...to remind people about today's march against Brexit

[twofingerstoEverything]

...starting at 12 o clock from Pall Mall.

(Piccadilly, Green Park and Charing Cross station are the nearest tubes.)

If the Brexit vote was 'easy' then the Government would have implemented it ages ago. The problem is that they hadn't done their homework before calling A50. Only after they did that and LAWYERS looked at some of the aspects, such as the requirement for a border with the EU which is not possible as Ireland is joined to NI and the GFA specifies NO border. Issues such as Single market and Customs union had not been worked out and still, 2 years down the line have not been worked out.
As the UK will be a 'third country' so many treaties and arrangements HAVE to be rewritten and the UK will lose access to security and the new Galileo GPS satellite system.

Waitrose must have been empty.

Well, I managed to go to the march and do my shopping in Waitrose earlier in the day.

The basic problem is the UK government promised a whole load of stuff that it CAN'T deliver in the same way that you can't go shopping with £100 and come back with £150 worth of goods, you can't do it.

MarcusCrassus, why are you so, so bitter?

So...

Is a ‘people’s vote’ now what we call a referendum when it doesn’t give a correct answer the first time around?

The return of the 'we won but have no idea what we have won' brigade!

‘Will of the people’ seems to make them sick - but ‘people’s vote’ has them jumping for joy?

It’s like the life of Brian all over again.

I see no one on the ‘Brexit means Brexit’ side is prepared to answer my question.

How is a vote on the final deal undemocratic?

A referendum on the deal does not in any way hurt democracy.

It wasn't clear what Brexit meant, there are many different variables, so a second referendum will only reinforce the democratic will of the people.

How is a vote on the final deal undemocratic?

Because the vast majority of leavers want a different type of Brexit to remainers. So remainers will just use ‘the people’s vote’ to frustrate the process.
Is that clear enough for you?

Because the vast majority of leavers want a different type of Brexit to remainers. So remainers will just use ‘the people’s vote’ to frustrate the process.
Is that clear enough for you?

So basically you’re not confident enough in Brexiters to vote in enough numbers to ensure the result?

That should tell you something.

misssusansays that depends on what question is asked on the ballot paper. If it’s going to include a ‘remain’ box then that question has already been asked and answered so to have it in again could be argued to be undemocratic.

I really don’t think the government will put anything else regarding Brexit to the public vote, not least because there isn’t the time.

Because the vast majority of leavers want a different type of Brexit to remainers.

I thought remainers didn't want Brexit at all.

So, you’re both admitting that you don’t think you’d win a ‘re-vote’ and are therefore against a vote on the final deal, just in case one of the options is to just forget about the whole thing.

And you would stick stubbornly to this point not matter how bad the final deal is?

Because the vast majority of leavers want a different type of Brexit to remainers

No one knows what type of Brexit leavers want anyway. Brexit means Brexit is hardly enlightening.

Marcus’s fascinating Brexit is one where industries leave and there are fewer jobs, there’s a housing property crash...

Is this everyone’s brexits hopes?

I heard a protester say the NHS is finished because of Brexit. Prior to the vote I was given a leaflet from a group of NHS workers campaigning to leave because the NHS will be better if we’re out of the EU. The truth is we’ll only know for sure when the dust settles.

Remain meant 'stay as we were which is a simple option.
Even if we do 'stay as we were' (repeal A50 etc) we have already lost both money and business confidence.
Any other form of deal hard. medium, soft, are just more money and more uncertainty, just different amounts.
Crashing out with no deal is worse than all the above with the added excitement that outgoing trade will have to STOP on the morning of Brexit.

If there were to be a 2nd referendum I think remain would win it yes. Because a lot of people who voted leave the 1st time around wouldn’t bother again, they’d feel so disillusioned by it all.
And that’s a terrible shame.

Funding of the NHS has nothing to do with the EU. If it was billed as a reason to 'Brexit' then it was a complete lie.

MisssusansaysAhha so we have got to the crux, you want a complete re-vote because you didn’t get what you wanted - of course that’s democratic .

If the government decide on a yes/no vote on accepting the deal then fine but it’s not going to make a blind bit of difference because we have to take what the EU offer or we crash out, those are the options.
If you think we can go back to Brussels and say ‘i’m sorry but we have decided we don’t like this deal can we have something else please’ then that’s unicorns and rainbows.

For what it’s worth if certain media and papers continue portraying the EU rightly or wrongly as bullies and people see other people trying anything to overturn the original result I believe the leave share will actually increase if you were to re-run it.

God I wish they would stop it.

Bet Terri would secretly be hugely relieved!

Exactly what is undemocratic about a second advisory referendum?

Tell me, explain, how a second advisory referendum is undemocratic?

Parliament, the U.K. sovereign body will make the decision that is how our democracy works.

So what would we call a referendum (sorry - ahem - people’s vote) if it gives a second wrong answer.

Tricky one.

Perhaps the ‘new’ people’s vote? Worked for labour once upon a time I suppose.

Surfer we’ve covered both bases there you could be right and yes it would be a shame.

What if remain won the 2nd referendum, by exactly the same margin as leave won the 1st one ?