BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

ballysmate

Perhaps the Telegraph has become the JK Rowling of Fleet Street, Stevo?

rick_chasey

Stevo_666 said:

Just because the article comes from a source that some people dislike doesnt mean it can't have a valid point

.

Just spat my porridge out over this.

You can’t actually believe this?

I’ll rephrase. Stevo cannot believe this statement.

rick_chasey

Still maintain comment/opinion columns from professional columnists are not worth sharing on here as they’re inevitably nonsense and about as well researched as a cycling forum post.

kingstongraham

ballysmate said:

Perhaps the Telegraph has become the JK Rowling of Fleet Street, Stevo?

I think the guardian gets much the same treatment on here, with equal justification.

Difference is, I can't read the telegraph - I don't mind the guardian opinion drivel because I don't have to pay for it.

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

Just because the article comes from a source that some people dislike doesnt mean it can't have a valid point

.

Just spat my porridge out over this.

You can’t actually believe this?

I’ll rephrase. Stevo cannot believe this statement.

What, so you reckon any article from the Telegraph automatically cannot have a valid point? Even I will confess to having seen a few articles in Guardian that made a valid point.

Edit: of course it's worth considering sacking Barnier - after all his job was to get a deal and after several years he's failed. The article says a bit more about why. Unfortunately firing him is a bit hypothetical as mentioned above, as the EU doesn't seem to fire people for failing.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

ballysmate said:

Perhaps the Telegraph has become the JK Rowling of Fleet Street, Stevo?

I think the guardian gets much the same treatment on here, with equal justification.

Difference is, I can't read the telegraph - I don't mind the guardian opinion drivel because I don't have to pay for it.

Classic case of 'you get what you pay for'?

Stevo_666

ballysmate said:

Perhaps the Telegraph has become the JK Rowling of Fleet Street, Stevo?

And I'm the Salman Rushdie of Cake Stop.

pblakeney

Revisionist history or a dodgy memory? Haven't we had a few deals agreed?
Only for Westminster to decide they want something else.

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

ballysmate said:

Perhaps the Telegraph has become the JK Rowling of Fleet Street, Stevo?

I think the guardian gets much the same treatment on here, with equal justification.

Difference is, I can't read the telegraph - I don't mind the guardian opinion drivel because I don't have to pay for it.

Classic case of 'you get what you pay for'?

I feel I get a sense of the Telegraph by reading Quentin Letts in the Times. Proper unquestioning loyalty to the party despite everything.

Stevo_666

pblakeney said:

Revisionist history or a dodgy memory? Haven't we had a few deals agreed?
Only for Westminster to decide they want something else.

It took Boris to get us to a withdrawal agreement As mentioned in the article, Barnier screwed it up by overplaying his hand, which led to the Westminster rebellion.

tailwindhome

Stevo_666 said:

pblakeney said:

Revisionist history or a dodgy memory? Haven't we had a few deals agreed?
Only for Westminster to decide they want something else.

It took Boris to get us to a withdrawal agreement As mentioned in the article, Barnier screwed it up by overplaying his hand, which led to the Westminster rebellion.

As pointed out earlier it makes no sense to criticise Barnier's inability to compromise as a failure then claim his compromise* on the withdrawal agreement as his failure.




*terms, conditions and reality may apply

Stevo_666

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

pblakeney said:

Revisionist history or a dodgy memory? Haven't we had a few deals agreed?
Only for Westminster to decide they want something else.

It took Boris to get us to a withdrawal agreement As mentioned in the article, Barnier screwed it up by overplaying his hand, which led to the Westminster rebellion.

As pointed out earlier it makes no sense to criticise Barnier's inability to compromise as a failure then claim his compromise* on the withdrawal agreement as his failure.




*terms, conditions and reality may apply

The overplaying of his hand originally then forced the compromise. IMHO.

I agree there is limited point in criticing him for this - as he won't get fired in any event. It was just a suggestion and the responses defending the other side have been fairly predictable.

tailwindhome

Stevo_666 said:

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

pblakeney said:

Revisionist history or a dodgy memory? Haven't we had a few deals agreed?
Only for Westminster to decide they want something else.

It took Boris to get us to a withdrawal agreement As mentioned in the article, Barnier screwed it up by overplaying his hand, which led to the Westminster rebellion.

As pointed out earlier it makes no sense to criticise Barnier's inability to compromise as a failure then claim his compromise* on the withdrawal agreement as his failure.




*terms, conditions and reality may apply

The overplaying of his hand originally then forced the compromise. IMHO.

I agree there is limited point in criticing him for this - as he won't get fired in any event. It was just a suggestion and the responses defending the other side have been fairly predictable.

What was the compromise available to him, which he overlooked in "overplaying his hand", which would resulted in the protection of the EU SM with no checks of any nature at the Irish border (which he achieved), passed through the HOC and would have been a better deal for the EU?


It could be observed that as a negotiator he achieved his primary objective in protecting the SM by convincing a UK PM to put a customs & regulatory union down the middle of their own sovereign territory and have that PM call it a win for Britain.

Stevo_666

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

pblakeney said:

Revisionist history or a dodgy memory? Haven't we had a few deals agreed?
Only for Westminster to decide they want something else.

It took Boris to get us to a withdrawal agreement As mentioned in the article, Barnier screwed it up by overplaying his hand, which led to the Westminster rebellion.

As pointed out earlier it makes no sense to criticise Barnier's inability to compromise as a failure then claim his compromise* on the withdrawal agreement as his failure.




*terms, conditions and reality may apply

The overplaying of his hand originally then forced the compromise. IMHO.

I agree there is limited point in criticing him for this - as he won't get fired in any event. It was just a suggestion and the responses defending the other side have been fairly predictable.

What was the compromise available to him, which he overlooked in "overplaying his hand", which would resulted in the protection of the EU SM with no checks of any nature at the Irish border (which he achieved), passed through the HOC and would have been a better deal for the EU?


It could be observed that as a negotiator he achieved his primary objective in protecting the SM by convincing a UK PM to put a customs & regulatory union down the middle of their own sovereign territory and have that PM call it a win for Britain.

That was an issue for him and the EU and goes back to my points about inflexibility of that institution which has been debated before. If he hadn't overplayed his hand, the deal would probably not have been rejected.

Why are you so resistant to trying a fresh approach with a different chief negotiator? The EU can't really make any less progress that Barnier has on this trade deal.

tailwindhome

Stevo_666 said:

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

tailwindhome said:

Stevo_666 said:

pblakeney said:

Revisionist history or a dodgy memory? Haven't we had a few deals agreed?
Only for Westminster to decide they want something else.

It took Boris to get us to a withdrawal agreement As mentioned in the article, Barnier screwed it up by overplaying his hand, which led to the Westminster rebellion.

As pointed out earlier it makes no sense to criticise Barnier's inability to compromise as a failure then claim his compromise* on the withdrawal agreement as his failure.




*terms, conditions and reality may apply

The overplaying of his hand originally then forced the compromise. IMHO.

I agree there is limited point in criticing him for this - as he won't get fired in any event. It was just a suggestion and the responses defending the other side have been fairly predictable.

What was the compromise available to him, which he overlooked in "overplaying his hand", which would resulted in the protection of the EU SM with no checks of any nature at the Irish border (which he achieved), passed through the HOC and would have been a better deal for the EU?


It could be observed that as a negotiator he achieved his primary objective in protecting the SM by convincing a UK PM to put a customs & regulatory union down the middle of their own sovereign territory and have that PM call it a win for Britain.

That was an issue for him and the EU and goes back to my points about inflexibility of that institution which has been debated before. If he hadn't overplayed his hand, the deal would probably not have been rejected.

Why are you so resistant to trying a fresh approach with a different chief negotiator? The EU can't really make any less progress that Barnier has on this trade deal.

OK Stevo. Ok
I'll leave you on the merry go round yourself.
Have a good day.

rick_chasey

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

Just because the article comes from a source that some people dislike doesnt mean it can't have a valid point

.

Just spat my porridge out over this.

You can’t actually believe this?

I’ll rephrase. Stevo cannot believe this statement.

What, so you reckon any article from the Telegraph automatically cannot have a valid point? Even I will confess to having seen a few articles in Guardian that made a valid point.

Edit: of course it's worth considering sacking Barnier - after all his job was to get a deal and after several years he's failed. The article says a bit more about why. Unfortunately firing him is a bit hypothetical as mentioned above, as the EU doesn't seem to fire people for failing.

No no. Your posts show the opposite of original statement.

briantrumpet

We should remember that Stevo's journey from Remainer to "No Deal Is Fine" has mirrored the Telegraph's almost exactly, in real time. Make of that what you will.

darkhairedlord

I thought the deal was done before GE?

diplodicus

darkhairedlord said:

I thought the deal was done before GE?

Oven ready?

Stevo_666

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

rick_chasey said:

Stevo_666 said:

Just because the article comes from a source that some people dislike doesnt mean it can't have a valid point

.

Just spat my porridge out over this.

You can’t actually believe this?

I’ll rephrase. Stevo cannot believe this statement.

What, so you reckon any article from the Telegraph automatically cannot have a valid point? Even I will confess to having seen a few articles in Guardian that made a valid point.

Edit: of course it's worth considering sacking Barnier - after all his job was to get a deal and after several years he's failed. The article says a bit more about why. Unfortunately firing him is a bit hypothetical as mentioned above, as the EU doesn't seem to fire people for failing.

No no. Your posts show the opposite of original statement.

You'll have explain that one.

Stevo_666

briantrumpet said:

We should remember that Stevo's journey from Remainer to "No Deal Is Fine" has mirrored the Telegraph's almost exactly, in real time. Make of that what you will.

It does seem that some of us will never make the journey from voting to accepting democratic outcomes

briantrumpet

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

We should remember that Stevo's journey from Remainer to "No Deal Is Fine" has mirrored the Telegraph's almost exactly, in real time. Make of that what you will.

It does seem that some of us will never make the journey from voting to accepting democratic outcomes

Part of that 'democratic outcome' should have included reference to the oft-repeated statements that "no-one's suggesting leaving the Single Market". Democracy seems to be a very flexible thing to the 'winners'.

Stevo_666

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

We should remember that Stevo's journey from Remainer to "No Deal Is Fine" has mirrored the Telegraph's almost exactly, in real time. Make of that what you will.

It does seem that some of us will never make the journey from voting to accepting democratic outcomes

Part of that 'democratic outcome' should have included reference to the oft-repeated statements that "no-one's suggesting leaving the Single Market". Democracy seems to be a very flexible thing to the 'winners'.

I think the argument about what was intended by leaving has already been done a few times on here. My point still stands though...

pblakeney

Accepting you're leaving is very different from liking it.

briantrumpet

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

We should remember that Stevo's journey from Remainer to "No Deal Is Fine" has mirrored the Telegraph's almost exactly, in real time. Make of that what you will.

It does seem that some of us will never make the journey from voting to accepting democratic outcomes

Part of that 'democratic outcome' should have included reference to the oft-repeated statements that "no-one's suggesting leaving the Single Market". Democracy seems to be a very flexible thing to the 'winners'.

I think the argument about what was intended by leaving has already been done a few times on here. My point still stands though...

So did Custer.

I'll leave others to make up their own minds on its validity, standing or not.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

pblakeney said:

Revisionist history or a dodgy memory? Haven't we had a few deals agreed?
Only for Westminster to decide they want something else.

It took Boris to get us to a withdrawal agreement As mentioned in the article, Barnier screwed it up by overplaying his hand, which led to the Westminster rebellion.

Or to take the other point of view, Johnson only got the WA done because he agreed to the EU's preferred option for NI, which the previous PM said no British PM could agree to. No deal would be a failure on both sides and supporters of each will blame the other even though they share the fault. It's as pointless an argument as suggesting that the Conservative Party should have chosen Jeremy Hunt as leader, and equally wishful thinking.

spatt77

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

We should remember that Stevo's journey from Remainer to "No Deal Is Fine" has mirrored the Telegraph's almost exactly, in real time. Make of that what you will.

It does seem that some of us will never make the journey from voting to accepting democratic outcomes

Part of that 'democratic outcome' should have included reference to the oft-repeated statements that "no-one's suggesting leaving the Single Market". Democracy seems to be a very flexible thing to the 'winners'.

We`ll still have full access to it! just with quotas and tariffs if the EU want them.

surrey_commuter

spatt77 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

We should remember that Stevo's journey from Remainer to "No Deal Is Fine" has mirrored the Telegraph's almost exactly, in real time. Make of that what you will.

It does seem that some of us will never make the journey from voting to accepting democratic outcomes

Part of that 'democratic outcome' should have included reference to the oft-repeated statements that "no-one's suggesting leaving the Single Market". Democracy seems to be a very flexible thing to the 'winners'.

We`ll still have full access to it! just with quotas and tariffs if the EU want them.

I am starting to understand why you voted Leave

Stevo_666

pblakeney said:

Accepting you're leaving is very different from liking it.

We are leaving so we may as well make the most of it, as I've said before.

Stevo_666

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

Stevo_666 said:

briantrumpet said:

We should remember that Stevo's journey from Remainer to "No Deal Is Fine" has mirrored the Telegraph's almost exactly, in real time. Make of that what you will.

It does seem that some of us will never make the journey from voting to accepting democratic outcomes

Part of that 'democratic outcome' should have included reference to the oft-repeated statements that "no-one's suggesting leaving the Single Market". Democracy seems to be a very flexible thing to the 'winners'.

I think the argument about what was intended by leaving has already been done a few times on here. My point still stands though...

So did Custer.

I'll leave others to make up their own minds on its validity, standing or not.

I see it more as leaving a relationship where one side was never entirely comfortable Maybe painful but on balance the decision was taken that it needed to be done and now there's no going back (not for along time anyway, in case you bring that one up again...)

https://facebook.com/bbcthree/videos/quickies-breaking-up-with-a-remoaner/2243826552508985/