The problem is that your argument for a second referendum is totally flawed no matter how many words you use or how many times you repeat it.

Understand. There will no greater understanding of a future Britain outside the EU until it actually happens and time has passed. Before any second vote, people would only be exposed to more propaganda, falsehoods, predictions, self interest and inducements and nothing more that would qualify them to make an educated choice.

Your position is just a losers last hope of getting their own way and you know it. We all know it.

Did you now?

You knew “quite a bit” eh? So you knew the NHS bus was a lie? You knew the talk of Turkey was a bunch of nonsense? You knew that when David Davis said it would be the easiest deal in history, that he was a tad misguided? You knew that you were voting for a no deal, when the entire leave campaign spoke of piss easy deals, negotiated overnight, from our position of negotiating power? You knew that the NFU would call a no deal brexit the biggest farming disaster ever? You knew about the contents of the yellowhammer report, before it was even written?

You had “some dealings” with EU related issues. Wow.

So let me get this straight, you believe, you truly and honestly believe that the general public do not know loads more about brexit now, then they did in 2016? If you really believe that, be careful at the pedestrian crossing near sainsburys.

So you are the guy who coined the phrase backstop? I wondered who it was.

Yes I crossed the Atlantic, that was easy. All the stuff after that, was more difficult,

I am nice enough, but not when it comes to right wing brexit ideologues, for them I make an exception.

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.