding No Deal are:

    1. Revoke - less than 10% chance
    2. Wrench the steering wheel from her hand - 10% chance
    3. Kick the Can - 70% chance

    Kick the Can only defers the cliff edge of course, but it opens up opportunities for a deal of some kind, or a GE or a 2nd referendum. And if all these fail, there's always Kick the Can again.

    I don't think Kick the Can offers any of those options as I cannot see the EU accepting it unless we are definitely doing something (remember it requires unanimous support - and to be blunt if nothing is changing and no decision has been made why would you give us another 3 months to do sod all).

  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    edited February 2019
    eek said:

    Barnesian said:

    Everyone knows that Mrs May is bluffing over No Deal. She's probably told Rudd and Gauke which is they are still in the cabinet. But accidents can happen so I would put the chance of No Deal at around 10%. (Chance of her deal going through on time is zero.)

    The mechanisms for avoiding No Deal are:

    1. Revoke - less than 10% chance
    2. Wrench the steering wheel from her hand - 10% chance
    3. Kick the Can - 70% chance

    Kick the Can only defers the cliff edge of course, but it opens up opportunities for a deal of some kind, or a GE or a 2nd referendum. And if all these fail, there's always Kick the Can again.

    I don't think Kick the Can offers any of those options as I cannot see the EU accepting it unless we are definitely doing something (remember it requires unanimous support - and to be blunt if nothing is changing and no decision has been made why would you give us another 3 months to do sod all).

    It would be to complete a deal or hold a GE or hold a 2nd referendum. There would be a reason. And the EU Council would agree because the alternative would be for the UK to crash out which would be devastating for us, but would also harm the EU. So they would agree.

    EDIT: She can probably only Kick the Can twice before she runs out of her VONC time and Boris takes over.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    edited February 2019
    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    What I'm trying to get into your thick skull, and what I've said in every single one of my comments, is that even though it may not legally be the same agreement, if both parties choose to agree to it, it can be substantially the same.

    And every single time you were wrong.

    I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.
    And there's your Referendum-winning Remainer attitude, right there.

    "You are too stupid to understand the wonderful case I'm making to stay in the EU."
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009
    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    What I'm trying to get into your thick skull, and what I've said in every single one of my comments, is that even though it may not legally be the same agreement, if both parties choose to agree to it, it can be substantially the same.

    And every single time you were wrong.

    I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.
    You "can't understand" simple English.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    What I'm trying to get into your thick skull, and what I've said in every single one of my comments, is that even though it may not legally be the same agreement, if both parties choose to agree to it, it can be substantially the same.

    And every single time you were wrong.

    I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.
    And there's your Referendum-winning Remainer attitude, right there.

    "You are too stupid to understand the wonderful case I'm making to stay in the EU."
    Children, children .. please!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575
    justin124 said:

    That is an excellent article - though though I cannot agree with Max Weber's assertion that Britain was ' a working democracy' in the years before January 1919 given that the franchise had been restricted to circa 60% of the male population. That is as ludicrous as describing Apartheid South Africa as a 'working democracy' because elections were held on a regular basis.
    No, it’s not.
    By the standards of the day, Britain was a working democracy, however imperfect. Difficult to assert the same about apartheid South Africa.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,009
    eek said:

    Barnesian said:

    Everyone knows that Mrs May is bluffing over No Deal. She's probably told Rudd and Gauke which is they are still in the cabinet. But accidents can happen so I would put the chance of No Deal at around 10%. (Chance of her deal going through on time is zero.)

    The mechanisms for avoiding No Deal are:

    1. Revoke - less than 10% chance
    2. Wrench the steering wheel from her hand - 10% chance
    3. Kick the Can - 70% chance

    Kick the Can only defers the cliff edge of course, but it opens up opportunities for a deal of some kind, or a GE or a 2nd referendum. And if all these fail, there's always Kick the Can again.

    I don't think Kick the Can offers any of those options as I cannot see the EU accepting it unless we are definitely doing something (remember it requires unanimous support - and to be blunt if nothing is changing and no decision has been made why would you give us another 3 months to do sod all).

    I don't know what the EU is thinking, but in the EU's place I would be telling her she could have an extension only to complete the arrangements if a decision had already been made.
  • eekeek Posts: 24,797
    Barnesian said:

    eek said:

    Barnesian said:

    Everyone knows that Mrs May is bluffing over No Deal. She's probably told Rudd and Gauke which is they are still in the cabinet. But accidents can happen so I would put the chance of No Deal at around 10%. (Chance of her deal going through on time is zero.)

    The mechanisms for avoiding No Deal are:

    1. Revoke - less than 10% chance
    2. Wrench the steering wheel from her hand - 10% chance
    3. Kick the Can - 70% chance

    Kick the Can only defers the cliff edge of course, but it opens up opportunities for a deal of some kind, or a GE or a 2nd referendum. And if all these fail, there's always Kick the Can again.

    I don't think Kick the Can offers any of those options as I cannot see the EU accepting it unless we are definitely doing something (remember it requires unanimous support - and to be blunt if nothing is changing and no decision has been made why would you give us another 3 months to do sod all).

    It would be to complete a deal or hold a GE or hold a 2nd referendum. There would be a reason. And the EU Council would agree because the alternative would be for the UK to crash out which would be devastating for us, but would also harm the EU. So they would agree.
    You gave 3 reasons and yet seem to have already dismiss one of them.

    1) A deal of some kind - unless May removes her redlines, how?
    2) A general election - exactly how does Labour / Tories create a manifesto with an agreed Brexit policy that their candidates will stand on?
    3) A referendum - do you really think the EU will let us sit in limbo for the time required for us to have one. And that's before you look at the questions available.

    While can kicking seems to be May's approach I don't think the EU are going to let things continue.
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,502
    Tusks comments were probably not clear enough and so have been spun to include Leave voters .

    If people listened to the whole clip they’d understand who he was talking about but he probably shouldn’t have used such charged language .

    Having said this he had a point and he is obviously incredibly sad at the UK leaving and has been quite emotional in previous news conferences .

    I personally have a lot of time for Tusk and he has clearly had enough of May and her pathetic trashing of her own deal .
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    edited February 2019
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
  • nico67 said:

    Tusks comments were probably not clear enough and so have been spun to include Leave voters .

    If people listened to the whole clip they’d understand who he was talking about but he probably shouldn’t have used such charged language .

    Having said this he had a point and he is obviously incredibly sad at the UK leaving and has been quite emotional in previous news conferences .

    I personally have a lot of time for Tusk and he has clearly had enough of May and her pathetic trashing of her own deal .

    He is a clever man, so why leave the door open to ambiguity? He could have just explicitly named the people he was talking about and negated the opportunity for spin.

    Obviously his comments will now be used to imply he meant all leave voters in the same way May’s were regarding citizens of nowhere.
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787



    It's political correctness gone mad. Tusk made the mistake of saying what he really thought about the Bumbling Buccaneers. We all pretend we want politicians to speak their minds. We absolutely hate it when they do.

    You say bumbling but they are close to getting what they sought. And you keep using the word Buccaneers as if it's an insult. It's not.

    A.global Buccaneering Britain has a better future than a sclerotic and parochial Europe.
    It is an insult. A buccaneer was a pirate, a particularly heinous class of criminal that was and is regarded as the common enemy of mankind.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
    It could, and still be significantly less favourable than the EU deal, which seems to be the way Japan is thinking:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/japan-seeking-big-concessions-from-britain-in-trade-talks-eu-brexit
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979
    edited February 2019
    eek said:

    Barnesian said:

    eek said:

    Barnesian said:

    Everyone knows that Mrs May is bluffing over No Deal. She's probably told Rudd and Gauke which is they are still in the cabinet. But accidents can happen so I would put the chance of No Deal at around 10%. (Chance of her deal going through on time is zero.)

    The mechanisms for avoiding No Deal are:

    1. Revoke - less than 10% chance
    2. Wrench the steering wheel from her hand - 10% chance
    3. Kick the Can - 70% chance

    Kick the Can only defers the cliff edge of course, but it opens up opportunities for a deal of some kind, or a GE or a 2nd referendum. And if all these fail, there's always Kick the Can again.

    I don't think Kick the Can offers any of those options as I cannot see the EU accepting it unless we are definitely doing something (remember it requires unanimous support - and to be blunt if nothing is changing and no decision has been made why would you give us another 3 months to do sod all).

    It would be to complete a deal or hold a GE or hold a 2nd referendum. There would be a reason. And the EU Council would agree because the alternative would be for the UK to crash out which would be devastating for us, but would also harm the EU. So they would agree.
    You gave 3 reasons and yet seem to have already dismiss one of them.

    1) A deal of some kind - unless May removes her redlines, how?
    2) A general election - exactly how does Labour / Tories create a manifesto with an agreed Brexit policy that their candidates will stand on?
    3) A referendum - do you really think the EU will let us sit in limbo for the time required for us to have one. And that's before you look at the questions available.

    While can kicking seems to be May's approach I don't think the EU are going to let things continue.
    1) The current Withdrawal Agreement - with some Labour support and an altered political declaration. I haven't dismissed this. It just won't be ready by 29 March.
    2) Tories manifesto: May's deal or you get Corbyn. Simple blackmail. Labour manifesto: Our CU deal plus a deal/remain referendum. Both parties will lose some candidates - probably the Tories will lose more but if they stand as independents they split the vote and risk Corbyn and possibly remain. A GE is doable. May might be attracted. Labour would agree.
    3) Yes the EU would agree the six months needed for a 2nd referendum on deal v remain.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,233

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
    ...COULD...
  • Barnesian said:

    eek said:

    Barnesian said:

    eek said:

    Barnesian said:

    Everyone knows that Mrs May is bluffing over No Deal. She's probably told Rudd and Gauke which is they are still in the cabinet. But accidents can happen so I would put the chance of No Deal at around 10%. (Chance of her deal going through on time is zero.)

    The mechanisms for avoiding No Deal are:

    1. Revoke - less than 10% chance
    2. Wrench the steering wheel from her hand - 10% chance
    3. Kick the Can - 70% chance

    Kick the Can only defers the cliff edge of course, but it opens up opportunities for a deal of some kind, or a GE or a 2nd referendum. And if all these fail, there's always Kick the Can again.

    I don't think Kick the Can offers any of those options as I cannot see the EU accepting it unless we are definitely doing something (remember it requires unanimous support - and to be blunt if nothing is changing and no decision has been made why would you give us another 3 months to do sod all).

    It would be to complete a deal or hold a GE or hold a 2nd referendum. There would be a reason. And the EU Council would agree because the alternative would be for the UK to crash out which would be devastating for us, but would also harm the EU. So they would agree.
    You gave 3 reasons and yet seem to have already dismiss one of them.

    1) A deal of some kind - unless May removes her redlines, how?
    2) A general election - exactly how does Labour / Tories create a manifesto with an agreed Brexit policy that their candidates will stand on?
    3) A referendum - do you really think the EU will let us sit in limbo for the time required for us to have one. And that's before you look at the questions available.

    While can kicking seems to be May's approach I don't think the EU are going to let things continue.
    1) The current Withdrawal Agreement - with some Labour support and an altered political declaration. I haven't dismissed this. It just won't be ready by 29 March.
    2) Tories manifesto: May's deal or you get Corbyn. Simple blackmail. Labour manifesto: Our CU deal plus a deal/remain referendum. Both parties will lose some candidates - probably the Tories will lose more but if they stand as independents they split the vote and risk Corbyn and possibly remain. A GE is doable. May might be attracted. Labour would agree.
    3) Yes the EU would agree the six months needed for a 2nd referendum on deal v remain.
    If she tries to call a GE, would the backbenchers call the 1922, alter their rules, hold another leadership contenst by show of hands and eject May?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    Nigelb said:

    justin124 said:

    That is an excellent article - though though I cannot agree with Max Weber's assertion that Britain was ' a working democracy' in the years before January 1919 given that the franchise had been restricted to circa 60% of the male population. That is as ludicrous as describing Apartheid South Africa as a 'working democracy' because elections were held on a regular basis.
    No, it’s not.
    By the standards of the day, Britain was a working democracy, however imperfect. Difficult to assert the same about apartheid South Africa.

    The same could be said of 'the standards of the day' in Apartheid South Africa.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
    ...COULD...
    And it's not like ...COULD... didn't do some ultra-heavy lifting for the Remain campaign?

    At least mine is a plausible, measured case. I don't see much of that played back at me....
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    The ManU machine grinds onwards towards another 3 points.



  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
    It could, and still be significantly less favourable than the EU deal, which seems to be the way Japan is thinking:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/japan-seeking-big-concessions-from-britain-in-trade-talks-eu-brexit
    They're negotiating. What else do you expect them to say???
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,084
    rpjs said:



    It's political correctness gone mad. Tusk made the mistake of saying what he really thought about the Bumbling Buccaneers. We all pretend we want politicians to speak their minds. We absolutely hate it when they do.

    You say bumbling but they are close to getting what they sought. And you keep using the word Buccaneers as if it's an insult. It's not.

    A.global Buccaneering Britain has a better future than a sclerotic and parochial Europe.
    It is an insult. A buccaneer was a pirate, a particularly heinous class of criminal that was and is regarded as the common enemy of mankind.
    And it nicely captures how they are batting for themselves and their rich friends, rather than the country.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679


    As a Londoner born and bred I have a lot of sympathy with that. I’d only note that many of the most dynamic parts of England - Manchester, Leeds, Bristol, Brighton, Norwich, Oxford, Cambridge, Leamington (!!) - are pretty much on the same page. Leave voting England is utterly dependent on Remain voting England. It’s very much like the red and blue states in the US.

    Actually Remain voting England - being mostly concentrated in the urban wastelands - is utterly dependent on Leave voting England for all its basic necessities. If and when civilisation collapses you can be sure Lincolnshire will fare far better than London.
    People in Lincolnshire are certainly in a better position to forage for nuts and berries than people in Islington. But I don't think it is going to be that bad is it?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,233

    viewcode said:



    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.

    ...COULD...
    And it's not like ...COULD... didn't do some ultra-heavy lifting for the Remain campaign?

    At least mine is a plausible, measured case. I don't see much of that played back at me....
    What the Remain campaign did or did not do is not relevant. What the Leave campaigns did or did not do is not relevant. What matters now is what is going to happen in 48 days. On the balance of probabilities, do you believe that the new UK/Japan deal will be better for the UK or worse? And when do you think it will be signed and ratified?
  • viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I've been as clear as I possibly could about that all along. In every one of my comments I've stressed that the legal technicalities would be different, but that if both parties wished to reinstate the agreement, they could do so.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
    ...COULD...
    Could.

    And dependent upon hard work and competence (including proper preparation and attention to details) from our posturing politicians and smug, self-satisfied Sir Humphreys.

    Until Westminster and Whitehall are capable of that I wouldn't be rushing into trade negotiations.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,772

    DavidL said:

    The pessimism about the UK's prospects is being massively overdone by those who think leaving the EU for a looser arrangement is somehow turning our back on the world or condemning us to parochial insignificance.

    In the real world it is worth looking at this list: https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings-articles/world-university-rankings/out-now-qs-world-university-rankings-2019

    4 of the top 10 Universities in the world are in the UK. If you keep looking down that list you will eventually find, at number 50, the first University in the EU after we leave, the Universite PSL in Paris. We have 8 with more bubbling under that top 50.

    Our economy is dependent on services which have consistently grown faster than manufacturing in most developed countries. We are well placed to continue to grow faster than western EU countries as we have done since 2008.

    This isn't because of Brexit which is a peripheral issue. It is because we are a brilliant country with an absurdly internationally dominant legal system that is respected world wide for its integrity and predictability, the leading international centre for international financial services, a stable if somewhat overly consumption driven economy, a rapidly growing IT sector, very low crime rates and a basic decency which, along with English, makes us a place very, very large numbers of people aspire to live in.

    We have problems, of course we do, but so does everyone else and we are much better placed than most. The doomsters have lost all sense of perspective and need to get a grip. I read posters saying that they are ashamed to be British and I am frankly bewildered. We are so lucky to live here.

    I may be misremebering, but I believe on a very small number of occasions you may have expressed your displeasure with the education system, economy and general governance of Scotland. I presume the 'brilliant country' to which you're referring is England.
    There is a lot of things we can do better and I completely agree with @cyclefree that there is little more British than the right to call those who govern us a lot of incompetent clowns. The debate about Brexit is equally a legitimate one raising strong passions. That was not my point. My point is that our views of how we can be better should not be allowed to obscure how fortunate we are.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    Yes of course. Technically it would be a new agreement, reinstating the terms of the agreement that had previously been offered.

    I don't wish to be rude, but if the point you're trying to make is that you're too stupid to grasp something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
    It could, and still be significantly less favourable than the EU deal, which seems to be the way Japan is thinking:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/japan-seeking-big-concessions-from-britain-in-trade-talks-eu-brexit
    They're negotiating. What else do you expect them to say???
    Nothing different - but that hardly invalidates my point.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 7,979

    Barnesian said:

    eek said:

    Barnesian said:

    eek said:

    Barnesian said:

    Everyone knows that Mrs May is bluffing over No Deal. She's probably told Rudd and Gauke which is they are still in the cabinet. But accidents can happen so I would put the chance of No Deal at around 10%. (Chance of her deal going through on time is zero.)

    The mechanisms for avoiding No Deal are:

    1. Revoke - less than 10% chance
    2. Wrench the steering wheel from her hand - 10% chance
    3. Kick the Can - 70% chance

    Kick the Can only defers the cliff edge of course, but it opens up opportunities for a deal of some kind, or a GE or a 2nd referendum. And if all these fail, there's always Kick the Can again.

    I don't think Kick the Can offers any of those options as I cannot see the EU accepting it unless we are definitely doing something (remember it requires unanimous support - and to be blunt if nothing is changing and no decision has been made why would you give us another 3 months to do sod all).

    It would be to complete a deal or hold a GE or hold a 2nd referendum. There would be a reason. And the EU Council would agree because the alternative would be for the UK to crash out which would be devastating for us, but would also harm the EU. So they would agree.
    You gave 3 reasons and yet seem to have already dismiss one of them.

    1) A deal of some kind - unless May removes her redlines, how?
    2) A general election - exactly how does Labour / Tories create a manifesto with an agreed Brexit policy that their candidates will stand on?
    3) A referendum - do you really think the EU will let us sit in limbo for the time required for us to have one. And that's before you look at the questions available.

    While can kicking seems to be May's approach I don't think the EU are going to let things continue.
    1) The current Withdrawal Agreement - with some Labour support and an altered political declaration. I haven't dismissed this. It just won't be ready by 29 March.
    2) Tories manifesto: May's deal or you get Corbyn. Simple blackmail. Labour manifesto: Our CU deal plus a deal/remain referendum. Both parties will lose some candidates - probably the Tories will lose more but if they stand as independents they split the vote and risk Corbyn and possibly remain. A GE is doable. May might be attracted. Labour would agree.
    3) Yes the EU would agree the six months needed for a 2nd referendum on deal v remain.
    If she tries to call a GE, would the backbenchers call the 1922, alter their rules, hold another leadership contenst by show of hands and eject May?
    She's only call it with Cabinet support and a good chance of winning it - if Labour was in disarray for instance.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 2,201

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
    It could, and still be significantly less favourable than the EU deal, which seems to be the way Japan is thinking:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/japan-seeking-big-concessions-from-britain-in-trade-talks-eu-brexit
    They're negotiating. What else do you expect them to say???
    The Telegraph reported that what Japan really wants is for the UK to join the TPP not have a bilateral FTA.
  • SunnyJimSunnyJim Posts: 1,106
    edited February 2019
    If I try to see the problem from May's perspective it would seem to me that, assuming her deal fails, she would arrive at a GE as the least destructive option.

    She could frame it as vote for her deal rather than remaining or no deal and define the manifesto accordingly.

    Yes, the Soubrys, Grieves, Woolastons etc would sadly need to find a party more suited to their views but that would be a price worth paying for hopefully achieving a pathway to concluding the process.

    A majority would achieve the aim.

    A slight minority would probably achieve it.

    A messily hung parliament and she could hand over the reigns to Corbyn to sort out.
  • SunnyJim said:

    If I try to see the problem from May's perspective it would seem to me that, assuming her deal fails, she would arrive at a GE as the least destructive option.

    She could frame it as vote for her deal rather than remaining or no deal and define the manifesto accordingly.

    Yes, the Soubrys, Grieves, Woolastons etc would sadly need to find a party more suited to their views but that would be a price worth paying for hopefully achieving a pathway to concluding the process.

    A majority would achieve the aim.

    A slight minority would probably achieve it.

    A messily hung parliament and she could hand over the reigns to Corbyn to sort out.

    Indeed.

    And the sooner a GE the better for the Conservatives because of the economic cycle.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:



    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.

    ...COULD...
    And it's not like ...COULD... didn't do some ultra-heavy lifting for the Remain campaign?

    At least mine is a plausible, measured case. I don't see much of that played back at me....
    What the Remain campaign did or did not do is not relevant. What the Leave campaigns did or did not do is not relevant. What matters now is what is going to happen in 48 days. On the balance of probabilities, do you believe that the new UK/Japan deal will be better for the UK or worse? And when do you think it will be signed and ratified?
    What has always been a weakness in the Brexiteer case was the notion that we could whizz around the globe doing multiple trade deals at once. Because we have been under the EU umbrella for so long, we would need to acquire that expertise.

    The only practical route would be to have an arrangement where the terms of any existing EU trade deals are kept in place as between the UK and A. N Other trading nation for x years. (Much as the UK is doing with respect to exisiting EU legislation.) In the meantime, there will be ongoing meetings, with a committee set up for each country to look at the areas of current concerns on both sides - and see what can be done to make a more beneficial arrangement. Those initial arrangements could be resolved in days, if the will is there. (Of course, some such arrangements should already be in place...but we appear to have a negligent Govt. in place.)
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Roger said:

    You saw 'Boy Erased'?

    No, that's just out, I think, isn't it. Kidman and Crowe. Probably will see it.

    But I do tend to have a movie playing in my head when I think about American blue collar - since it is a topic of which (like most topics I opine on) I have zero experience - and it is always the same one.

    Deer Hunter.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,789

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
    It could, and still be significantly less favourable than the EU deal, which seems to be the way Japan is thinking:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/japan-seeking-big-concessions-from-britain-in-trade-talks-eu-brexit
    They're negotiating. What else do you expect them to say???
    The Telegraph reported that what Japan really wants is for the UK to join the TPP not have a bilateral FTA.
    https://twitter.com/TonyTassell/status/1093873255910440960
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575
    kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    You saw 'Boy Erased'?

    No, that's just out, I think, isn't it. Kidman and Crowe. Probably will see it.

    But I do tend to have a movie playing in my head when I think about American blue collar - since it is a topic of which (like most topics I opine on) I have zero experience - and it is always the same one.

    Deer Hunter.
    Filmed four decades ago, about a story a decade older still...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,575

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Chris said:

    Scott_P said:

    Chris said:

    BUT if both parties want to "unexpire" the arrangements, no doubt they can do so. Why not?

    You can't unexpire an agreement that expired.

    You can sign a new one.
    something that has been put to you over and over again, you've certainly succeeded.
    Once we fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements via No Deal, I don't think we can simply ressurect them via signing an agreement
    We fall out of the EU's existing free trade agreements deal or no deal.
    And as the Japanese example makes very clear, even our friends are not falling over themselves to replicate what we have/had as EU members.

    Given the Govt. has given private assurances to Japanese industries in the UK that post-Brexit they will be looked after, of course they are expecting a sweet-heart trade deal.
    And the Japanese have publicly stated we should not expect a deal as good as the one the EU just inked, citing inter alia our lack of comparative clout.

    We are still in the top 6 economies in the world and they have an exisiting manufacturing base in this country which has found our regime to their liking. And it will be free to move away from those elements of the EU regime they do not like. And if we so choose, a tax regime that encourages them to trade with us.

    There will be aspects of the EU trade deal where they had red lines to protect EU member states, and where they will haven given things away elsewhere to achieve them. We will be able to have a different set of red lines, quite possibly far fewer. The overall package, tailored for the UK, could still be a net gain to both the UK and Japan.
    It could, and still be significantly less favourable than the EU deal, which seems to be the way Japan is thinking:
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/08/japan-seeking-big-concessions-from-britain-in-trade-talks-eu-brexit
    They're negotiating. What else do you expect them to say???
    The Telegraph reported that what Japan really wants is for the UK to join the TPP not have a bilateral FTA.
    https://twitter.com/TonyTassell/status/1093873255910440960
    But... they would say that....
  • kinabalu said:

    Roger said:

    You saw 'Boy Erased'?

    No, that's just out, I think, isn't it. Kidman and Crowe. Probably will see it.

    But I do tend to have a movie playing in my head when I think about American blue collar - since it is a topic of which (like most topics I opine on) I have zero experience - and it is always the same one.

    Deer Hunter.
    From the same year:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Collar_(film)

    Available for free:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Um3l6NQj7Z8
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    Mr. Dancer's bet currently in the money..... (Ireland by 6+)
  • United in top four slot 1 point ahead of Chelsea who play City tomorrow away

    Ole catches up 11 points in a run of 10 wins and a draw

    And turned Pogba into the best player in the league

    Are you watching Mourinho. Same players so no excuse
  • United in top four slot 1 point ahead of Chelsea who play City tomorrow away

    Ole catches up 11 points in a run of 10 wins and a draw

    And turned Pogba into the best player in the league

    Are you watching Mourinho. Same players so no excuse

    It does suggest some of the players weren't trying very hard previously.
  • United in top four slot 1 point ahead of Chelsea who play City tomorrow away

    Ole catches up 11 points in a run of 10 wins and a draw

    And turned Pogba into the best player in the league

    Are you watching Mourinho. Same players so no excuse

    It does suggest some of the players weren't trying very hard previously.
    They were demoralised by Mourinho negative play and confrontation management.
  • United in top four slot 1 point ahead of Chelsea who play City tomorrow away

    Ole catches up 11 points in a run of 10 wins and a draw

    And turned Pogba into the best player in the league

    Are you watching Mourinho. Same players so no excuse

    It does suggest some of the players weren't trying very hard previously.
    They were demoralised by Mourinho negative play and confrontation management.
    Or perhaps some of them weren't trying very hard.
  • United in top four slot 1 point ahead of Chelsea who play City tomorrow away

    Ole catches up 11 points in a run of 10 wins and a draw

    And turned Pogba into the best player in the league

    Are you watching Mourinho. Same players so no excuse

    It does suggest some of the players weren't trying very hard previously.
    They were demoralised by Mourinho negative play and confrontation management.
    Or perhaps some of them weren't trying very hard.
    If your manager undermines you and causes dissent throughout the team what motivates you
  • rpjs said:



    It's political correctness gone mad. Tusk made the mistake of saying what he really thought about the Bumbling Buccaneers. We all pretend we want politicians to speak their minds. We absolutely hate it when they do.

    You say bumbling but they are close to getting what they sought. And you keep using the word Buccaneers as if it's an insult. It's not.

    A.global Buccaneering Britain has a better future than a sclerotic and parochial Europe.
    It is an insult. A buccaneer was a pirate, a particularly heinous class of criminal that was and is regarded as the common enemy of mankind.
    Pirates have been romanticised since then.

    However actually even then they were privateers more than pirates. Privateers operating with a letter of marque were not criminals.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 38,851
    Nigelb said:

    Filmed four decades ago, about a story a decade older still...

    Yes, ages ago - in 1978 a certain D. Trump was only just getting into real estate. One wishes one had a time machine and could go back and warn everybody -

    "See that hyper-privileged, frat boy tycoon over there who won't rent apartments to black people? ... That's your future president, that is."
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,959
    This Scotland v Ireland game is proving a great, great game of rugby.....
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 24,967
    edited February 2019

    United in top four slot 1 point ahead of Chelsea who play City tomorrow away

    Ole catches up 11 points in a run of 10 wins and a draw

    And turned Pogba into the best player in the league

    Are you watching Mourinho. Same players so no excuse

    It does suggest some of the players weren't trying very hard previously.
    They were demoralised by Mourinho negative play and confrontation management.
    Or perhaps some of them weren't trying very hard.
    If your manager undermines you and causes dissent throughout the team what motivates you
    What motivates you ?????????

    These aren't local park on a Sunday morning players.

    Pride in your own performance motivates you.
    Attempting to win trophies motivates you.
    Fan support motivates you.
    The honour of playing for a great club motivates you.
    A fucking huge pay package motivates you.

    Footballers have to take some responsibility for their own performance.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,004
    edited February 2019

    United in top four slot 1 point ahead of Chelsea who play City tomorrow away

    Ole catches up 11 points in a run of 10 wins and a draw

    And turned Pogba into the best player in the league

    Are you watching Mourinho. Same players so no excuse

    It does suggest some of the players weren't trying very hard previously.
    They were demoralised by Mourinho negative play and confrontation management.
    Or perhaps some of them weren't trying very hard.
    If your manager undermines you and causes dissent throughout the team what motivates you
    What motivates you ?????????

    These aren't local park on a Sunday morning players.

    Pride in your own performance motivates you.
    Attempting to win trophies motivates you.
    Fan support motivates you.
    The honour of playing for a great club motivates you.
    A fucking huge pay package motivates you.

    Footballers have to take some responsibility for their own performance.
    Do workers if they lose confidence in their boss who publicly humilates them
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,047
    Remainers very upset here today. It's possibly slowly dawning that Brexit is happening, so now their only comfort is telling each other and anyone else who may be listening what a horrendous disaster it will be. Sad.
This discussion has been closed.