Wes Tender

Why shouldn't we get a result at the other Manchester club? Are they better than City?

I think that generally they have done adequately. The main objective was to ensure that the NHS was not overwhelmed, and it wasn't. The trouble is that there might well be a further spike now, because of the idiocy of many, who attended protest marches, raves and who packed the beaches like sardines, all with no care for distancing rules.

Wow! Just Wow. What a defensive performance and what a great game we gave City. The Beeb gave Stephens MOTM, but it was a difficult choice between many of the team and there really wasn't any player who was sub-par in terms of their effort and commitment. At half time, the pundits were saying that they couldn't think of another team who had dispossessed City as often as us this season. The high press was very effective, meaning that when we robbed them of the ball high up the pitch, we did possess a real goal threat with Ings especially in the form he is in. But Adams having fired blanks all season, scored a worldy from distance, which any striker in the league would have been proud of. We had our backs against the wall for much of the match thereafter, but a rock solid defence and some wonderful saves from McCarthy gave us the three points, with a clean sheet against one of the best goal-scoring teams in the World. OK, they might argue that they had a couple of key players missing, but the manager had them available, but rested them tactically thinking that the team he fielded should be plenty good enough to beat us, especially as being safe, we could have felt that there was nothing more to play for. But credit Ralph, he had them all very much up for this match. I am really proud of this team, and they have provided a springboard to some optimism as to how they could fare next season.

So what are the Tw*tterati going to do about it? It's good that they have this escape valve of venting their spleens on Tw atter, otherwise I worry that their poor, tiny little heads might explode.

I hope that they get past Oxford and then get beaten at Wembley, their spiritual home

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2RujJ04vxY Re-examining and learning from history. Here is an interesting take on it.

Getting back to the current situation regarding the trade negotiations with the EU, rather than raking over old coals from 4 years back, it is very telling how things are going when the talks have to finish a full day earlier than planned. Frost keeps on telling Barnier that we will not shift our position on ECJ jurisdiction, control of our own territorial waters and who can fish them, and our refusal to be tied to their level playing field rules, but Barnier appears to have cloth ears. Like a stuck record, he then disparages us for being unreasonable in our uncompromising stance, not seeming to recognise that we told him on numerous occasions that we will not accept any changes to those red lines. Sooner or later, it will become clear that we mean what we say, and that therefore either they drop those demands, or there is going to be no deal. Next week, it is their turn to come to London to resume the talks, but I am not expecting any developments again, if neither side is prepared to budge an inch from their position - and we won't.

Oh dear, over four years later and you're still really so peeved that you contradict yourself in the space of two short paragraphs. First project fear was the truth and then you admit that both sides told lies. A bit of genius from Gove, that, eh? You know what topics it referred to, as did most of the electorate. By the simple expedient of labelling any depressing forecasts about the negative consequences of Brexit as project fear, the effects of the weapon were blunted. When it came to slick marketing of the campaign and memorable, pithy slogans, the leave campaign was streets ahead of the remain one, who were supposed to be the brainy ones. Anyway, all water long since under the bridge. Move on, it's not doing you any good mentally lingering over it.

What would you call it?

Yes, of course it was a put up job. Cameron asked Obama to do him a favour and tell the remoaner establishment media to publish a nice little project fear story that we would be at the back of the queue when it came to the question of a UK/USA trade deal. Obama asked what a queue was, and Cameron told him it was the same as a "line", but that he had better say "queue" so that we would understand what he was talking about. Obama duly obliged, and added a nice few percent to the leave vote, when people were incensed that Obama was interfering in our referendum. But quite why Hockey wants to rake over old coals like this is a mystery to me. The dynamics of why Obama got involved on behalf of Cameron are now ancient history, as are the two of them. It failed to secure a remain vote, we have now left the EU, and are negotiating our trade deals as a sovereign independent nation. As we do more trade with the USA than with any other single country, it makes sense to both parties to do a FTA together, whoever becomes the next president

It isn't a question of somebody at the British Embassy in Washington knowing more than me about our position on the outcome of trade talks with the EU, and it is a ridiculous comparison to draw. If you care to read my post again, I was asking you whether some Yank newspaper would be a better source than Conservative Home when it came to having an accurate idea of the Government's opinion on whether they stood a better chance of getting a UK/USA trade deal with Trump or Biden as president. To simplify, would the Conservative Home website have a better insight into Government thinking than some American newspaper? The clue is in the name of each entity. I note that you have avoided answering the last question. How many years do you reckon for an EU/USA trade deal?

The Washington Post! 🤣 They'll definitely know far better than Conservative Home what the Brexit team's thoughts are on whether Trump or Biden is elected as the next president. Not. And as the EU took over 8 years to agree a trade deal with Canada, how long do you think that it will take them to complete one with the USA?

I believe that I read about it on Conservative Home. You probably read about it in the Guardian, The Not Independent or the Mirror. Which is more likely to represent accurately the views of a Conservative Government in your opinion? Good luck to the Democrats wanting a trade deal with the EU if they get elected. Whatever happened to the last lot of negotiations between them? Do you think that in order to get one, the EU will have to accept chlorine washed chicken, or hormone fed beef? Will they have to open up their health services to USA pharmaceutical competition? 🤣 It would probably get so far, and then the Walloons would probably veto it.

You're all over the place. Who said anything about Obama? Thanks for the Gammon insult and the irony of you calling others childish for name-calling. And what has Boris' private life got to do with the current debate? But as you're flinging names out of the blue into the discussion, returning to the title of the thread, that David Frost is one hell of good negotiator, isn't he?

I agree that it's sad, individuals whining about events of four years ago, raking over old coals that they cannot alter. Suggesting that we wait and see how events turn out is the only sensible stance that you've adopted so far. No doubt as a patriot, you'll be wishing for the best outcome for the country after the 31st December, rather than hoping things go badly just so that you can crow that you told us so, won't you? Me, I'm not that bothered about American politics. I read an article the other day suggesting that the UK's trade position with the USA would be enhanced if Biden were to be elected. As flawed as Trump is, Biden comes across as being on the edge of senility, so either of them are a worry in their different ways.

Why are all you remoaners bellyaching on and on like a stuck record over something that has taken place four years ago, that you are powerless to change until there are grounds for another referendum on whether we should rejoin the EU at some stage in the distant future? Get over it.

I hadn't read the thread properly before that. Having done so, I responded on that basis, and it is even more idiotic to make comparisons between the two photos because of the actual context.

Anybody who saw the Farage photo and believed that there was an analogy to be made between that and streams of Jews being herded towards a concentration camp is a bit wrong in the head.

Royal ascent 😄

I've said it before, but it obviously needs to be repeated for your benefit; I have nothing against us taking in our fair share of refugees, something that we have not shied away from doing now, or indeed at many times in our history. Our policy currently has been to take them from the refugee camps, as the distinction between refugees and economic migrants is easier to make, and family units are a more pressing priority in my opinion than fit young men. There really is no need to point out the difference to me between refugees, economic migrants and those coming here as part of the EU freedom of movement, as it is all perfectly clear to me. Under international law, refugees seeking asylum should declare that at the first safe country they reach, so those approaching the EU from the Middle East or North Africa have several choices before they reach our shores. But as I say, because of the numbers involved, I am content to take a fair share of genuine refugees on humanitarian grounds. You've been very quiet of late, Gavyn, but I see that you are trying to make up for lost time in your usual arrogant, infantile insult mode.

The black and white image was largely comprised of the elderly, and women and children fleeing the tyranny of Hitler's wartime Germany. The Farage poster comprises nearly all fit young males, economic immigrants, wanting to enter an EU formed to promote European peaceful relationships, with pretensions of becoming a superstate, where Germany is the most powerful country. I can see the similarities.

Oh, I thought that the racist, thicko rhetoric was supposed to have been peddled by the leavers, not the remoaners. Project fear was what the remoaners peddled. Immigration might well not go down, but it will comprise people who we allow to come here because they have skills and abilities that we need, rated on points based criteria rather than being able to come here willy-nilly solely because they happen to live in the EU. Regarding your assertion that those leave voters will be poorer, then of course you cannot know that for sure. You're entitled to express an opinion, and to enjoy fantasising about the potential grief that might befall your fellow citizens, if that floats your boat, but we will just have to wait and see whether it comes to pass. But they naturally felt the need to vote to leave the EU for their own personal reasons, so I'm sure that they will be willing to accept the consequences, as they have to in other political decisions they make.

I can dispute the "facts", or should I say the "facts" according to you, but I've moved on since then and am looking forward to the 31st December when we will either have a FTA with the EU or will leave on WTO terms. I'm not going to waste time raking over old coals, arguing the toss with embittered poor losers about events four years ago.

Now you're really beginning to sound pathetic.

You do understand the concept of a referendum, don't you? There is usually a binary decision on offer, in this case to remain in the EU or to leave it. There was no rule that the vote was invalid unless a certain percentage of the electorate voted, it was to be decided on a simple majority. Leave had 1,269,501 more votes than remain, but even a smaller majority would have counted. Just stop the bleating about how unfair it all was. Despite the PM at the time recommending that we should vote to remain in the EU, and spending £9 million of taxpayer's money in propaganda to get that message across, a majority of the stupid, racist electorate voting in the referendum decided not to follow his advice. Get over it. There isn't anything you can do about it. You'll just have to accept it, just as everybody who didn't want to join in the first place had to accept if nearly 50 years ago.