Why does Boris want a General Election when surely a second referendum might address the deadlock more definitively.

[Whatjusthappenedthere]

This. Because I can’t see anywhere this question has been asked or answered and I’m truly baffled.

I thought there that you were talking about Germany and how they have banned Referendums and the reason why.

A general election is just that - general. They should never be used as single issue tools. What about the nhs, policing, welfare, social care? These are important issues - affected by Brexit, but separate. A GE should not be used to determine what happens with Brexit.

It's far too late for there to be anything like a good outcome for the country from Brexit.

If enough of our politicians had put the country first they could have guided us towards a Brexit where we stayed in the Single Market and Customs Union and left the political institutions. Most of us on both sides would have accepted this - we would have retained many of the benefits of membership and removed any prospect of being involved in that mythical EU Army that everyone seems so worried about.

Instead the Right Wingers in the Tory party saw the chance to get the sort of deregulated nightmare they couldn't get past the electorate. They have somehow convinced significant numbers that "the elite" who are trying to protect the environment, workers rights and health and safety are the enemy. The lady in Doncaster today was asking about what would happen to Workers Rights after BRexit and BJ refused to answer, while the other people around him cheered him on. Ordinary people wanting their own rights to be removed.

Cummings and his ilk openly proclaim they want a society where everything is in chaos and rules are smashed. Guess which people go to the wall in that scenario? Not the rich.

I honk we should have a second ref, 2-stage question - first leave/remain and second preferred mode of leaving if leave wins.

Referendum solves nothing.

If it is a re-run of previous ref (binary leave/remain) then it is an affront to democracy.

If a ref is held at all then it should be deal/no deal

If a ref is held and Remain is in the ballot paper, then there must also be options for deal & no deal. 'Leave' should be counted as the total of both leave options and if leave wins then the highest of deal/no deal wins over all.

If Remain wins on less than 51.89%, or on a turnout of less than 72.21% then the result is invalid as it will not have overturned the previous result.

None of it matters though, because if leave wins again, then the Lib Dems & other remainers have already stated that they will not accept the result.

Ergo, nothing at all is solved by having another referendum.

The only way to break the deadlock is a GE, with all parties standing on honest Brexit positions.

The only way to break the deadlock is a GE, with all parties standing on honest Brexit positions

Correct. The parties state whether or not they will revoke Article 50 and people choose.

I don't think a second referendum with remain on the ballot should happen (I voted remain and would again btw). I do think something needs to be done to break the deadlock though and I think the country is too divided to deliver a workable majority in a GE (lets face it, most votes will be cast based on Brexit). A second referendum with a specific deal vs no deal would probably be fairest: but a specific deal, not just the theory of a deal. But if you are going to allow the public to decide, there has to be impartial information available for people to weigh up and decide for themselves-positives and negatives for both options. I doubt the government would be prepared to agree to the level of transparency this would require.

Instead I can see this will go on and on for years, unless the EU refuse an extension or wily political tactics force a no deal. Its like Groundhog Day at the moment.

Why shouldn't a further referendum include remain on the ballot, given that it's the most sensible option? Otherwise the question would be tantamount to asking "should the country shoot itself in the head or the heart?"

As a PP said, we should stop fetishising the result from 2016 - a time when we were fed lies/kept ignorant of the repercussions of any type of Brexit. We also need to give younger people a chance to vote on their futures. If people still want to leave, they can vote for it again.

I’m terrified that the way the numbers stand, GE will result in a Tory Brexit alliance and a hard right government led by Bojo for the next 5 years.

So, if Boris ( as per the No Deal being illégal bill, which was just passed) has to go to a Brussels; ask for an extension, then MPs vote for ( a version of) a Withdrawal agreement, so it becomes ; surely if Bojo wins a majority with the Brexit party, they can overturn it?

Or, do we automatically leave with the ( new) WA terms on the revised Extension date?
If so, I guess that means that theBrexit party in a GE is an irrelevance. As basically Brexit is now in law, so Leavers can vote in their natural homes of a Labour or Tory.....

Hope that makes sense?

The only way to break the deadlock is a GE, with all parties standing on honest Brexit positions

Correct. The parties state whether or not they will revoke Article 50 and people choose.

Oh, and people will campaign and vote for the parties according solely to their Brexit conditions, will they?

Of course they won't.

You can't move on MN for posters campaigning against Labour or against Jeremy Corbyn, to the point of saying "would you rather have Brexit or Corbyn" – as though those were somehow the choices. I've seen similar on other media almost like it's a planned message.

MysteryTripAgain, how would you vote if Corbyn came out with a firm Leave position for the party? And the Tories expressed a firm Remain position (as so many of them have individually)?

The reason I said I dont think remain should be on a second referendum is not personal preference-I have already stated my position on that. If you intend to disregard the first referendum, the default position is to remain anyway. Just revoke and be done.

If remain was on a second vote there would be calls for a third referendum, as leave already got the majority in the first.

If a second referendum, it should be on the question of how-not if- to exit.

I don't think it's a question of 'disregarding' the first referendum. It's a question of asking voters whether they still want Brexit now they have a better understanding of the likely consequences.
I would also prefer revoke, but don't believe anyone in Parliament, let alone government, has the courage to suggest or support this.

Yes, I can see your point with that, I suppose though if remain were to win, it would necessitate a third referendum (especially if you are talking about similarly narrow margins as the first). If leave were to win a second time, we are back to square one (again possibly a third referendum as to how).

In theory, I do like the idea of a three way vote Remain/Leave deal/Leave No deal; but I think this will cause problems as to be unchallenged by anyone I think remain would need to gain overall majority of the sum of the other two options (I know that is not how it is supposed to work-but can you imagine the frenzy that would be whipped up in the media-and how many are directly led by the media to the ballot box?!).

I am not sure remain truly has that majority-as much as it pains me to say it-the UK is split down the middle. That is really why we are in this mess.

You can't have a 2nd Referendum on May's Deal v No Brexit, because this is two variations of Hard Brexit. If you're going to tell half the country they can't have their preferred option of Remain you can't also deprive them of a Brexit which would protect their employment rights, the environment and food safety.

Possible options:

1)A 2nd Ref between a full soft Brexit where we stay in the SM and CU v No Deal. The trouble with this is that No Deal is not a permanent state - there will eventually have to be a Trade Deal with the EU. So the whole argument starts again.

2. STV between Remain/ May Deal and No Deal. But see above......

Really all this emphasises is that there is NO actual Brexit that has majority support. Politicians who had any thought for the welfare of the country would have been working for a decent compromise from the start.

It needs to be acknowledged, but set against the very real considerations about what is in this country's best interests economically, politically and culturally.

But who gets to decide about the country’s best interests though? I think this is the crux of the matter. And what happens if the public choose something that isn’t believed to be in the country’s best interests.

I would also prefer revoke, but don't believe anyone in Parliament, let alone government, has the courage to suggest or support this

So have a general election. If anyone has changed their minds they can choose between the parties that want to revoke and those that don’t.

A general election should not be about Brexit alone. There are other massive problems facing this country.

A general election should not be about Brexit alone

But it will be

...and why if there is going to be any sort of vote, a 2nd referendum should come first.

Though as DC now thinks a 2nd vote is preferable, i'm all out for a GE !!

Well, that's why I don't think there should be one. If Parliament genuinely wants to know the people's current opinions on Brexit, have a referendum.
If you vote for a party purely because of their position on Brexit (particularly an extreme party like the Brexit Party that didn't even bother to publish a manifesto prior to the EU elections) you are basically giving them carte blanche to do whatever the hell they want in terms of employment, NHS, transport, education, defence, etc.

^^That was in response to Mystery.

why if there is going to be any sort of vote, a 2nd referendum should come first

Parliament voted against a further referendum in the meaningful votes

I think you missed my question, MysteryTripAgain.

How would you vote if Corbyn came out with a firm Leave position for the Labour party, and the Tories expressed a firm Remain position?

Because he knows a referendum would not go his way whilst a GE probably would, even though it wouldn’t resolve the mess anyway.
Astonishing that so many people just don’t get that and think a GE will somehow end it all.

Mystery

We've moved on since the indicative votes, new PM and 21 tory MPs sacked off and another resigned.

Brexit needs to be bought to a head, a GE will be a single issue election, not good.
It also may just lead to another hung parliament and even more delay.

A legally binding, Pv on Remain vs May's or Johnsons deal is a way out.

Is it ideal? no but we are way past perfection.