[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Because of all the previous remainer narratives about how ‘no deal’ would be disastrous for us, the PM had to accept the deal that was available, because otherwise there were too many doubts in the minds of the public. He may have had the majority (just) but he needed to retain public trust.

The PM has already made clear there is agent out clause. We can give notice of termination if we cannot make it work. By that time, the public will probably agree.

He didn’t have to accept it at all, he clearly stated that no deal was better than a bad deal. He put that forward as part of his election manifesto and the tories were returned based on that.

---------- Post added at 00:22 ---------- Previous post was at 00:19 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Because of all the previous remainer narratives about how ‘no deal’ would be disastrous for us, the PM had to accept the deal that was available, because otherwise there were too many doubts in the minds of the public. He may have had the majority (just) but he needed to retain public trust.

The PM has already made clear there is agent out clause. We can give notice of termination if we cannot make it work. By that time, the public will probably agree.

---------- Post added at 00:18 ---------- Previous post was at 00:16 ----------



I guess morality and trustworthiness doesn’t come into it in your mind.

I hardly think you’re in a position to level criticisms regarding morality & trustworthiness as you would have the U.K. breach our legally binding obligations.