Well,I'm still baffled.

Another point you make here I have some sympathy for:

because I was brought up to believe in parliamentary democracy, in other words, letting elected politicians get on with making political decisions, subject only to periodic general elections. If they are to get on with it now, and can recognise that the consequences of Brexit will be what you say, how are they still getting with making political decisions if they can't make a decision on something as big as this?

I think we know the answer - having had the referendum, making out it was something where they needed to refer to the people, it's pretty hard to come back with that old stuff about the sovereignty of parliamentary. I think most people would see that as a bit dubious, whatever their views on Brexit

On the other hand, if a referendum then was legitimate, how can it not be legitimate now to have another referendum? I just don't see that. If we have another referendum now, which could use some system of preference voting to allow a range of options to be on the ballot paper, that wouldn't seem dubious to me.

I keep hearing the suggestion that we shouldn't do anything about the negative consequences of Brexit, because it will lead to anarchy, I guess because angry Leavers will take to the streets. Would Leavers really do that, after another referendum which didn't go their way? That's rather like accusing them of believing in mob rule, which I don't think is fair, but if it was, is that something to give in to?

This post was last modified: 13-09-2018 09:35 PM by Tim Lund.