I didn't vote for a compromise. I voted to remain.

[placemats]

Obviously the above statement is against Brexit means Brexit.

But what does Brexit actually mean? Should those who voted for Brexit now be the ones to make the compromise?

Out of interest if there were a 2nd referendum and the result was once again leave. What would you do?

I would expect those who represent the leave vote in Parliament to deliver a leave vote that the people voted for. Because obviously, and I hate to point this out, leave is more complex that remain. Ergo, the leavers have to deliver the compromise.

Oh, and out of interest, what do you think Brexit means?

I don't see how you define a brexit compromise in a way. The leave campaign never defined what brexit was. Some people were advocating Norway, others free trade.

How do you compromise if one position is undefined?

I suppose CU/SM would be the most obvious compromise but I think the issue with that is that there is a lot of the political stuff we don't want to lose either, like security deals, Galileo, Erasmus. So by the time we've done all the political deals and stayed in the CU/SM we might as well have remained.

So then do we retain the political bits and ditch the CU/SM but then fuck business and the Irish border?

I do think that the no deal hardliners need to step back a bit though. I compare it to remain winning by 52/48 and then pushing for Schengen, the euro, further integration. They would have been apoplectic, so I can't see why they're so surprised that remainers don't want to leave on no deal.

I (would have) voted Leave and I'm happy to compromise to get a sensible, practical solution.

No one thought leave would get the majority so no plan was made in advance. This is not the fault of leavers, rather an extreme absence of due diligence from the government.

agree SusanWalker the problem was the definition of Brexit has always been Brexit. So in essence that we leave. Never how or what that meant just leave.

And at the time how many actually thought it would ever mean no deal - that was never even contemplated that at this point we would have the choice though.

The problem is OP as much as I agree that actually the compromise of leaving suits no one (because there is actually no real way to leave. Which is the irony of all of this. We are so enmeshed now that it almost impossible to enmesh us and impossible to do (a) well and (b) in a way that makes everyone happy.

A compromise really does need to be made

QueenofIce if there is to be a 2nd referendum MPs would have to be completely stupid to phrase it in a simple remain/leave way and they were pretty stupid to have done so the first time round. Any referendum would be to vote on whatever the deal was that they had come up with against remain (there is an argument I guess for no deal but since they have - rightly - trashed that it seems unlikely)

Voting to stay within the EU meant remain. Unequivocal and clear.

Voting for Brexit meant what exactly?

The term Brexit was not clear. It was ambiguous.

Now, it's entirely up to those who voted Brexit to set out the terms of that word.

I'm not, as a remain voter, going to clear up the mess.

Now, it's entirely up to those who voted Brexit to set out the terms of that word

This imo is what has driven the no deal option. There is nothing to define. We throw everything away and the brexiteers don't have to come up with anything in any detail.

I have come to the conclusion that most of the leading brexiteers - Boris, Farage et al. are lazy and not overly intelligent. They liked the attention but not paying attention to the details. And now they've been caught without a plan, instead of coming up with one they're just going to flounce out because it's easier and makes better sound bites. Oh and it doesn't make them work, unlike the poor sods in public service having to plan to mitigate the mess.

Very difficult for remainers to compromise, any form of brexit means we are out of the EU and ... well that's it really, its over, we are out, how can that be compromised over?
It's also forever or least a generation.

Having said that, i would accept a EFTA/EEA deal, we are out of the EU but retain many benefits.

I never actually thought any PM would go through with the referendum, it was obvious it was going to cause huge division, whoever won, DC opened Pandora's box.

Cameron really should be in prison for what he has done.

Jasjas I have similar views to you. I would like to stay in the EU of course. But the EEA option keeps us close to the EU, we keep employment rights and Erasmus, doesn't stuff Ireland or Gibraltar, and if we ever wanted to rejoin the EU or any successor organisation, we'd be in a good position to do so.

Oh well. I am really angry that a bunch of Etonian buffoons and their hangers on have put us in this situation. We are not pawns to be played with but they think it's 1819, not 2019 and we should be doffing our caps and saying how grateful we are to be exploited.

*I (would have) voted Leave and I'm happy to compromise to get a sensible, practical solution.

No one thought leave would get the majority so no plan was made in advance. This is not the fault of leavers, rather an extreme absence of due diligence from the government.*

Well, I agree that the government should have made some preparations for this, but the official leave campaign should have had some vision rather than promising every version of leave to different people. "I voted to leave", depending on who you speak to could mean:
No Deal
Customs union
"Noway agreement"
WA
EEA
... and so on.

Jasjas. That's the elegant and civilised approach of course and it's incredibly difficult to ignore.

But it one brown stain left to harden on the toilet seat taken too far.

Brexit voters: own your own shit.

I have come to the conclusion that most of the leading brexiteers - Boris, Farage et al. are lazy and not overly intelligent. They liked the attention but not paying attention to the details.

They didn’t expect (or want) Leave to win, and thought they would be able to continue their self-serving tactics of disruption and rabble-rousing - which is what they have done by agitating for no-deal. They don’t commit to anything, or if they do, they wriggle out of it.

They don’t see it as their job to work out any details or deliver anything. They will never do anything that doesn’t directly benefit them. They are the absolute worst type of politician.

Some, like Francois, just seem to be pretty thick, but dangerous nonetheless.

Agree niteflights they never actually wanted to win because they must know that actually leaving is complicated and would not solve anything and cause more issues that it solved.

They just wanted to limelight etc.

The problem is people bought it and they have no idea how to solve it so they are going for no deal. And people are still buying it no matter how much proper research shows how bad it would be

I still think 'project fear' was the most genius catchphrase the leave side came up with. Any uncomfortable facts can just be pushed away by project fear. If you dismiss them that makes you clever enough to see through it, and if you think the warnings are true it paints you as fearful and cowardly.

Did anyone catch the briefing room on radio 4 last night? It was about the leave and remain psyches and was fascinating. Especially about brexit being a crisis of english Identity.

It's like none of the "compromisers" heard the phrase "Take Back Control".

You can argue for control by exercising voting rights within the EU and working for Remain and Reform or you can control by Leaving CU and SM etc.

All the "compromises" I have seen, including the WA, are an exercise in ceding control.

There was a compromise available with remain, before brexiters poisoned the debate by insisting that a marginal referendum win was a mandate for the hardest of hard Brexits.

Whether there is still a willingness to compromise amongst remainers I don't know. I suspect that as positions hardened on the Brexit side, that was mirrored by a hardening of attitudes among remainers.

I'm not, as a remain voter, going to clear up the mess.
Who has asked you too? Are you TM?

Well, people who voted leave aren’t necessarily getting what they voted for (or believe they voted for) either. I’m not sure what conversation you’re trying to start with your statement. Fair enough if you need a space to express your dissatisfaction though.

Also, who is asking you to clean up the mess?

It’s a bloody shit situation, I don’t disagree, but the vast majority of us remainers have now power or control over what comes next.

No one thought leave would get the majority so no plan was made in advance. This is not the fault of leavers, rather an extreme absence of due diligence from the government.

So what were they actually voting for?
Notions of past glory?

I’m afraid the notion that leave voters are not to blame drew a distinctly derisive snort from me. Either you knew a plan was necessary, but you voted leave without one, in which case you were a reckless fool. Or you didn’t realise a plan was necessary, in which case you were an ignorant fool.
You can’t sidle out of this one. You are to blame. Make better decisions next time.

There is no compromise only a fudge.

We may end up with some sort of stupid soft Brexit in which we would ironically lose sovereignty that we previously had as full members - ie a vote, a veto, a seat at the table and input into the regulations we will have to mirror.

But if do that we may as well Remain.

Many Leavers actually know that, which is why they’ve ended up backing hard, ruinous Brexit.

To quote a civil servant working in Yellowhammer madness.

For Brexiteers, that’s the prestige and pride that the last three years (and possibly the 60-odd since the Suez crisis) have leached away: they’ll vote for anything that promises to stop them feeling foolish and humiliated.

So what were they actually voting for
Notions of past glory

Exactly this.