Discussion:
Daily Mail - Brexit
Add Reply
Judith
2017-12-05 23:43:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.

Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,


(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
James Harris
2017-12-06 05:20:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is

Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad

And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says

Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X

What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
pullgees
2017-12-06 07:51:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the campaign.
Ian Jackson
2017-12-06 08:26:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
pullgees
2017-12-06 09:04:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU, sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Lancer
2017-12-06 09:05:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU, sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Status quo?
James Harris
2017-12-06 09:42:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU, sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Status quo?
There is no such thing. The EU may change slowly but it is not a static
organisation. It has a goal and works continually toward it in
incremental steps which, crucially, are intended to be irreversible.

For sure, EU membership offers benefits to prospective members. But it
does so as a fisherman offers a worm to a fish.

There is no status quo. There is only the choice between two journeys.
--
James Harris
Lancer
2017-12-06 10:32:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and
organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not
being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU,
sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Status quo?
There is no such thing. The EU may change slowly but it is not a static
organisation. It has a goal and works continually toward it in
incremental steps which, crucially, are intended to be irreversible.
Despite claims he came away empty handed by some, reforms negotiated by
David Cameron in February exempting Britain from 'ever closer union'
with the EU. It was irreversible according to the EU President Donald Tusk.
Post by James Harris
For sure, EU membership offers benefits to prospective members. But it
does so as a fisherman offers a worm to a fish.
Or paying your taxes and getting free healthcare, schools, police, fire
brigade, defence, roads, footpaths, street lighting........

Some of it goes towards helping poor foreign brow people and the
feckless workshy, but that is no reason not to pay your taxes.
Post by James Harris
There is no status quo. There is only the choice between two journeys.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/eu-deal-what-david-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/
pensive hamster
2017-12-06 10:46:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
[...]
Post by Lancer
Post by James Harris
The EU may change slowly but it is not a static
organisation. It has a goal and works continually toward it in
incremental steps which, crucially, are intended to be irreversible.
Despite claims he came away empty handed by some, reforms negotiated by
David Cameron in February exempting Britain from 'ever closer union'
with the EU. It was irreversible according to the EU President Donald Tusk.
Post by James Harris
For sure, EU membership offers benefits to prospective members. But it
does so as a fisherman offers a worm to a fish.
Or paying your taxes and getting free healthcare, schools, police, fire
brigade, defence, roads, footpaths, street lighting........
Some of it goes towards helping poor foreign brow people and the
feckless workshy, but that is no reason not to pay your taxes.
Post by James Harris
There is no status quo. There is only the choice between two journeys.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/eu-deal-what-david-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/
Useful link, thanks.
pamela
2017-12-06 11:20:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Despite claims he came away empty handed by some, reforms
negotiated by David Cameron in February exempting Britain from
'ever closer union' with the EU. It was irreversible according
to the EU President Donald Tusk.
The EU didn't give Cameron as much as it could have done but I agree
that they gave a crystal-clear commitment that Britain was exempt
from "ever-closer union".
pamela
2017-12-06 11:20:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Despite claims he came away empty handed by some, reforms
negotiated by David Cameron in February exempting Britain from
'ever closer union' with the EU. It was irreversible according
to the EU President Donald Tusk.
The EU didn't give Cameron as much as it could have done but I agree
that they gave a crystal-clear commitment that Britain was exempt
from "ever-closer union".
James Harris
2017-12-06 16:49:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by James Harris
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and
organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not
being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU,
sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Status quo?
There is no such thing. The EU may change slowly but it is not a static
organisation. It has a goal and works continually toward it in
incremental steps which, crucially, are intended to be irreversible.
Despite claims he came away empty handed by some, reforms negotiated by
David Cameron in February exempting Britain from 'ever closer union'
with the EU. It was irreversible according to the EU President Donald Tusk.
Yes, and similar arguments were used often in the run-up to the
referendum - basically that we need not worry because the UK would
retain the choice over X and Y, and that we could not be forced into any
major programmes which we did not want to participate in. That has, to
varying degrees, been part of the UK/EU relationship since the
beginning: we as a country have always had choices over further major
forms of integration. The problem, though, has always been that despite
such assurances, over time our leaders have accepted further integration
on specific measures, and that the things they accepted became almost
impossible for a later leader to choose to exit from. We have therefore
been sucked further and further in to the Project.
Post by Lancer
Post by James Harris
For sure, EU membership offers benefits to prospective members. But it
does so as a fisherman offers a worm to a fish.
Or paying your taxes and getting free healthcare, schools, police, fire
brigade, defence, roads, footpaths, street lighting........
Some of it goes towards helping poor foreign brow people and the
feckless workshy, but that is no reason not to pay your taxes.
I don't get the analogy. The EU offers a single market in goods (and
some services) and significant largesse to smaller states. No wonder
they want to join. But the cost is increasing levels of political
integration. Of course, like an alcoholic, people believe they can stop
any time they want. But it never works out that way. All that happens is
that the EU makes changes and trade deals more slowly because it has
more countries to please.
Post by Lancer
Post by James Harris
There is no status quo. There is only the choice between two journeys.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/eu-deal-what-david-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/
Good link, thanks.
--
James Harris
Lancer
2017-12-06 23:13:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by Lancer
Post by James Harris
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no
mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with
Brexit on
the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not
being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU,
sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Status quo?
There is no such thing. The EU may change slowly but it is not a static
organisation. It has a goal and works continually toward it in
incremental steps which, crucially, are intended to be irreversible.
Despite claims he came away empty handed by some, reforms negotiated by
David Cameron in February exempting Britain from 'ever closer union'
with the EU. It was irreversible according to the EU President Donald Tusk.
Yes, and similar arguments were used often in the run-up to the
referendum - basically that we need not worry because the UK would
retain the choice over X and Y, and that we could not be forced into any
major programmes which we did not want to participate in. That has, to
varying degrees, been part of the UK/EU relationship since the
beginning: we as a country have always had choices over further major
forms of integration. The problem, though, has always been that despite
such assurances, over time our leaders have accepted further integration
on specific measures, and that the things they accepted became almost
impossible for a later leader to choose to exit from. We have therefore
been sucked further and further in to the Project.
Which is the fault of our leaders, not the EU.
Post by James Harris
Post by Lancer
Post by James Harris
For sure, EU membership offers benefits to prospective members. But it
does so as a fisherman offers a worm to a fish.
Or paying your taxes and getting free healthcare, schools, police, fire
brigade, defence, roads, footpaths, street lighting........
Some of it goes towards helping poor foreign brow people and the
feckless workshy, but that is no reason not to pay your taxes.
I don't get the analogy. The EU offers a single market in goods (and
some services) and significant largesse to smaller states. No wonder
they want to join. But the cost is increasing levels of political
integration. Of course, like an alcoholic, people believe they can stop
any time they want. But it never works out that way. All that happens is
that the EU makes changes and trade deals more slowly because it has
more countries to please.
When you need to please 500,000,000 people that's what you get. If some
bureaucrat forgets to dot the i or cross the t the EU could end up being
forced to buy expensive crap it doesn't want, or sell stuff at less than
cost.


You don't need to look any further that Labour and the PFI scandal to
see what happens when you rush to sign the dotted line.
Post by James Harris
Post by Lancer
Post by James Harris
There is no status quo. There is only the choice between two journeys.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/eu-deal-what-david-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/
Good link, thanks.
YW
R. Mark Clayton
2017-12-07 10:22:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
SNIP
Post by Lancer
When you need to please 500,000,000 people that's what you get. If some
bureaucrat forgets to dot the i or cross the t the EU could end up being
forced to buy expensive crap it doesn't want, or sell stuff at less than
cost.
Oh you mean like CAP, but at least there was milk in the fridge and butter on the table...
Post by Lancer
You don't need to look any further that Labour and the PFI scandal to
see what happens when you rush to sign the dotted line.
and don't know what you are doing / signing!
Post by Lancer
Post by James Harris
Post by Lancer
Post by James Harris
There is no status quo. There is only the choice between two journeys.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/19/eu-deal-what-david-cameron-asked-for-and-what-he-actually-got/
Good link, thanks.
YW
Yellow
2017-12-06 13:17:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 09:42:42 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1
Post by James Harris
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU, sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Status quo?
There is no such thing. The EU may change slowly but it is not a static
organisation. It has a goal and works continually toward it in
incremental steps which, crucially, are intended to be irreversible.
For sure, EU membership offers benefits to prospective members. But it
does so as a fisherman offers a worm to a fish.
There is no status quo. There is only the choice between two journeys.
I agree with that 100% but I don't think that is how some remain voters
would have seen it, those guys that just voted to remain because they
are happy with the situation as it is now.
James Harris
2017-12-06 16:56:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 09:42:42 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1
Post by James Harris
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU, sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Status quo?
There is no such thing. The EU may change slowly but it is not a static
organisation. It has a goal and works continually toward it in
incremental steps which, crucially, are intended to be irreversible.
For sure, EU membership offers benefits to prospective members. But it
does so as a fisherman offers a worm to a fish.
There is no status quo. There is only the choice between two journeys.
I agree with that 100% but I don't think that is how some remain voters
would have seen it, those guys that just voted to remain because they
are happy with the situation as it is now.
I suspect that a significant number voted Remain because they thought
that it was the safe status quo, in contrast with the big scary unknown
of Brexit.
--
James Harris
Yellow
2017-12-06 13:14:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU, sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.
Ian Jackson
2017-12-06 13:51:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on
the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not
being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU,
sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.
It was certainly stressed that untangling four decades of increasingly
intimate co-operation would be incredibly difficult - but in the main it
was the was the advantages that the EU brought to trade,
standardization, work opportunities, residency etc that were used to
justifying staying in the EU.

Maybe if the problems of leaving the EU had been emphasised more than
they were, then some of those who thought we could walk out of the EU on
24 June would have taken a little more notice. But even as things were,
any such negative assessments were immediately slated as being Project
Fear propaganda.
--
Ian
James Harris
2017-12-06 17:00:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Yellow
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not
being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU,
sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.
It was certainly stressed that untangling four decades of increasingly
intimate co-operation would be incredibly difficult - but in the main it
was the was the advantages that the EU brought to trade,
standardization, work opportunities, residency etc that were used to
justifying staying in the EU.
Maybe if the problems of leaving the EU had been emphasised more than
they were, then some of those who thought we could walk out of the EU on
24 June would have taken a little more notice. But even as things were,
any such negative assessments were immediately slated as being Project
Fear propaganda.
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
--
James Harris
Ian Jackson
2017-12-06 17:35:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not! The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
--
Ian
pamela
2017-12-06 18:18:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack
of credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there
would be some negatives, but they found not to be credible the
extreme claims that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too
far. They lost their audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that
we are now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it?
Of course not! The Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as
being just another example of ridiculous Remainer OTT
fear-mongering.
We're currently in a situation worse than any Brexiteer's worst
nightmare.... and it's set to get worse.

Brexiteers are continuously in denial that even when we are clearly
in the shit and you tell them, they won't accept it.

Watching Brexiteers come to terms with what's happening is
like watching someone go through the five Kubler-Ross steps of
grief. This group has people going through.......

Denial that Brexit is going badly,

Anger at their lofty objectives being thwarted,

Bargaining with their minds that the extra costs are worth having.
James Harris
2017-12-06 20:00:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack
of credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there
would be some negatives, but they found not to be credible the
extreme claims that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too
far. They lost their audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that
we are now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it?
Of course not! The Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as
being just another example of ridiculous Remainer OTT
fear-mongering.
We're currently in a situation worse than any Brexiteer's worst
nightmare.... and it's set to get worse.
You Remainers have not got a clue as to what Brexiteers want or expect
and you should stop projecting your views onto others. If you don't
believe me, try this:

British voters increasingly think Brexit is being mishandled. But that
doesn’t mean they’re turning their backs on the idea of abandoning the
European Union -- just on Prime Minister Theresa May’s Conservative
government.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-06/most-brits-still-want-brexit-but-expect-it-all-to-end-badly
--
James Harris
Yellow
2017-12-06 18:44:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 17:35:58 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not!
Would that have believed it? Don't know, don't care. It would simply
have been a guess because not one single one of us could have predicted
the election and the consequences.

Would it have changed my vote anyway? No. But obviously I could live
without it.
Post by Ian Jackson
The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
Which it would have been or are you claiming an insight that no one
could possibly have had? As they say, even a stopped clock it right
twice a day.
Ian Jackson
2017-12-06 19:17:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 17:35:58 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not!
Would that have believed it? Don't know, don't care. It would simply
have been a guess because not one single one of us could have predicted
the election and the consequences.
Would it have changed my vote anyway? No. But obviously I could live
without it.
Post by Ian Jackson
The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
Which it would have been or are you claiming an insight that no one
could possibly have had? As they say, even a stopped clock it right
twice a day.
Stop deliberately mis-understanding or mis-reading what I said, which
started "And if the Remainers had foretold this.....".

Not even the most pessimistic Remainer could have foretold the chaos
we're now in - and if they had, then no-one (including the rest of the
Remain camp) would have believed them either!!
--
Ian
Yellow
2017-12-06 21:11:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 19:17:35 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Yellow
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 17:35:58 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not!
Would that have believed it? Don't know, don't care. It would simply
have been a guess because not one single one of us could have predicted
the election and the consequences.
Would it have changed my vote anyway? No. But obviously I could live
without it.
Post by Ian Jackson
The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
Which it would have been or are you claiming an insight that no one
could possibly have had? As they say, even a stopped clock it right
twice a day.
Stop deliberately mis-understanding or mis-reading what I said, which
started "And if the Remainers had foretold this.....".
I understood what you meant perfectly and I have re-read my reply and
cannot see why it has yanked your chain.
Post by Ian Jackson
Not even the most pessimistic Remainer could have foretold the chaos
we're now in - and if they had, then no-one (including the rest of the
Remain camp) would have believed them either!!
pamela
2017-12-12 18:58:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by Yellow
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 17:35:58 +0000, Ian Jackson
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a
lack of credibility. The public were probably persuadable
that there would be some negatives, but they found not to be
credible the extreme claims that Project Fear came out with.
Remain went too far. They lost their audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos
that we are now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it?
Of course not!
Would that have believed it? Don't know, don't care. It would
simply have been a guess because not one single one of us could
have predicted the election and the consequences.
Would it have changed my vote anyway? No. But obviously I could
live without it.
Post by Ian Jackson
The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just
another example of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering.
[Come on - admit it - you would.]
Which it would have been or are you claiming an insight that no
one could possibly have had? As they say, even a stopped clock
it right twice a day.
Stop deliberately mis-understanding or mis-reading what I said,
which started "And if the Remainers had foretold this.....".
I had this weird misunderstand of what was written with Yellow.
It's unpleasant and unnecessary. I came to wonder if he had some
sort of cognitive impairment.
Post by Ian Jackson
Not even the most pessimistic Remainer could have foretold the
chaos we're now in - and if they had, then no-one (including the
rest of the Remain camp) would have believed them either!!
James Harris
2017-12-06 19:57:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not! The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
I am puzzled by your description. You are evidently sincere but what did
you think would happen around now? I am not surprised in the least - and
won't be if a deal on phase 1 is not reached until the new year.

In fact, I wouldn't be overly surprised if we don't get a trade deal
with the EU at all - and I certainly wouldn't be disappointed - though I
would very much regret that the government has not spent enough time
preparing for alternatives.

I am genuinely puzzled as to what problem you see! This is all
completely standard negotiation argy-bargy - especially when the EU is
involved. There's a lot of brinkmanship going on.
--
James Harris
Pelican
2017-12-06 20:10:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not! The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
I am puzzled by your description. You are evidently sincere but what did
you think would happen around now? I am not surprised in the least - and
won't be if a deal on phase 1 is not reached until the new year.
In fact, I wouldn't be overly surprised if we don't get a trade deal
with the EU at all - and I certainly wouldn't be disappointed - though I
would very much regret that the government has not spent enough time
preparing for alternatives.
I am genuinely puzzled as to what problem you see! This is all
completely standard negotiation argy-bargy - especially when the EU is
involved. There's a lot of brinkmanship going on.
You don't appear to understand the situation.

No-one expected the referendum vote to go the way it did, so there was
no preparation for the outcome by the government, and certainly not by
those advocating Brexit.

Immediately the outcome was known, the EU made its position clear. The
UK would take whatever the EU was offering, or no deal. That is the
same position that the EU is taking now.

That leaves the prospect of a hard Brexit ie the UK leaves the EU
without any deal. Which is generally seen as a lose-lose result,
although quite a few Brexit people say that would be quite ok, like you.

The problems that might cause are of no concern to people like you. So
far as all other people are concerned, tough luck.
James Harris
2017-12-06 20:46:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pelican
Post by James Harris
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not! The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
I am puzzled by your description. You are evidently sincere but what did
you think would happen around now? I am not surprised in the least - and
won't be if a deal on phase 1 is not reached until the new year.
In fact, I wouldn't be overly surprised if we don't get a trade deal
with the EU at all - and I certainly wouldn't be disappointed - though I
would very much regret that the government has not spent enough time
preparing for alternatives.
I am genuinely puzzled as to what problem you see! This is all
completely standard negotiation argy-bargy - especially when the EU is
involved. There's a lot of brinkmanship going on.
You don't appear to understand the situation.
No-one expected the referendum vote to go the way it did, so there was
no preparation for the outcome by the government, and certainly not by
those advocating Brexit.
Immediately the outcome was known, the EU made its position clear. The
UK would take whatever the EU was offering, or no deal. That is the
same position that the EU is taking now.
That leaves the prospect of a hard Brexit ie the UK leaves the EU
without any deal. Which is generally seen as a lose-lose result,
although quite a few Brexit people say that would be quite ok, like you.
Not quite. I've been saying for some time, now, that there are two basic
types of no deal.

1. No trade deal, i.e. no FTA.
2. No agreement of any kind.

Number 2 would be a disaster for the UK and the EU but mostly for the
UK. It is the kind of doomsday scenario that some warn about where
planes don't fly across the channel and goods are stopped at the borders
either completely or with miles and miles of tailback, foreign residents
have no legal status and contracts of services are voided. That would
fit all the dire descriptions that you have heard from those who fear No
Deal, and probably a lot more.

Number 1, by contrast, would be OK. It would leave businesses with some
adjustment to do and some would be impacted worse than others. But it
would be doable. And, crucially, it would leave the UK free of imposed
regulation. And that would be a prize which is very much worth having;
it would bring local and global opportunities that an FTA with the EU
might not. But it would take time to realise the benefits of that freedom.

It is precisely because number 2 is so dire that I don't think either
side would agree to it. The only way that it would be the outcome is if
the talks broke down into unimaginable levels of acrimony, and the UK is
doing a wonderful job in maintaining a friendly atmosphere so I cannot
see it happening.

Does that help you see why I am OK about No Deal?
Post by Pelican
The problems that might cause are of no concern to people like you. So
far as all other people are concerned, tough luck.
--
James Harris
Pelican
2017-12-06 21:12:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by Pelican
Post by James Harris
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not! The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
I am puzzled by your description. You are evidently sincere but what did
you think would happen around now? I am not surprised in the least - and
won't be if a deal on phase 1 is not reached until the new year.
In fact, I wouldn't be overly surprised if we don't get a trade deal
with the EU at all - and I certainly wouldn't be disappointed - though I
would very much regret that the government has not spent enough time
preparing for alternatives.
I am genuinely puzzled as to what problem you see! This is all
completely standard negotiation argy-bargy - especially when the EU is
involved. There's a lot of brinkmanship going on.
You don't appear to understand the situation.
No-one expected the referendum vote to go the way it did, so there was
no preparation for the outcome by the government, and certainly not by
those advocating Brexit.
Immediately the outcome was known, the EU made its position clear.  The
UK would take whatever the EU was offering, or no deal.  That is the
same position that the EU is taking now.
That leaves the prospect of a hard Brexit ie the UK leaves the EU
without any deal. Which is generally seen as a lose-lose result,
although quite a few Brexit people say that would be quite ok, like you.
Not quite. I've been saying for some time, now, that there are two basic
types of no deal.
1. No trade deal, i.e. no FTA.
2. No agreement of any kind.
I'm afraid not. There is only one basic deal, that offered by the EU.
And that's the problem for the UK. There are people in the UK who want
Brexit, but think that something less than Brexit can be "negotiated".
Post by James Harris
Number 2 would be a disaster for the UK and the EU but mostly for the
UK. It is the kind of doomsday scenario that some warn about where
planes don't fly across the channel and goods are stopped at the borders
either completely or with miles and miles of tailback, foreign residents
have no legal status and contracts of services are voided. That would
fit all the dire descriptions that you have heard from those who fear No
Deal, and probably a lot more.
Number 1, by contrast, would be OK. It would leave businesses with some
adjustment to do and some would be impacted worse than others. But it
would be doable. And, crucially, it would leave the UK free of imposed
regulation. And that would be a prize which is very much worth having;
it would bring local and global opportunities that an FTA with the EU
might not. But it would take time to realise the benefits of that freedom.
It is precisely because number 2 is so dire that I don't think either
side would agree to it. The only way that it would be the outcome is if
the talks broke down into unimaginable levels of acrimony, and the UK is
doing a wonderful job in maintaining a friendly atmosphere so I cannot
see it happening.
You have not understood the EU position. The UK has no cards to play,
the EU knows it, and they have always known it. The UK government knows
it. The rest of the world knows it.
Post by James Harris
Does that help you see why I am OK about No Deal?
I understand your position - you are dreaming.
Post by James Harris
Post by Pelican
The problems that might cause are of no concern to people like you.  So
far as all other people are concerned, tough luck.
pamela
2017-12-06 22:50:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pelican
[...]
I'm afraid not. There is only one basic deal, that offered by
the EU. And that's the problem for the UK. There are people in
the UK who want Brexit, but think that something less than
Brexit can be "negotiated".
[...]
You have not understood the EU position. The UK has no cards to
play, the EU knows it, and they have always known it. The UK
government knows it. The rest of the world knows it.
That sums up the present situation with honesty.

Winning the referendum was like a Leaver fairy tale come true. Now
Leavers expect another of their fairy tales to come true.....
negotiations where the UK comes out on top.

Wake up, Leavers..... getting the first one was an amazing fluke
but getting both is impossible. Dream time is over.
James Harris
2017-12-06 23:16:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
...
Post by Pelican
You have not understood the EU position. The UK has no cards to play,
the EU knows it, and they have always known it. The UK government knows
it. The rest of the world knows it.
I am afraid you are under a delusion. For example, the EU needs access
to London, to the UK's intelligence services, and to the UK's money. And
while the EU as a whole is the bigger party there are some parts therein
which need UK trade.

Nevertheless, it works both ways. Both sides need each other.

I've seen plenty of examples of where Remainers show that they look down
on the UK. No wonder they voted Remain.
--
James Harris
Pelican
2017-12-06 23:37:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
...
You have not understood the EU position.  The UK has no cards to play,
the EU knows it, and they have always known it.  The UK government knows
it.  The rest of the world knows it.
I am afraid you are under a delusion. For example, the EU needs access
to London, to the UK's intelligence services, and to the UK's money.
The UK chose to leave the EU. That has certain consequences. If you
are saying that those things you mention are available as levers to the
UK in negotiating the terms of UK's departure, you are dreaming.
Post by James Harris
And
while the EU as a whole is the bigger party there are some parts therein
which need UK trade.
The UK chose to leave the EU, not the other way around.
Post by James Harris
Nevertheless, it works both ways. Both sides need each other.
What a shame that the UK chose to leave.
Post by James Harris
I've seen plenty of examples of where Remainers show that they look down
on the UK. No wonder they voted Remain.
The Brexit vote is now water under the bridge. The issues now are the
consequences. Whether anyone in the UK was a Brexiteer or a Remainer
has now no relevance. The UK is leaving the EU, and some in the UK are
hoping to obtain a negotiated departure favourable to the UK. They are
dreaming. Others in the UK just want to get out of the EU come what
may. They will probably get their wish.
James Harris
2017-12-07 00:06:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pelican
Post by James Harris
...
You have not understood the EU position.  The UK has no cards to play,
the EU knows it, and they have always known it.  The UK government knows
it.  The rest of the world knows it.
I am afraid you are under a delusion. For example, the EU needs access
to London, to the UK's intelligence services, and to the UK's money.
The UK chose to leave the EU. That has certain consequences. If you
are saying that those things you mention are available as levers to the
UK in negotiating the terms of UK's departure, you are dreaming.
I am not sure what significance you attribute to which of the two made
the choice. The effect is the same: the two parties are going to go
their separate ways and need to negotiate the separation.
Post by Pelican
Post by James Harris
And
while the EU as a whole is the bigger party there are some parts therein
which need UK trade.
The UK chose to leave the EU, not the other way around.
Post by James Harris
Nevertheless, it works both ways. Both sides need each other.
What a shame that the UK chose to leave.
Post by James Harris
I've seen plenty of examples of where Remainers show that they look down
on the UK. No wonder they voted Remain.
The Brexit vote is now water under the bridge. The issues now are the
consequences. Whether anyone in the UK was a Brexiteer or a Remainer
has now no relevance. The UK is leaving the EU, and some in the UK are
hoping to obtain a negotiated departure favourable to the UK. They are
dreaming. Others in the UK just want to get out of the EU come what
may. They will probably get their wish.
As a Brexiteer I expect our EU trade to be worse than it is now to some
degree and as long as the government doesn't tie us in too closely to
the EU, for our global opportunities to be greater. It's a tradeoff.
--
James Harris
pamela
2017-12-07 00:50:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pelican
Post by James Harris
...
You have not understood the EU position.  The UK has no cards
to play, the EU knows it, and they have always known it.  The
UK government knows it.  The rest of the world knows it.
I am afraid you are under a delusion. For example, the EU needs
access to London, to the UK's intelligence services, and to the
UK's money.
The UK chose to leave the EU. That has certain consequences.
If you are saying that those things you mention are available as
levers to the UK in negotiating the terms of UK's departure, you
are dreaming.
Post by James Harris
And
while the EU as a whole is the bigger party there are some
parts therein which need UK trade.
The UK chose to leave the EU, not the other way around.
Post by James Harris
Nevertheless, it works both ways. Both sides need each other.
What a shame that the UK chose to leave.
Post by James Harris
I've seen plenty of examples of where Remainers show that they
look down on the UK. No wonder they voted Remain.
The Brexit vote is now water under the bridge. The issues now
are the consequences. Whether anyone in the UK was a Brexiteer
or a Remainer has now no relevance. The UK is leaving the EU,
and some in the UK are hoping to obtain a negotiated departure
favourable to the UK. They are dreaming. Others in the UK just
want to get out of the EU come what may. They will probably get
their wish.
When it predictably all goes belly up, Leavers will moan for ever
more that Brexit was done properly (which actually means it wasn't
done in the crazy way they advocated) and that the mess is all
somebody else's fault..... such as the EU.
pamela
2017-12-07 00:50:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Pelican
Post by James Harris
...
You have not understood the EU position.  The UK has no
cards to play, the EU knows it, and they have always known
it.  The UK government knows it.  The rest of the world
knows it.
I am afraid you are under a delusion. For example, the EU
needs access to London, to the UK's intelligence services, and
to the UK's money.
The UK chose to leave the EU. That has certain consequences.
If you are saying that those things you mention are available
as levers to the UK in negotiating the terms of UK's departure,
you are dreaming.
Post by James Harris
And while the EU as a whole is the bigger party there are some
parts therein which need UK trade.
The UK chose to leave the EU, not the other way around.
Post by James Harris
Nevertheless, it works both ways. Both sides need each other.
What a shame that the UK chose to leave.
Post by James Harris
I've seen plenty of examples of where Remainers show that they
look down on the UK. No wonder they voted Remain.
The Brexit vote is now water under the bridge. The issues now
are the consequences. Whether anyone in the UK was a Brexiteer
or a Remainer has now no relevance. The UK is leaving the EU,
and some in the UK are hoping to obtain a negotiated departure
favourable to the UK. They are dreaming. Others in the UK
just want to get out of the EU come what may. They will
probably get their wish.
When it predictably all goes belly up, Leavers will moan for
ever more that Brexit was done properly (which actually means it
wasn't done in the crazy way they advocated) and that the mess
is all somebody else's fault..... such as the EU.
s/was/wasn't/

Heh!
Ian Jackson
2017-12-07 08:15:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by pamela
When it predictably all goes belly up, Leavers will moan for
ever more that Brexit was done properly (which actually means it
wasn't done in the crazy way they advocated) and that the mess
is all somebody else's fault..... such as the EU.
s/was/wasn't/
Heh!
Indeed. It's all the EU's fault (especially the Roi's). If they'd only
give us exactly what we want, there wouldn't be any problem. Why can't
the Remoaners see that?
--
Ian
James Harris
2017-12-07 09:31:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pamela
Post by pamela
When it predictably all goes belly up, Leavers will moan for
ever more that Brexit was done properly (which actually means it
wasn't done in the crazy way they advocated) and that the mess
is all somebody else's fault..... such as the EU.
s/was/wasn't/
Heh!
Indeed. It's all the EU's fault (especially the Roi's). If they'd only
give us exactly what we want, there wouldn't be any problem. Why can't
the Remoaners see that?
What you and many others miss is that the success of Brexit does not
depend on the EU. The EU could offer the UK the worst practical deal
possible and Brexit would still be a success /if/ the government takes
advantage of the opportunities. Remember that something like 90% of
world growth over the next ten years is expected to come from outside
the EU.
--
James Harris
Ian Jackson
2017-12-07 10:19:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Remember that something like 90% of world growth over the next ten
years is expected to come from outside the EU.
I guess you are unfamiliar with Dickens' "Great Expectations"?
--
Ian
James Harris
2017-12-07 10:50:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Remember that something like 90% of world growth over the next ten
years is expected to come from outside the EU.
I guess you are unfamiliar with Dickens' "Great Expectations"?
In return, I guess you are someone who accepts forecasts you like - such
as those which said we'll do less well outside the EU - but not ones you
don't like - such as the above. ;-)

In fact, the 90% projection was from the EU themselves - your friends!
Here's the detail. Do you believe them?



The Commission is proposing a new trade and investment strategy for the
European Union: 'Trade for All'.

The new approach builds on Europe's excellent trade track record. More
than 30 million jobs already depend on exports outside the EU. 90% of
future global growth will happen outside Europe's borders. A new
strategy that will make trade agreements more effective and that will
create more opportunities means supporting jobs in Europe.

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/new-trade-strategy/index_en.htm



So by far the most of the world's future growth is expected to come from
outside the EU. And despite decades of existence and the EU's
500-million size which we keep hearing about, it has failed to establish
FTAs with the world's biggest economies. That a is a shocking fact and I
would suggest we can do better by going directly. Brexit is about
cutting out the middleman.

A middleman perhaps makes sense if you are a tiny economy. But Britain
is vastly bigger than many EU members.

And the basic point remains: Brexit success depends on the government,
not on whether we get a good or bad deal from the EU. A good EU deal
would be helpful in the short term. But Brexit does not depend on it.
--
James Harris
The Todal
2017-12-07 10:37:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pamela
Post by pamela
When it predictably all goes belly up, Leavers will moan for
ever more that Brexit was done properly (which actually means it
wasn't done in the crazy way they advocated) and that the mess
is all somebody else's fault.....  such as the EU.
s/was/wasn't/
Heh!
Indeed. It's all the EU's fault (especially the Roi's). If they'd only
give us exactly what we want, there wouldn't be any problem. Why can't
the Remoaners see that?
What you and many others miss is that the success of Brexit does not
depend on the EU. The EU could offer the UK the worst practical deal
possible and Brexit would still be a success /if/ the government takes
advantage of the opportunities. Remember that something like 90% of
world growth over the next ten years is expected to come from outside
the EU.
And remember that if you belong to the EU you can drive a hard bargain
when negotiating with customers and suppliers. After Brexit, we'll be
like a corner shop competing with Tesco, having to buy at higher prices
and passing on those prices to our people.

We do have a unique place in the world because of our financial services
- but those will be gradually transferred to Frankfurt and other major
financial centres.
James Harris
2017-12-07 11:06:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by The Todal
Post by James Harris
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pamela
Post by pamela
When it predictably all goes belly up, Leavers will moan for
ever more that Brexit was done properly (which actually means it
wasn't done in the crazy way they advocated) and that the mess
is all somebody else's fault.....  such as the EU.
s/was/wasn't/
Heh!
Indeed. It's all the EU's fault (especially the Roi's). If they'd only
give us exactly what we want, there wouldn't be any problem. Why can't
the Remoaners see that?
What you and many others miss is that the success of Brexit does not
depend on the EU. The EU could offer the UK the worst practical deal
possible and Brexit would still be a success /if/ the government takes
advantage of the opportunities. Remember that something like 90% of
world growth over the next ten years is expected to come from outside
the EU.
And remember that if you belong to the EU you can drive a hard bargain
when negotiating with customers and suppliers. After Brexit, we'll be
like a corner shop competing with Tesco, having to buy at higher prices
and passing on those prices to our people.
We do have a unique place in the world because of our financial services
- but those will be gradually transferred to Frankfurt and other major
financial centres.
On the last point, try this from the usually negative Kamal Ahmed:


--
James Harris
Yellow
2017-12-06 21:27:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 07:10:24 +1100, Pelican <water-
Post by Pelican
Post by James Harris
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not! The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
I am puzzled by your description. You are evidently sincere but what did
you think would happen around now? I am not surprised in the least - and
won't be if a deal on phase 1 is not reached until the new year.
In fact, I wouldn't be overly surprised if we don't get a trade deal
with the EU at all - and I certainly wouldn't be disappointed - though I
would very much regret that the government has not spent enough time
preparing for alternatives.
I am genuinely puzzled as to what problem you see! This is all
completely standard negotiation argy-bargy - especially when the EU is
involved. There's a lot of brinkmanship going on.
You don't appear to understand the situation.
No-one expected the referendum vote to go the way it did, so there was
no preparation for the outcome by the government, and certainly not by
those advocating Brexit.
You are excusing the lack of preparation for a leave vote on "no one
expected leave to win"? You are a lot kinder than I am.
Post by Pelican
Immediately the outcome was known, the EU made its position clear. The
UK would take whatever the EU was offering, or no deal. That is the
same position that the EU is taking now.
Yep, disappointing but not surprising.
Post by Pelican
That leaves the prospect of a hard Brexit ie the UK leaves the EU
without any deal.
Hard Brexit means leaving the Single Market and Customs Union, so yes
please!!!

Whether or not we get a trade deal is irreverent to that.
Post by Pelican
Which is generally seen as a lose-lose result,
although quite a few Brexit people say that would be quite ok, like you.
The "deal" only ever needed to sort out the practical details, like the
people already living here and in the EU, Trade deals on the other hand
come and go and while it would be nice to have a free trade deal in
place on the day we leave, that was always a big ask.
Post by Pelican
The problems that might cause are of no concern to people like you. So
far as all other people are concerned, tough luck.
Whatever is agreed, or not, some people will be affect positively, some
negatively and to some it will make no difference.
Pelican
2017-12-06 22:15:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 07:10:24 +1100, Pelican <water-
Post by Pelican
Post by James Harris
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not! The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
I am puzzled by your description. You are evidently sincere but what did
you think would happen around now? I am not surprised in the least - and
won't be if a deal on phase 1 is not reached until the new year.
In fact, I wouldn't be overly surprised if we don't get a trade deal
with the EU at all - and I certainly wouldn't be disappointed - though I
would very much regret that the government has not spent enough time
preparing for alternatives.
I am genuinely puzzled as to what problem you see! This is all
completely standard negotiation argy-bargy - especially when the EU is
involved. There's a lot of brinkmanship going on.
You don't appear to understand the situation.
No-one expected the referendum vote to go the way it did, so there was
no preparation for the outcome by the government, and certainly not by
those advocating Brexit.
You are excusing the lack of preparation for a leave vote on "no one
expected leave to win"? You are a lot kinder than I am.
It's not an excuse. There are no guarantees on the outcome of a
democratic vote. But that's all water under the bridge now.
Post by Yellow
Immediately the outcome was known, the EU made its position clear. The
Post by Pelican
UK would take whatever the EU was offering, or no deal. That is the
same position that the EU is taking now.
Yep, disappointing but not surprising.
Post by Pelican
That leaves the prospect of a hard Brexit ie the UK leaves the EU
without any deal.
Hard Brexit means leaving the Single Market and Customs Union, so yes
please!!!
Whether or not we get a trade deal is irreverent to that.
Irrelevant, as well.
Post by Yellow
Post by Pelican
Which is generally seen as a lose-lose result,
although quite a few Brexit people say that would be quite ok, like you.
The "deal" only ever needed to sort out the practical details, like the
people already living here and in the EU, Trade deals on the other hand
come and go and while it would be nice to have a free trade deal in
place on the day we leave, that was always a big ask.
Post by Pelican
The problems that might cause are of no concern to people like you. So
far as all other people are concerned, tough luck.
Whatever is agreed, or not, some people will be affect positively, some
negatively and to some it will make no difference.
Vidcapper
2017-12-07 08:27:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by James Harris
You must admit that the Remain camp brought on themselves a lack of
credibility. The public were probably persuadable that there would be
some negatives, but they found not to be credible the extreme claims
that Project Fear came out with. Remain went too far. They lost their
audience.
And if the Remainers had foretold this ever-deepening chaos that we are
now in, would a single Brexiteer have believed it? Of course not! The
Brexit camp would simply have dismissed it as being just another example
of ridiculous Remainer OTT fear-mongering. [Come on - admit it - you
would.]
But you are comparing apples & oranges here - assuming that just because
the *negotiations* have been awkward, that automatically means that
Brexit itself will be a failure.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
pullgees
2017-12-06 14:25:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no
mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on
the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU, sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.
Absolutely.
Tim Woodall
2017-12-06 15:07:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Yellow
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.
Absolutely.
This is bizarre. I don't think I've ever heard a remainer say we
shouldn't leave the EU because leaving is going to be hard. They
certainly did argue that the brexiteers claims that it would be easy
didn't hold water and so the claims they were making about how wonderful
everything would be post brexit wouldn't pan out.

But now that the remainers have been proved right, and leaving is a
difficult and painful negotiation with no visible upside for anyone, the
brexiteers are now claiming that we should leave *because* it is hard.

It's blatently obvious that (some) brexiteers just want (hard) brexit at
any cost and will make up any justification to "prove" them right even
when it's completely opposed to the previous "proof" that brexit is the
right thing.

IMO brexit is a done deal, now we're looking for the best deal possible
- which, IMO, requires us to stay in the single market. That we're 18
months post vote and the Government still doesn't know what to do about
the Irish border just reinforces that.
pamela
2017-12-06 15:38:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Woodall
Post by pullgees
Post by Yellow
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost
is that no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by
anyone. Of course being in the EU has some benefits for some
people but the biggest argument for staying always seems to
revolved around how hard it is to leave rather than reasons to
stay.
Absolutely.
This is bizarre. I don't think I've ever heard a remainer say we
shouldn't leave the EU because leaving is going to be hard. They
certainly did argue that the brexiteers claims that it would be
easy didn't hold water and so the claims they were making about
how wonderful everything would be post brexit wouldn't pan out.
But now that the remainers have been proved right, and leaving
is a difficult and painful negotiation with no visible upside
for anyone, the brexiteers are now claiming that we should leave
*because* it is hard.
It's blatently obvious that (some) brexiteers just want (hard)
brexit at any cost and will make up any justification to "prove"
them right even when it's completely opposed to the previous
"proof" that brexit is the right thing.
The desire for a hard Brexit is born partly out of uncontrollable
hatred of the EU and a desite to stick one on them.

Also, it is partly due to desperation that the UK might never
leave because it is so much more complicated than Brexiters
imagined. It's a bit like a pedestrian trying to cross a road so
busy there's never gap in the traffic..... so they close their
eyes and just walk. Oops! It's a good job there are some adults
around.
Post by Tim Woodall
IMO brexit is a done deal, now we're looking for the best deal
possible - which, IMO, requires us to stay in the single market.
That we're 18 months post vote and the Government still doesn't
know what to do about the Irish border just reinforces that.
I some some talking head on the telly explain that half the
country wants to leave the EU so we go for Brexit and the other
half wants to keep a close relationship with the EU so we go for a
soft Brexit.

Of course Brexiteers talk as if winning the referendum
somehow authorises them to dictate the terms of leaving but htey
are finding that Brexit will take into account the whole
population and not just for those who voted for it.
James Harris
2017-12-06 17:14:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by Tim Woodall
Post by pullgees
Post by Yellow
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost
is that no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by
anyone. Of course being in the EU has some benefits for some
people but the biggest argument for staying always seems to
revolved around how hard it is to leave rather than reasons to
stay.
Absolutely.
This is bizarre. I don't think I've ever heard a remainer say we
shouldn't leave the EU because leaving is going to be hard. They
certainly did argue that the brexiteers claims that it would be
easy didn't hold water and so the claims they were making about
how wonderful everything would be post brexit wouldn't pan out.
But now that the remainers have been proved right, and leaving
is a difficult and painful negotiation with no visible upside
for anyone, the brexiteers are now claiming that we should leave
*because* it is hard.
It's blatently obvious that (some) brexiteers just want (hard)
brexit at any cost and will make up any justification to "prove"
them right even when it's completely opposed to the previous
"proof" that brexit is the right thing.
The desire for a hard Brexit is born partly out of uncontrollable
hatred of the EU and a desite to stick one on them.
Maybe half a dozen people in the country think that. ;-) Others of us
want a so-called hard Brexit because it will be best for the country in
the long run. A number of Remain MPs seem keen to get the UK into the
very Norway-like relationship they derided during the campaign. Such a
half-in, half-out, soft and mushy Brexit would not be a good idea as it
would be in very great danger of going so far to ameliorate the
potential short-term negatives of Brexit that it would prevent the UK
ever benefiting from the future opportunities which Brexit opens up.
--
James Harris
Yellow
2017-12-06 16:31:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 15:07:55 +0000 (UTC), Tim Woodall <news001
Post by Tim Woodall
Post by pullgees
Post by Yellow
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.
Absolutely.
This is bizarre. I don't think I've ever heard a remainer say we
shouldn't leave the EU because leaving is going to be hard.
Then I suggest you start viewing The Daily Politics and reading the
newspapers.
Post by Tim Woodall
They
certainly did argue that the brexiteers claims that it would be easy
didn't hold water and so the claims they were making about how wonderful
everything would be post brexit wouldn't pan out.
But that is exactly it. How hard it was going to be to leave the EU was
neither here not there but what was key was the list of all the reasons
why we should have voted to stay. And they were not forthcoming.
Post by Tim Woodall
But now that the remainers have been proved right, and leaving is a
difficult and painful negotiation with no visible upside for anyone, the
brexiteers are now claiming that we should leave *because* it is hard.
You seems to have fallen in the same trap as so many others - people who
want to leave the EU do not share a hive-mind. Just because one person
who was campaigning to leave the EU might have argued it would be a
straightforward process it does not mean that it what all leavers
believed it would be a straightforward process.

It was never going to be a straightforward process. I know that and I am
sure you know that.

And in the event, the behaviour of the EU has surprised even someone as
cynical as me, and that has indeed made me as sure as my decision is it
ever was.
Post by Tim Woodall
It's blatently obvious that (some) brexiteers just want (hard) brexit at
any cost
Oh god, here we go again. Please define "cost" and then we can debate
what staying in the EU will "cost" us against what leave the EU will
'cost' us.
Post by Tim Woodall
and will make up any justification to "prove" them right even
when it's completely opposed to the previous "proof" that brexit is the
right thing.
I have never seen "proof that leave the EU is the right thing to do"
from any source. Please do share!
Post by Tim Woodall
IMO brexit is a done deal, now we're looking for the best deal possible
- which, IMO, requires us to stay in the single market.
Don't hold your breath.
Post by Tim Woodall
That we're 18
months post vote and the Government still doesn't know what to do about
the Irish border just reinforces that.
It will get resolved when we know what sort of trade deal is possible
(or not) and not before.
James Harris
2017-12-06 17:09:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Tim Woodall
Post by pullgees
Post by Yellow
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.
Absolutely.
This is bizarre. I don't think I've ever heard a remainer say we
shouldn't leave the EU because leaving is going to be hard. They
certainly did argue that the brexiteers claims that it would be easy
didn't hold water and so the claims they were making about how wonderful
everything would be post brexit wouldn't pan out.
I've been surprised at how pragmatic the British people have been - e.g.
expecting a slowdown as we leave then for growth to pick up again.
Neither side said that. But the public are smart enough not to believe
either extreme.
Post by Tim Woodall
But now that the remainers have been proved right, and leaving is a
difficult and painful negotiation with no visible upside for anyone, the
brexiteers are now claiming that we should leave *because* it is hard.
A strange delusion! Nothing has been proven yet - except that the dire
warnings of immediate recession were completely false. We'll have to
wait for the outcome of the negotiations to judge how good or bad the
negotiations have been, and I haven't heard anyone claiming we should
leave *because* it is hard to do so.
Post by Tim Woodall
It's blatently obvious that (some) brexiteers just want (hard) brexit at
any cost and will make up any justification to "prove" them right even
when it's completely opposed to the previous "proof" that brexit is the
right thing.
IMO brexit is a done deal, now we're looking for the best deal possible
- which, IMO, requires us to stay in the single market. That we're 18
months post vote and the Government still doesn't know what to do about
the Irish border just reinforces that.
The government is making problems for itself by overclaiming and by
allowing itself to be pushed around. As for the single market, staying
in would make things easier in the short term but would leave us open to
a charge of cherry picking and would be worse for the UK in the long
run. So I think the government is absolutely right to rule it out. A
trade deal would be better as long as it leaves us the freedom we should
have and does not tie us in to regulatory parity.
--
James Harris
Ophelia
2017-12-06 15:35:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no
mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on
the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where
it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not being
pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU, sometimes
they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.
Absolutely.

==

+1
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Ophelia
2017-12-06 15:35:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and
organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
--
Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not being
pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU, sometimes
they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.

===

I am a bit confused. Some above said:

" Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU and don't think it's 'wonderful'"

I am a Brexiteer and I don't worship the EU etc.

Any other Brexiteers here worship the EU ... ???
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Ian Jackson
2017-12-06 15:46:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by pullgees
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on
the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers
where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about
is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining
about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and
organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
-- Ian
You're a bit late, I had to force your nice EU comment.That's not
being pro-active. Remainers have been lacking in talking up the EU,
sometimes they vaguely mention reform, but never specify what they want.
Well arguably (no pun intended) one of the reasons remain lost is that
no great case for staying in the EU is ever made by anyone. Of course
being in the EU has some benefits for some people but the biggest
argument for staying always seems to revolved around how hard it is to
leave rather than reasons to stay.
===
I am a bit confused.
For once, you're right!
Post by Yellow
" Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU and don't think it's 'wonderful'"
I am a Brexiteer and I don't worship the EU etc.
You have totally mis-understood what I said.
Post by Yellow
Any other Brexiteers here worship the EU ... ???
DOH!
I'm obviously referring to those Brexiteers who worship the idea of
leaving the EU!
--
Ian
James Harris
2017-12-06 09:45:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ian Jackson
Post by pullgees
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
--
James Harris
Yes I've noticed that as well, Remainers hardly ever talk about how
wonderful the EU is, instead they just keep on and on about the
campaign.
Unlike Brexit, we don't worship the EU, and don't think it's
'wonderful'. Instead, we see it for what it is - not perfect by any
means, but something that has been of immense value in facilitating free
trade and friction-free commerce, and interaction between the peoples of
Europe.
How do you view the WTO and capitalism? They been doing similar for
global trade.

Aside from putting up barriers to the world outside I am not sure what
role the EU now plays. The world has moved on from what it was when the
European Project was born.
--
James Harris
Yellow
2017-12-06 13:01:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 05:20:12 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
That is a very interesting observation.
Ophelia
2017-12-06 15:31:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
"Yellow" wrote in message news:***@News.Individual.NET...

On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 05:20:12 +0000, James Harris <james.harris.1
Post by James Harris
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
A surprising amount of what persistent Remainers complain about is the
campaigners for leaving the EU rather than them complaining about Brexit
itself. They find lots of fault with the individuals and organisations
who wanted the UK to leave the EU. The logic is
Bad organisation X wanted to leave the EU so Brexit must be bad
And that's tied in with a similar misconception which says
Those who voted Brexit believed the lies of X
What persistent Remainers sometimes fail to grasp is that many
Brexiteers voted to leave the EU because they had examined the options
and picked what they thought would be the best option.
That is a very interesting observation.

==

Correct in my case and I suspect that of many others.
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
pullgees
2017-12-06 08:04:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Lancer
2017-12-06 08:47:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...

Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
pullgees
2017-12-06 08:52:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Lancer
2017-12-06 09:00:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Never said it wasn't.
pullgees
2017-12-06 09:07:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Never said it wasn't.
But that was OP's point, nothing wrong with changing the subject I suppose, seems a little early for that.
Judith
2017-12-06 11:19:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Never said it wasn't.
But that was OP's point, nothing wrong with changing the subject I suppose, seems a little early for that.
Hint: "Front page"
pullgees
2017-12-06 14:23:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Judith
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Never said it wasn't.
But that was OP's point, nothing wrong with changing the subject I suppose, seems a little early for that.
Hint: "Front page"
Do you get all your news from the front page, is that the most important page to you? No wonder you haven't got a clue about what's going on in the world. But what would we expect from a Corbyn shill. If you bothered to turn a couple of pages in the DM you would find plenty on the talks, lazy.
Lancer
2017-12-06 23:18:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Never said it wasn't.
But that was OP's point, nothing wrong with changing the subject I suppose, seems a little early for that.
Hint: "Front page"
Do you get all your news from the front page, is that the most important page to you? No wonder you haven't got a clue about what's going on in the world. But what would we expect from a Corbyn shill. If you bothered to turn a couple of pages in the DM you would find plenty on the talks, lazy.
You pick up every tabloid and read through it before buying?
Lancer
2017-12-06 09:04:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
pullgees
2017-12-06 09:11:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more precise when commentiong on news outlets.
Lancer
2017-12-06 09:22:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.

While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page all
the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child abuse,
food sell by date and Lily Allen.
kat
2017-12-06 10:54:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly
updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have
to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce
battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more
precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page all
the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child abuse,
food sell by date and Lily Allen.
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater depth than
large front page headlines and a short story.

And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
--
kat
Post by Lancer
^..^<
pamela
2017-12-06 11:21:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by kat
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major
papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly
updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you
don't have to scroll down far to find a section of
articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM
when it comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the
UK has to make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be
more precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail',
sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front
page all the DM had was a story about 200 people caught
watching child abuse, food sell by date and Lily Allen.
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater depth
than large front page headlines and a short story.
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
Kim Kardashian has done something new? The Mail always covers
that!
kat
2017-12-06 23:03:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by kat
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely
no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with
Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major
papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly
updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you
don't have to scroll down far to find a section of
articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM
when it comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the
UK has to make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be
more precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail',
sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front
page all the DM had was a story about 200 people caught
watching child abuse, food sell by date and Lily Allen.
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater depth
than large front page headlines and a short story.
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
Kim Kardashian has done something new? The Mail always covers
that!
Really?
--
kat
Post by pamela
^..^<
pamela
2017-12-07 00:39:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by kat
Post by pamela
Post by kat
Post by Lancer
On Wednesday, 6 December 2017 09:04:28 UTC, Lancer 
Post by Lancer
On Wednesday, 6 December 2017 08:47:05 UTC, Lancer 
Post by Lancer
On Tuesday, 5 December 2017 23:43:35 UTC, Judith 
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was
absolutely no mention of what had happened (or not
happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the
front page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other
major papers where it was the main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested in such things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot
understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was
constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks.
Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a
section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the
DM when it comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if
the UK has to make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front
page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to
be more precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail',
sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their
front page all the DM had was a story about 200 people caught
watching child abuse, food sell by date and Lily Allen.
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater
depth than large front page headlines and a short story.
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
Kim Kardashian has done something new? The Mail always covers
that!
Really?
The Mail's celebrity gossip pages are second to none....
especially online. I'm sure you've seen them.
kat
2017-12-07 08:14:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by kat
Post by pamela
Post by kat
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater
depth than large front page headlines and a short story.
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
Kim Kardashian has done something new? The Mail always covers
that!
Really?
The Mail's celebrity gossip pages are second to none....
especially online. I'm sure you've seen them.
Online? Judith insisted she was reading ( just ) the front page of the
real paper. Not that there is anything wrong with a page of gossip, it
lightens, for those that are interested in it, the day after pages of
Brexit, plastic in the oceans, terrorism, Grenfell people not getting
rehoused, what foods are killing us this week, etc etc etc.

Now, if they could do an article on chocolate that actually advises us
to eat it...
--
kat
Post by pamela
^..^<
pamela
2017-12-07 11:35:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by kat
Post by pamela
Post by kat
Post by pamela
Post by kat
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater
depth than large front page headlines and a short story.
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
Kim Kardashian has done something new? The Mail always
covers that!
Really?
The Mail's celebrity gossip pages are second to none....
especially online. I'm sure you've seen them.
Online? Judith insisted she was reading ( just ) the front page
of the real paper.
I meant the Daily Mail newspaper has a lot of celeb gossip and
that online celeb gossip dominates their site.

The Mail web site is a blockbuster which is widely read in the US
such that the Mail very successfully takes gossip about American
celebs and reflects it back to US readers.

In fact, I don't read the Mail online much because it is slow to
load. Even if it did load quickly I think the constant moral
outrage it mixes in with its news storeis can be a bit to much to
take.
Post by kat
Not that there is anything wrong with a page
of gossip, it lightens, for those that are interested in it, the
day after pages of Brexit, plastic in the oceans, terrorism,
Grenfell people not getting rehoused, what foods are killing us
this week, etc etc etc.
I have to confess to liking Heat magazine. :)
Post by kat
Now, if they could do an article on chocolate that actually
advises us to eat it...
You know, after a lifetime being brought up on British chocolate
with it's non-dairy fats, I prefer it to Euro choclate where the
emphasis is often on high cocoa content, freshness and a
resistance to warm weather.

I worked in Belgium for a short while and used to bring home to
the UK famed Belgian chocs from made-daily quality-ingredient
snazzy-looking chocolatiers...... but, if I was being honest with
myself, I was buying overpriced greasy confections which tasted
less good (to me) than a bar of chocolate I could get in the local
supermarket.
kat
2017-12-07 12:48:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by kat
Post by pamela
Post by kat
Post by pamela
Post by kat
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater
depth than large front page headlines and a short story.
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
Kim Kardashian has done something new? The Mail always
covers that!
Really?
The Mail's celebrity gossip pages are second to none....
especially online. I'm sure you've seen them.
Online? Judith insisted she was reading ( just ) the front page
of the real paper.
I meant the Daily Mail newspaper has a lot of celeb gossip and
that online celeb gossip dominates their site.
The Mail web site is a blockbuster which is widely read in the US
such that the Mail very successfully takes gossip about American
celebs and reflects it back to US readers.
In fact, I don't read the Mail online much because it is slow to
load. Even if it did load quickly I think the constant moral
outrage it mixes in with its news storeis can be a bit to much to
take.
I don't read the Mail Online at all!
Post by pamela
Post by kat
Not that there is anything wrong with a page
of gossip, it lightens, for those that are interested in it, the
day after pages of Brexit, plastic in the oceans, terrorism,
Grenfell people not getting rehoused, what foods are killing us
this week, etc etc etc.
I have to confess to liking Heat magazine. :)
Light relief, although I don't read it myself, we all need down time.:-)
Post by pamela
Post by kat
Now, if they could do an article on chocolate that actually
advises us to eat it...
You know, after a lifetime being brought up on British chocolate
with it's non-dairy fats, I prefer it to Euro choclate where the
emphasis is often on high cocoa content, freshness and a
resistance to warm weather.
I worked in Belgium for a short while and used to bring home to
the UK famed Belgian chocs from made-daily quality-ingredient
snazzy-looking chocolatiers...... but, if I was being honest with
myself, I was buying overpriced greasy confections which tasted
less good (to me) than a bar of chocolate I could get in the local
supermarket.
I believe you there, Belgian chocolates leave me cold. I like a high
cocoa content because I like dark chocolate, but British style, or, and
I don't know many British people who would agree, Hershey's - their dark
chocolate is different but I like it.

And we must not forget the products in Aldi and Lidl. ;-)
--
kat
Post by pamela
^..^<
Lancer
2017-12-06 12:05:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by kat
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly
updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't
have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the
divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more
precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page
all the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child
abuse, food sell by date and Lily Allen.
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater depth than
large front page headlines and a short story.
No, I haven't bought a national newspaper for a decade or more. There
are papers left on the tables at work, usually The Sun or Mirror.
Post by kat
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
But is what Lily Allan doing or saying far more important to DM readers
than Brexit negotiations?

Which is the point the OP was trying to make.
pullgees
2017-12-06 14:29:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by kat
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no
mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit
on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where
it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly
updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't
have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the
divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more
precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page
all the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child
abuse, food sell by date and Lily Allen.
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater depth than
large front page headlines and a short story.
No, I haven't bought a national newspaper for a decade or more. There
are papers left on the tables at work, usually The Sun or Mirror.
Post by kat
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
But is what Lily Allan doing or saying far more important to DM readers
than Brexit negotiations?
Which is the point the OP was trying to make.
A crazy generalisation. You imagine that DM readers are one type of person all with the same interests. What was on the Sun's front page today?
Lancer
2017-12-06 23:00:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by kat
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no
mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit
on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where
it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly
updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't
have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the
divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more
precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page
all the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child
abuse, food sell by date and Lily Allen.
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater depth than
large front page headlines and a short story.
No, I haven't bought a national newspaper for a decade or more. There
are papers left on the tables at work, usually The Sun or Mirror.
Post by kat
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
But is what Lily Allan doing or saying far more important to DM readers
than Brexit negotiations?
Which is the point the OP was trying to make.
A crazy generalisation.
Like you and lefties.
Post by pullgees
What was on the Sun's front page today?
Try Google
pullgees
2017-12-07 08:27:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by kat
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no
mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit
on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where
it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly
updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't
have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the
divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more
precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page
all the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child
abuse, food sell by date and Lily Allen.
But did you look inside? Extensive coverage, with greater depth than
large front page headlines and a short story.
No, I haven't bought a national newspaper for a decade or more. There
are papers left on the tables at work, usually The Sun or Mirror.
Post by kat
And, oddly, there is more going on in the world than Brexit.
But is what Lily Allan doing or saying far more important to DM readers
than Brexit negotiations?
Which is the point the OP was trying to make.
A crazy generalisation.
Like you and lefties.
Talk sense
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
What was on the Sun's front page today?
Try Google
You haven't got a clue have you?
pullgees
2017-12-06 14:12:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page all
the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child abuse,
food sell by date and Lily Allen.
I'll have to take your word for it as I have more important thing to do than take a wander down to the newsagent to check, but the talks were quite high up online.
Ophelia
2017-12-06 15:40:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating
the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll
down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more
precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page all
the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child abuse,
food sell by date and Lily Allen.
I'll have to take your word for it as I have more important thing to do than
take a wander down to the newsagent to check, but the talks were quite high
up online.

==

lol same here. The Remoaners do seem to love the Daily Mail:)
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
Ian Jackson
2017-12-06 15:52:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Ophelia
==
lol same here. The Remoaners do seem to love the Daily Mail:)
When I was very young, I used to look forward to getting the latest copy
of The Dandy and The Beano (about the same standard as the DM is these
days).
--
Ian
Lancer
2017-12-06 23:01:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no
mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with
Brexit on >>>>>> the front
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers
where it >>>>>> was the
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested >>>>>> in such
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly
updating >>>>> the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't
have to scroll >>>>> down far to find a section of articles on the
divorce battle.
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more
precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page all
the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child abuse,
food sell by date and Lily Allen.
I'll have to take your word for it as I have more important thing to do
than take a wander down to the newsagent to check, but the talks were
quite high up online.
==
lol same here. The Remoaners do seem to love the Daily Mail:)
Do they? I voted for Brexit. One and only reason why was my employer has
only taken on foreigners in the last 7 years. Bit of a wasted vote though.
Yellow
2017-12-06 16:33:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page all
the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child abuse,
food sell by date and Lily Allen.
I'll have to take your word for it as I have more important thing to do than take a wander down to the newsagent to check, but the talks were quite high up online.
It is worth searching out the Lily Allen story online - funny. :-)
Lancer
2017-12-06 22:59:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page all
the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child abuse,
food sell by date and Lily Allen.
I'll have to take your word for it as I have more important thing to do than take a wander down to the newsagent to check, but the talks were quite high up online.
All you need to do is use Google for searching, instead of posting,
you'd find it quicker that typing your reply.
pullgees
2017-12-07 08:25:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Yeah maybe she was, but with so much news online you got to be more precise when commentiong on news outlets.
'Nothing about Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail', sounds OK to me.
While all the others had a story about EU talks on their front page all
the DM had was a story about 200 people caught watching child abuse,
food sell by date and Lily Allen.
I'll have to take your word for it as I have more important thing to do than take a wander down to the newsagent to check, but the talks were quite high up online.
All you need to do is use Google for searching, instead of posting,
you'd find it quicker that typing your reply.
You made the assertion therefore it's for you to prove it.
Judith
2017-12-06 11:20:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Lancer
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Yeah, they call it 'intolerable demands', typical of the DM when it
comes to the EU. As for the reader comments...
Dread to think what they will say about trade talks if the UK has to
make one single concession.
So the DM is covering the talks then?
Maybe 'Judith' was on about the actual newspaper front page.
Spot on
Judith
2017-12-06 11:18:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pullgees
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
That's not correct at all, the DM on Monday was constantly updating the events in Brussels on the talks. Today you don't have to scroll down far to find a section of articles on the divorce battle.
Oh dear : I am talking about the paper version ie the one that has a front
page.

Why do you think it didn't warrant even a mention? I guess its aged readership
would not be interested and just couldn't understand - could you?
pamela
2017-12-06 11:18:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no
mention of what had happened (or not happened) in Brussels
yesterday with Brexit on the front page of the Daily Mail -
unlike all the other major papers where it was the main news
item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not
interested in such things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
I just posted a very different view than the Daily Mail's. It's
from CNN and perhaps it belongs better in this thread.....


Theresa May is scrambling to secure the bad Brexit deal she
didn't want

CNN, December 5, 2017

---

The European Union's negotiating tactics can be summed up in
two words: "Sign here."

They could add a footnote, four words long: "We're bigger than
you."

It's a lesson the United Kingdom, unused to negotiating as the
weaker party, is starting to absorb.

Britain entered the Brexit negotiations thinking it held five
strong cards: the financial depth of the City of London; its
large contributions to the EU budget; its "security surplus";
its relationship with Angela Merkel; and its size compared to
Ireland.

These were valuable while the UK was a member of the EU but no
use after its decision to leave.

London approached its negotiation of a "deep and special
partnership" as though it was another opt-out from the European
project. It assumed that British cooperation was valuable and
could be traded for market access. It imagined the referendum
result strengthened rather than weakened its hand.

Insisting at one point that "no deal is better than a bad
deal," Britain threatened to walk out of negotiations. The EU
judged that the UK was negotiating with a gun pointed at its
own head and called London's bluff.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/12/05/opinions/theresa-may-bad-brexit-
deal-walshe-opinion/index.html
R. Mark Clayton
2017-12-06 16:55:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
No news in the DM - plus ca change.
James Wilkinson Sword
2017-12-06 18:50:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Judith
I just happened to notice today that there was absolutely no mention of what
had happened (or not happened) in Brussels yesterday with Brexit on the front
page of the Daily Mail - unlike all the other major papers where it was the
main news item.
Perhaps they know that Daily Mail readers are just not interested in such
things,
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
Maybe nobody gives a fuck about it anymore? We're tired of hearing all this shit. We voted to leave, we're leaving, end of story.
--
My son was thrown out of school today for letting a girl in his class give him a hand-job. I said "Son, that's 3 schools this year! You'd better stop before you're banned from teaching altogether."
The Peeler
2017-12-06 20:35:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 06 Dec 2017 18:50:44 -0000, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
Post by James Wilkinson Sword
Post by Judith
(for "not interested" : please read "cannot understand")
Maybe nobody gives a fuck about it anymore? We're tired of hearing all
this shit. We voted to leave, we're leaving, end of story.
"We", again, you deluded piece of sociopathic shit? From what I've seen,
even all Brexiters consider you a complete idiot, Birdbrain!
--
Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) about women:
"I don't want one. Easy enough to get one if I wanted one."
MID: <***@red.lan>
Loading...