Digby wrote:You might imagine the Times is the same, it isn't. I don't read it every day but certainly most days and I'd lean towards saying it's pro remain
Well that's not the way my parents take it...
From what I've seen it belongs firmly in the "we're out, stop whining. Let's fix it for us all (not really, just for those set to profit, not you middle class nobodies who are going to have to pay more for everything to line our pockets hahahahahaha)".
Digby wrote:You might imagine the Times is the same, it isn't. I don't read it every day but certainly most days and I'd lean towards saying it's pro remain
Well that's not the way my parents take it...
From what I've seen it belongs firmly in the "we're out, stop whining. Let's fix it for us all (not really, just for those set to profit, not you middle class nobodies who are going to have to pay more for everything to line our pockets hahahahahaha)".
Maybe one in eight articles is pro brexit and even then they don't stoop to the level of fuck business, and even their pro articles could easily to be said to merely mean we should make the best we can of it
He telegraph is a UKIP paper. The comments section is a real eye opener.
The Times gives lots of balanced articles. Some writers are openly pro Brexit some obviously anti. Much of the content tends to be about managing the impact rather than let’s tirn back time and pretend the referendum hasn’t happened.
The exception is Melanie Phillips who is a lot more to the right.
Digby wrote:You might imagine the Times is the same, it isn't. I don't read it every day but certainly most days and I'd lean towards saying it's pro remain
Yep. I’ll repeat. It’s widely stated that The Times is some right wing rag but it puts the boot into Brexit on an almost daily basis. That it’s most prominent leaver opinion piece writer - Iain Martin - has spent the last few months denouncing the ERG tells you all you need to know. If that isn’t enough, it stated that it was a remain supporting newspaper at/near the start of the referendum campaign.
Of course, it sounds so much better to claim it’s a mouth piece of CCHQ and Murdoch.
Last edited by Mellsblue on Wed Oct 17, 2018 7:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Digby wrote:You might imagine the Times is the same, it isn't. I don't read it every day but certainly most days and I'd lean towards saying it's pro remain
Well that's not the way my parents take it...
From what I've seen it belongs firmly in the "we're out, stop whining. Let's fix it for us all (not really, just for those set to profit, not you middle class nobodies who are going to have to pay more for everything to line our pockets hahahahahaha)".
Digby wrote:You might imagine the Times is the same, it isn't. I don't read it every day but certainly most days and I'd lean towards saying it's pro remain
Well that's not the way my parents take it...
From what I've seen it belongs firmly in the "we're out, stop whining. Let's fix it for us all (not really, just for those set to profit, not you middle class nobodies who are going to have to pay more for everything to line our pockets hahahahahaha)".
Have you read the times regularly?
I think you may have hit the nail on the head there.
It’s not about what paper people read. What Trump and BoJo have discovered is that only the headline counts. Actually worrying about what is printed in an article is not an issue any more so long as you state your point in a short soundbite. All criticism and refutation is lost below the fold.
Stom wrote:
Well that's not the way my parents take it...
From what I've seen it belongs firmly in the "we're out, stop whining. Let's fix it for us all (not really, just for those set to profit, not you middle class nobodies who are going to have to pay more for everything to line our pockets hahahahahaha)".
Have you read the times regularly?
I think you may have hit the nail on the head there.
It’s not about what paper people read. What Trump and BoJo have discovered is that only the headline counts. Actually worrying about what is printed in an article is not an issue any more so long as you state your point in a short soundbite. All criticism and refutation is lost below the fold.
Sad but true. Johnson’s use of emotive words and phrases guarantees him headlines, column inches, likes, retweets etc and the lack of detail in the body of the message is ignored. It’s also true that if you put #fakenews in to the public domain it garners a lot more attention than the retraction a day or two later.
It’s also the advantage of not having the responsibility of being in charge. You can promise anything when you’re not the one delivering it.
That said I feel many Brexiteers are fanatical enough to stick two fingers up to Brussels regardless. There is an awful article in the Times today written by a Tory Brexiteers. Basically the EU is too complicated, Brexit is boring, let’s get on with trading with what we want which is open trade. With the EU. I sometimes wonder about our elected representatives!
Sadly I suspect many people who haven’t a huge interest in researching this will regard that statement as perfectly sound.
Sandydragon wrote:It’s also the advantage of not having the responsibility of being in charge. You can promise anything when you’re not the one delivering it.
Not only that, but its also relatively easy to make promises when you aren't in charge as you dont ever have to then put them in front of the EU whose response to everything thus far is a pretty resounding "non". Promising it is the easy bit, garnering support is a bit more of a struggle when there are so many different views expressed and often expressed so badly and divisively. But its all side show to to the main event where we have an EU whose only tactic is to delay and frustrate the whole process.
It's not simply on the EU. Both sides have positions they're declining to move away from which to a significant degree are political
And I see we're now floating delaying the process, which to a degree is seemingly unavoidable as the work just hasn't been done, but leaves open the huge and ongoing problem we're not telling business what the situation will be
Sandydragon wrote:It’s also the advantage of not having the responsibility of being in charge. You can promise anything when you’re not the one delivering it.
Not only that, but its also relatively easy to make promises when you aren't in charge as you dont ever have to then put them in front of the EU whose response to everything thus far is a pretty resounding "non". Promising it is the easy bit, garnering support is a bit more of a struggle when there are so many different views expressed and often expressed so badly and divisively. But its all side show to to the main event where we have an EU whose only tactic is to delay and frustrate the whole process.
The EU doesn’t want any other country to do the same, and those who thought that the financial implications of potentially losing UK markets would have a significant effect on negotiations were wishfully thinking.
If we had asked for single market access only then we probably would have got it without huge fuss. Anything else will take time and lots of it.
With the Brexiteers crying traitor at every opportunity and Labour not committing to anything, I’m very pessimistic about a positive outcome to this. My money at the moment is that we crash out with no deal.
Digby wrote:It's not simply on the EU. Both sides have positions they're declining to move away from which to a significant degree are political
And I see we're now floating delaying the process, which to a degree is seemingly unavoidable as the work just hasn't been done, but leaves open the huge and ongoing problem we're not telling business what the situation will be
We shouldn’t have triggered article 50 until we had a plan that at least the government could agree on. Accepting that businesses wanted to know, as did plenty of other organisations, but the implications of getting this wrong are huge.
Mellsblue wrote:Have the cojones to quote yourself man
That might have given the impression I think Gove has mad cow disease
Do you not?
He reminds me a bit of Mandelson, bright, creative, hard working, horrible people skills, and every few months reacting with horror as drops the ball in spectacular style
Digby wrote:It's not simply on the EU. Both sides have positions they're declining to move away from which to a significant degree are political
And I see we're now floating delaying the process, which to a degree is seemingly unavoidable as the work just hasn't been done, but leaves open the huge and ongoing problem we're not telling business what the situation will be
We shouldn’t have triggered article 50 until we had a plan that at least the government could agree on. Accepting that businesses wanted to know, as did plenty of other organisations, but the implications of getting this wrong are huge.
I agree, indeed ideally it'd have been part of the referendum. How tenable it'd have been is something we probably all doubt with so many lunatics involved
Sandydragon wrote:It’s also the advantage of not having the responsibility of being in charge. You can promise anything when you’re not the one delivering it.
Not only that, but its also relatively easy to make promises when you aren't in charge as you dont ever have to then put them in front of the EU whose response to everything thus far is a pretty resounding "non". Promising it is the easy bit, garnering support is a bit more of a struggle when there are so many different views expressed and often expressed so badly and divisively. But its all side show to to the main event where we have an EU whose only tactic is to delay and frustrate the whole process.
The EU doesn’t want any other country to do the same, and those who thought that the financial implications of potentially losing UK markets would have a significant effect on negotiations were wishfully thinking.
It has always astounded me that Brexiteers claim, on one hand, that the EU is a political club that is only interested in the political growth of that club regardless of economic issues/fallout, whilst, on the other hand, claiming the EU will cave due to fears of a loss of access to UK export markets.
Digby wrote:
That might have given the impression I think Gove has mad cow disease
Do you not?
He reminds me a bit of Mandelson, bright, creative, hard working, horrible people skills, and every few months reacting with horror as drops the ball in spectacular style
That’s pretty much spot on. It’s why, as much as I admire him, I worry at the idea of him leading the Conservatives.
Digby wrote:
That might have given the impression I think Gove has mad cow disease
Do you not?
He reminds me a bit of Mandelson, bright, creative, hard working, horrible people skills, and every few months reacting with horror as drops the ball in spectacular style
He is an excellent support player. Lots of big ideas about how to reform things, often for the better. He needs a sanity checker and someone to front that as he doesn’t communicate well.
