There is no detailed argument that negates basic maths. 52 is a larger number than 48. In terms of % it means that Leave won and Remain lost. Done and dusted.

No-one at all is arguing about maths. If you think that is even remotely true then you haven't actually been paying attention. We know what the result was in 2016. It's what it means and how it is to be applied that is in question. You think you know the answer, but many others disagree with your opinion. The only place such matters get resolved is in Parliament. Not here or down the pub. In Parliament by our elected representatives. So far they have tried, but failed, because of another set of unarguable basic maths.

Your Emperor is start bollock naked. There are no clothes.

I don't have an "Emperor"! I rely on common sense and reasoning and not the lead given by anyone. However, it does seem to me that Mr Farage might have pickled your brain at some time. Maybe he is your "Emperor"!

Lets say we have another referendum. And lets say Remain wins by say 52% to 48. Is that 52% more meaningful? A bigger 52?

Which is exactly why a 3 choice single transferable system is proposed, so that if your first choice fails to make the top two your second choice would be transferred. A close result would then be very unlikely. You do the maths! I think a "deal" outcome to be the odds on favourite.

What I struggle with to the point of apoplexy is how anybody can believe that a second referendum, after the first has been deemed of no meaningful consequence will have the slightest shred of credibility. Or how it brings us all together again. Of how it will do the exact opposite of cementing the divides and actually restore our faith in the power of voting.

A second referendum would not just be a rerun of the first. It would be to try to guide Parliament on what the people now want, given the experiences of the intervening years and faced with either a "hard" or a "soft" Brexit option together with Remain for those who voted that way in the first place. You cannot disenfranchise people just because they voted in a way you disagree with.

Perhaps it is me? Perhaps I am too narrow-minded to accept that when I am told my vote will be counted and a result acted upon that to then have it explained that perhaps that was not QUITE what all those politicians meant when they promised to honour it.

They have met their promises though! It's this that so many Brexiteers fail to understand. Despite many, including Mrs May, favouring Remain, our MPs voted to trigger Article 50, thus meeting their commitment. All the subsequent problems have not been about Brexit itself, but about how we Brexit. That is Parliament's job and not ours.

Actually you know what, balls to it. I would rather die being labelled an ignoramus than ever accept I am in the wrong on this.

Ignoramus, no. Stubborn to the point of intransigence, yes.

I voted on June 23rd 2016 in utter good faith. And I despise anybody who deems me a fool for doing so because that is what anybody who wants a second referendum with Remain on the ballot paper are doing.

No-body regards people who think like you as fools. They just think you are unable to see that things have evolved to the point that what happened in 2016 is no longer the only consideration. That's life and fighting yesterday's battles is rather pointless. If you still believe that leaving the EU without an agreed deal is the best option then that's where your energy will be best applied.

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (13 Oct 2019 2.15pm)

You say deal is favourite on a 3 way vote.
Ok let's say the vote happens(BS really).
If no deal wins everyone wanting remain, like you ,maine and steeleye will accept it.
I dont think you would so what is the point.

Selfishness works both ways! But democracy is the over arching answer and last time I looked 17.5 million people trump 1.8 million.

If no deal was the choice then of course it would be accepted, both by me and I think by Parliament too.

I don't though think that is the likely outcome. I think a "deal" which a new Parliament has negotiated and which meets all the red lines of the EU and protects us too, would romp home by a very large margin. Then a disconsolate Farage would be trotting home on three legs and ready for the knackers yard, and the ERG left with no-where to go.

All that MUST happen is for a deal to be made with the EU that Parliament as a whole can approve. Until something is presented and thoroughly evaluated we won't know if that is possible but it looks almost impossible to me by the deadline. No-one's doing any sabotage. They are doing their jobs.

I think that is a quite deliberate tactic by Johnson to give Parliament no time for the thorough scrutiny needed, leaving them no option other than to refuse to accept it. It has nothing at all to do with "Remainers" in Parliament or outside, most of whom will accept a "deal" that protects our best interests but won't if it harms them. Many "Leavers" voted down Mrs May's deal and as the rumours are that this one has aspects that are worse then how they will respond is as yet unknown.

Why have a remain option then.
That horse has run and lost.
Deal or no deal.
Binary choice as you say.

Because of the changed circumstances in which so many know so much more. In 2016 idea of an exit without a properly negotiated transitional arrangement wasn't even on the horizon, let alone the table.

We haven't left yet, so as we have a chance to check how people feel about it now, and not about how they felt about then, some think we should. If you really believe in the will of the people being paramount then what have you to be worried about? I want Parliament to decide themselves but it seems that they may well decide to ask us all again.

Whether we have a 3 choice referendum, or one just about how we leave, my money would all be on a "deal" being chosen, provided it is one that Parliament can agree upon, and that doesn't look to be very likely to happen yet.

Oh don't start him off again FFS - "single transferable vote bla bla bla"

zzzzzz

The more likely outcome there is that any party that foists a poor deal onto the people would be destroyed at the polls and probably put Brexit right back on the agenda. The EU already ruled out any kind of Norway deal and there is little point in paying the same amount for a trade deal as Britain pays at the moment, without having any say or control over standards, customs or indeed, movement. What I'm seeing here is one of those cake and eat it deals - which just is not going to happen- which is pie in the sky.
The EU are following the narrative of naughty Britain needs to be punished for its intransigence and there is little sign that they will change. Without a huge pay-off of course. The red lines of the EU are totally at odds with the UK's red lines - hence the complete inability for any acceptable deal to be reached - for the people that is. Be careful when thinking that politicians are going to deliver some kind of decent and acceptable deal.