Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
That last bit is incredible.
Initially I thought that british people were exaggerating when they described the Telegraph as Torygraph but the more I read it and the more ridiculous it is. To me they seem more dangerous than the Sun or Daily Mail because they have the appearance of a respectable paper, their writers seem wise and know how to write serious articles, the issue being that it's pretty much a branch of conservatives.com and they will distort reality in favor of Tories 100% of the time.
Yeah, I always had them down as “conservative but sensible”. They seem to have got way more extreme over the last 10 years or so. I guess that’s the nature of the shift to online media? The quest for clicks drives more and more polarised views.
Hardly anyone reads it. It's far less influencial than The Sun or the Mail on national politics. For none political stuff it's a good paper.
The Telegraph’s main demographic is white middle class old men and it basically tells them what they want to hear. It’s not influencing anyone’s opinions on anything.
Sun and Daily Mail are tabloids while the Telegraph isn't right? Do you think that people take The Sun and Mail as seriously as they do for other papers?
Outside of white middle class old men who are a large demographic, also isn't demonstrated that people tend to vote like their parents?
It's not always been like this though. Pre ~2013 it was a decent (if conservative) newspaper with an occasional good take on some things.
Post brexit it's somewhere between Fox News and One America .
The Sun and The Mail have real political reach and their readership do believe what they read in it regarding politics to a worrying degree. New Labour had Murdoch and the Sun onside which was one of the reasons that they were able to get into power. In that era The Sun backed Labour.
The broadsheets are not influential at all really. Your average Joe doesn't read them. The Telegraph is behind a paywall and is still an old school physical broadsheet i.e. it fecking massive. It preaches to a parochial choir. The Times, which is Murdoch's broadsheet, backed remain in the 2016 whilst The Sun backed Brexit. I can only imagine that The Times had editorial freedom on the question from Murdoch because it had no real influence in the vote, like The Telegraph the readership is small.
Thanks for the information.
Only thing I'll say for this total buffoon is that at least she's honest, unlike the rest of the liars who deny it was ever a factor.
Exactly. Bet you won't get a clear answer.
Honestly. What a dim thing to say anyway.
Well nobody knows that.
sovereignty and british fish.
Fixed that.
Well if the bombs were to start up again she’s invited them to her front door
That's what they want you to think.
Talking of outwardly respectable appearances.
We move forward in time to 1st January 2071, fifty years to the day the UK left the transition period.
At a great ceremony Jacob Rees-Mogg , now 101, unveils the Brexit prize the UK has been waiting for.
A tin of Happy British Mackerel for everybody. The few remaining Brexit voters cheer, 'See, he didn't let us down and a whole year's ration to boot.'
We move forward in time to 1st January 2071, fifty years to the day the UK left the transition period.
At a great ceremony Jacob Rees-Mogg , now 101, unveils the Brexit prize the UK has been waiting for.
A tin of Happy British Mackerel for everybody. The few remaining Brexit voters cheer, 'See, he didn't let us down and a whole year's ration to boot.'
More people read The Telegraph than The Times. Though I think the latter has a higher level of digital engagement. Both papers are entrenched Tories.
I read The Times every day…
only because I get a subscription with my AMEX card.
Read mostly for the sport, but it’s set up pretty well that you can dive in and out.
Im surprised to hear more people read the telegraph that the times.
About 30% more in print circulation (I wonder if this includes the "free" copies you get forced on you in WH "just whack on 50% to the price" Smith's) but online readership is a huge factor now.I read The Times every day…
only because I get a subscription with my AMEX card.
Read mostly for the sport, but it’s set up pretty well that you can dive in and out.
Im surprised to hear more people read the telegraph that the times.
Interestingly, this brings the Guardian (which is about a third of the Time's circulation in print) heavily into play and above the Daily Mail, although I assume these are international figures.
https://www.pressgazette.co.uk/biggest-news-websites-april-2020/
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ry-as-government-drops-eu-import-restrictions
Yet another industry to damage courtesy of the trade expertise of Liz Truss.
Yet another industry to damage courtesy of the trade expertise of Liz Truss.
As newspapers go I prefer the Financial Times, even though I'm not rich or right-wing. So long as you take the editorials with a pinch of salt (lots) they try to be factual with the news.
They're quite pro-Europe of course, Wolfie would wank himself to death if he was a regular reader.
I can 100% appreciate and accept anyone in the North who feels British. At this stage the most important thing is peace. However anyone in the North who believes that the average British person cares about them as much as the average Irish person does is frankly delusional.
I don't find the FT that pro-Europe and it's free to read. Anyway I'm more anti-stupidity than anything.
Bye bye British lobster and crab stocks etc...
Exclusive: EU fishermen can ‘plunder’ UK waters for remainder of this year
Boats allowed to haul in unlimited amount of non-quota species after Britain failed to set limits on catches in a post-Brexit agreement
EU fishermen have been granted the right to "plunder" UK waters of red mullet, scallops and lobster after Britain failed to set limits on the amount that can be caught in a post-Brexit agreement.
The Telegraph can reveal that, under the terms of the UK's first annual fisheries agreement with Brussels since Brexit, more than 1,600 European boats will be allowed to catch an unlimited amount of non-quota species for the remainder of this year.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/06/11/eu-fishermen-can-plunder-uk-waters-remainder-year/
Exclusive: EU fishermen can ‘plunder’ UK waters for remainder of this year
Boats allowed to haul in unlimited amount of non-quota species after Britain failed to set limits on catches in a post-Brexit agreement
EU fishermen have been granted the right to "plunder" UK waters of red mullet, scallops and lobster after Britain failed to set limits on the amount that can be caught in a post-Brexit agreement.
The Telegraph can reveal that, under the terms of the UK's first annual fisheries agreement with Brussels since Brexit, more than 1,600 European boats will be allowed to catch an unlimited amount of non-quota species for the remainder of this year.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/06/11/eu-fishermen-can-plunder-uk-waters-remainder-year/
So you don’t give a shit if the bombings start up again? Because that’s what they are gambling with here, not just that the North go short of a few items
Sovereign waters, help yourselves lads
What a clusterfeck this all is
Yes, and the British fisherman can't get their shellfish to European markets in good time, so they lose both ways. Who'd have thought it?
Taking back control... who would have thought our civil servants and politicians might not be up to the job eh... I'm already looking forward to the rejoin campaign and I'm thinking 10 years not 20
After 10 years with the UK taking the Mickey, I would like to see how EU members would receive an application to join the EU.
It would probably depend how much money was attached to it
I don't think so. It would be attached to how much trust and respect is left. A country that is continuously disruptive and continuously demand to be treated exceptionally isn't worth it, particularly when as a sovereign country they could recreate Brexit for the benefit of the next national elections. Peace is the best currency on the international scene and in this case, peace of mind, remember that Brexit has been a waste of money for both sides, if money was that important Brexit wouldn't be a thing. I wouldn't be surprised if in the future the EU were happy to create a strong relationship with the UK while actively keeping them out of the EU.
Agree with @JPRouve . I'd love to rejoin tomorrow if we could and have said before I personally have no issues with closer political union etc etc. But I can't see any way in which we rejoin the EU in a generation.
Both from the UK perspective (there's still a hardcore significant Brexit component in the UK and always will be, people won't want to admit they're wrong and I've noticed even people who are very pro-Europe generally are finding themselves a bit aggrieved at times because of the inevitable friction between the UK and EU, any rejoin referendum would be similarly slim margins imo) and from the EU perspective (we've always been an awkward member, we've caused everyone a lot of headaches in the last 5 years, even most of the pro-EU lot in the UK are generally not as pro closer political integration).
Yes we'll be a loss economically, culturally, politically etc to the EU but peace of mind probably will be significantly better for the EU and they can carry on with their business without one of their largest and most important members always throwing up roadblocks.
Both from the UK perspective (there's still a hardcore significant Brexit component in the UK and always will be, people won't want to admit they're wrong and I've noticed even people who are very pro-Europe generally are finding themselves a bit aggrieved at times because of the inevitable friction between the UK and EU, any rejoin referendum would be similarly slim margins imo) and from the EU perspective (we've always been an awkward member, we've caused everyone a lot of headaches in the last 5 years, even most of the pro-EU lot in the UK are generally not as pro closer political integration).
Yes we'll be a loss economically, culturally, politically etc to the EU but peace of mind probably will be significantly better for the EU and they can carry on with their business without one of their largest and most important members always throwing up roadblocks.
You're almost at the fifth anniversary of the vote and even the first implementations of the agreement aren't even put in place.
Another five years of moaning from the Brexiteers and blaming the EU.
Nationalistic RW press waving the flags.
Total set of incompetent politicians on both sides.
Anyone seriously think the EU would welcome them back until the UK's attitude changes completely.
Forty or fifty years possibly.
At the G7 he looked less respectable than a guy who got slapped by a guy that clearly still listens to Grunge.