That's what your hoping for more like.

And it does not end Brexit.

Let's assume we get this second referendum. If Remain is on the paper (which it will be) along with a Leave 'choice' (which wont be Leave in anyway, shape or form) then there will be a mass boycott. Farage has already said he will sit it out and go down the pub. It will be a farce.

But Remain will 'win' on probably less than a 50% turn out and with less than 17.4 million votes for Remain. It will be scoffed at.

We still have to have a GE sooner rather than later. And a Tory party that will stand on a manifesto promise of taking us out of the EU asap. It has no choice.

Brexit still will dominate our politics forever until we actually leave the EU. That is the only reset option.

Part of me would actually relish this farcical second referendum. It's proponents would be torn apart in interview after interview by a simple question.

'Why, after all the promises made about the June 23rd referendum should anybody believe you now about honouring the result of a 2nd?". Over and over again.

And why should they? That is the crux of here. The referendum process would be rendered utterly pointless. Futile beyond comprehension and dealing a massive blow to the wider faith in our system.

Yet these divs pushing for this option seem unable to grasp that simple yet glaringly obvious reality of what they are wishing for. Dumb f***ers. That is all I can say. Thick, retarded morons. Everyone of them.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

To you perhaps it does however the same logic applies as to Brexit, those who voted Remain, did you:

1. Vote for the status quo. This means the UK will continue to have a fractious relationship with the EU as we will be continually vetoing or requesting op outs as the direction of the EU is now quite clear.

2. Vote for full membership of the EU including euro and Schengen. I have no problem with this position I don't agree with it but it is logical if we are going to be in a club we should embrace all it's rules so hopefully being proactive we can then shape those rule.

3. Vote for something in the middle of the above.

The EU is continuing to expand in countries and in the control it exerts over its members. Anybody who thinks we can carry on as before is naive.

One more point

Do you understand how a single transferable vote system works?

In your example result, which I don't think is the most likely but let's run with it for the sake of argument, if either "deal" and "no deal" came top then "in" would be eliminated. The second preferences of those who voted "in" would then be counted to see which of the first two came top. As "deal" would almost certainly be the preference of most people who voted "in" it would be the final choice. Only if "no deal" got over 50%, or very close to 50%, before the second preference of "in" were counted would it succeed. I don't think that's very likely.

I think the same result is likely in just about every scenario, with the only other possibility being that "in" might succeed before the second preference of an eliminated "no deal" choice were transferred.

As the chances of "in" succeeding must though be higher in a straight binary choice between "no deal" and "in" I would have thought a 3 way choice with a much higher chance of a "deal" result would have a greater appeal to Brexiteers.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Watch the news today matey

remain would beat both deals being no deal and a deal singularly and that's the point.
That's why it's a stitch up.
It's obvious that remain singularly would beat the other two as individuals so there's the stitch up.
My point is that if both deals together beat remain that is fair on the fact that leaving won last time.
Then have another one about that.
Which as I said is where we are now.
How we leave is now the point.
It's not fair to even have another referendum but this is how it should be.

As what I am suggesting would produce exactly the same result as what you are, but without the need for the cost, trouble or delay of another referendum then what would be the point?

That's the purpose of a single transferable vote system. It ought to be used for GEs too so that a majority of the people feel they have voted, in some way, for the final choice. Having governments formed by first past the post often results in only 35% of the people choosing who they are. That's one of the primary reasons people have lost confidence in our Parliamentary system.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

What on earth has my last post got to do with "remain" let alone being "propaganda"?

It was solely about the single transferable vote system and how it might actually benefit those who want to leave.

However if it sends you to sleep then I am happy for you. I am knee deep in my tax returns and it's having the same effect.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Agreed, seems the most likely scenario.

Did you know? 98.0000001% of people are morons.

To be fair I don't know, it is why I use polls to help my understanding of what people actually think outside of my group of friends. This tells me between one in four or five people would vote for no deal not exactly the will of the people [Link] And yes it does say more would vote to leave, given the options so pretty clear thah at least a sizeable chunk of us who voted remain have accepted the result

One supporter of hacking argued that without it "you will do away with the courage and pluck of the game, and I will be bound to bring over a lot of Frenchmen who would beat you with a week's practice -Blackheath secretary at first meeting of the F.A