Yes but perhaps it should take another 41 years I am happy for that its a long time but worth it.

But hey not 6 months after.

You and the likes of au richie are not fooling anyone. You won't accept any result other than remain or remain in all but name.

David Cameron made the following statement during the referendum campaign:

“What the British public will be voting for is to leave the EU and leave the single market.”

In fact, he said it over and over again. We don't need a referendum on this as it was clearly stated what the implication of a Brexit vote was. Frankly, I'd argue that it's more valid to suggest a second referendum in the event of a soft Brexit than a full Brexit as that would be something different to voter expectations of leaving the EU and leaving the single market.

e
Fame at last! And for you - a Damascene conversion on the road to chaos. You will not regret it!

Geez - yet another comedian with a crystal ball!! An examination of the EU's rickety economic progress would suggest that Brexit will result in 'leaving' the 'road to chaos'!!

If there was a second vote (I don't think there should be)... then I agree with the first three options, but there must not EVER be a "Remain" option on future questions asked. We voted leave and leave we must.

No to a 2nd referendum it was nasty, diverse and the quality of debate poor. The public have decided the binary choice, now it up to parliament to fill in the details.

I would prefer that Parliament makes the final decision in 2019 or 2020 whenever it is on the final deal. If it a crap deal for Britain I hope that MP's will tell May to try again and renegotiate.

Totally agree no second referendum, I don't think I can stomach another one.

Asking what exactly?

48% didn't want to leave in the first place so it's likely they'd reject whatever was on the table.
It would be nigh on impossible for the 52% to be in full agreement with whatever was offered (the old "you can't please all of the people all of the time" scenario) so some of those would also reject it

Let's say for the sake of argument we had one and the deal was rejected.

Then what happens?

Presumably A50 would have run its course by then so what happens in the interim while they are trying to thrash out another deal?

Ask for an extension and remain part of the EU until a deal is reached. Negotiate and compromise.

I really do not understand you want a referendum when its the EUs decision...

An extension can only be granted if all other EU nations agree to it,which is by no means a certainty.

Obviously a sensible extension, not a year, If the deal is not favourable to them as well I would hope that they would grant it. Anyway hypothetical scenario.

And what if they don't grant us something they're not obliged to?

I can't see all 27 members agreeing to grant us an extension to something that comes with a use by date by design. It kinda makes a mockery of having the thing in the first place if that were to happen.

And what if they didn't grant an extension??

Compromise, negotiate that's what sensible politicians in democracies do until the right deal happens. As I said its a scenario which may not happen anyway.

Its a nonsensical idea. And repeats the same idea the Leave campaign was based on - we would demand what we wanted and the European foreign chappies would give us what we demanded.

Its totally impractical, as you can't have a referendum with 4 choices - none would have a majority. Staying would have the biggest vote. So you would be aiming to be in and out, or one of them - pending on which referendum you fancied.. And you would still have no idea which option most people wanted, of the ones that would emerge in negotiation. Its the sort of thing, the Liberals may well suggest.

You can't have a set requirement to negotiate - because the opponent in the negotiation will just demand more, and more, for what you have to get. Its a suicidal negotiating strategy.

You can't set a requirement for government to get - because you then have nowhere to go - when the Europeans say non. The negotiation would then end, and you would need another referendum where to go next. Meanwhile, the economy would be trashed.

Thankfully most in fact id say 99% of all those who voted to remain are not so utterly obsessed with trying to change the result, a few wingers on here and the useless voids like Farron are fast becoming Violet Elizabeth Bott clones..

As someone who voted to remain I get a lot of abuse from the usual suspects for my decision but strangely enough none of them have been Brexit supporters, a few facts the OP and his alter ego Aurichie need to get into his mind are

There is no second referendum.

We lost so stop making it now about how you are going to be affected, give a damn for everyone else for a change.

The sovereign elected Parliament has taken on the Labour amendment so the process is going to happen.

Constantly winding up Brexit supporters on here is getting the debate nowhere.

And while I'm still here Trevor care to give the thread a opinion on the rumours that some of the threats to Millar were actually done by obsessed remainers in order to channel sympathy for the Remain cause.

No. The as you were option is entirely logical .

The last referendum was on accepting the newly renegotiated relationship - logically there should be one on the new relationship.

The Leave prospectus was a tissue of lies - people ought to make a judgement on the actuality,

As what we end up with will be worse for most people, than the status quo now - voters logically ought to be able to vote for the best option.

its ridiculous to have the country's foreign policy forever based, decisively, on the views of a lot of 70 and 80 year olds , who will soon be dead . its inevitable that the issue will be revisited , as the Leave majority literally dies off.

But

The referendum is practically impossible when voters will want the new deal, and more, and less, of something, or the pre June 24 situation.

And its politically impossible to have large numbers of angry Leave voters rattling around the political system, denying any government a majority, and drifting more and more to the fascist right.

The second referendum will come when the older generation of leave voters has gone and Leave is a proven disaster. That will take time. And the deal then will be worse than the June 23 one.

Voters were told the opposite by leave's leaders.

I agree Leave voters should have believed Cameron then, not now, , but they didn't.

Boris is where he is now, precisely to come along and explain that, when he said we could have our cake and eat it, he was wrong Or he will avoid apologizing - by blaming the foreigners for being unexpectedly silly and not acting in their own economic interests.

May isn't going to take the blame for Leave's lies turning out to be lies, or Leave voters who couldn't follow what was actually on offer, expecting something they won't get. Davis and Johnson are going to have a lot of explaining to do - why we get what we get, and why its wonderful and what they promised, even if some voters don't think it is.

Nor is May going to be responsible for a bad deal - that may follow automatically from meeting the Leave voter's demand for immigration controls .The Europeans control what we get - not her. The government is going to have to blame the foreigners for what follows from immigration control , and Leave voters are going to have to have it explained to them , repeatedly , that its their insistence on immigration control, that will be making them even poorer.

In other words, delay Brexit indefinitely? Nice try.

Or in other words trevgo in desperate bid to overturn the first referendum and remain in the EU by splitting the leave vote.

Which is exactly what the diehard Remainers want. And that's exactly what all this obfuscation around 'no mandate to leave single market' and 'we should have a second referendum' is actually about: trying to stay in the EU.

That's why it would have to be under STV, so there would eventually be a majority for one of the choices. But I agree it would be impractical.