I think the biggest problem here is that plenty of people voted leave who are not aligned with your viewpoint, Midlands Eagle.

It is hard to hold democracy in high regard on one hand, calling for the vote in 2016 to be respected, otherwise its a betrayal, but on the other hand not accept that the democratic will of millions of leave voters is not a no deal exit.

One way to find out would some kind of 2nd vote.

Why can there not be an option to remain, if that it now the will of the people? I thought you were all about democracy?

However I didnt say that, I just said some kind of 2nd vote to be fair.

Again, for the 50th time, we are currently on a road to nowhere so we need some kind of plan to get on to a road to somewhere.

In a short while it will be 3 years since the vote, when it gets to 4 years since most elections, the people get another chance to pick a new leader, in most democracies.

When does the line get drawn that enough time has passed since an issue was looked at that public opinion may have shifted? 5 years, 10 years, 20 years?

New vote could have Leave or Remain as question 1, majority wins.

Question 2 could then be no deal/may's deal/whatever else for those who want to leave, along an indicative voting process.

Then question 1 would be fair wouldn't it, as it wouldn't be splitting the leave vote.

You need to enlighten me, as I dont follow you!

Let me be sure you understand what I am saying:

Question 1 (unrelated to question 2)

Leave or Remain - same as 2016.

Question 2 (for those who want to leave)

May's deal/No deal/Norway plus/whatever.

If question 1 goes on the side of Leave, then question 2 would dictate how.

The dissenting opinions 'how' to leave the EU is the reason we havent left the EU yet.

Remainers could vote in the second part irrespective of how they voted in the first part.

It is a ridiculous idea.

That is definitely one school of thought, Becky.

Another one is that the 2016 vote is undeliverable, due to the enormous differences between no deal/May’s deal/Norway plus etc etc.

Leaving is one thing.

How you leave, is quite another.

Stop using the word undeliverable. It is deliverable with no deal for example. This is about obstruction.

You are wrong, if you dont mind me pointing out.

People did not vote exclusively for a no deal exit, though some did.

People did not vote exclusively for May's deal (as it didnt exist), though some voted for some kind of managed exit along the lines of a withdrawal agreement/deal.

People did not vote exclusively for Norway plus, though some did.

Therefore delivering one of those options, is not democratic, Hrolf.

You cannot play the "uphold the democracy" card on one hand when it suits you, then completely sack of the concept of democracy on the other hand.

The way in which we leave the EU has massive, fundamental and far reaching consequences. No deal compared to May's deal is very different indeed.

To democratically deliver one of those exit routes, it must be voted on in a 2nd referendum.

Given the amount of lies, mistruths, lack of understanding and simple inability to predict the future in 2016, any reasonable person would also concede the very concept of leaving the EU must be voted on again, if you are going to the trouble of arranging a second national vote.

If your position is solid, we will vote again to leave the EU.

As you hold democracy in such high regard, if the will of the British people has changed, as they have seen the 350 mil for the NHS was a lie, and they have seen job losses and uncertainty, and they have seen what is happening with British Steel, then democratic process must rule and a new vote must be held.

More claptrap.

I'm sure there are Remainers who would like to alter some aspects of EU membership but leaned toward the safer option.

You cannot rerun a vote just because it is in the nature of remaining that everything stays the same and that Leave has options.

Do give up. Your arguments are all self serving and nothing more.
We had a vote and a binary choice was the only fair option.
The fact that Parliament has conspired to ignore it does not mean that we can just keep having votes till you and they get result you wanted.
Another vote would just trigger another load of lies and propaganda from both sides, so the idea of being better informed is just another losers excuse.

I've missed nothing. You are coming up with excuses to have a second referendum when we already have the mechanisms in place for Parliament to accept a no deal or a proper Brexit deal.

I'll say it one more time. You cannot reward obstructive Remainers with an opportunity to win a second vote.

In what world does that make any sense except for those who wish to win at all costs?

Yawn! Yes, that's it... Wisbech.
How's your white race search on Google getting on?
Nearly there?