@Ruth, @David, @EmarisaIt's a conundrum for Remainers. I feel Brexit may fail because it was poorly thought out, there was no attempt at conciliation, definition of what Brexit was or planning before invoking A50 and the whole negotiations seem to have been poorly managed in that both Remainers and Leavers have been united in disliking the resulting deal. However, I think many Leavers would feel that was a manipulated outcome, although untangling 40+ years legislation, not infringing the Good Friday Agreement, catering for those who have taken advantage of the freedom of movement, etc was always going to be a challenge. Given a deal can't be agreed and a no-deal is also likely to be rejected by Parliament then revoking, or suspending, A50 seems the only sensible option. Some think that the vote was a result of misinformation and threfore invalid but we get on dangerous ground there, that could be argued about many ballots! The safest option does seem to be a second referendum - if people feel they were misinformed they can change their mind, but the result is either revalidated or corrected. Further, this isn't a "remoaner's" idea; to quote Rees-Mogg from 2011: “We could have two referendums. As it happens, it might make more sense to have the second referendum after the renegotiation is completed.” (Twitter, 9am 24.10.11.) I do, though think as well as a deal (whatever it is) or no deal alternative there must also be a remain option for my reason in the next paragraph.So I'd prefer a second vote and I'm reluctant to criticise the idea of reversing Brexit because I'm not convinced the vote wasn't manipulated which is why I'm uncomfortable with the result of the 2016 referendum given its narrow margin. Throughout my life I've been a great believer in the "cock-up" rather than the "conspiracy" theory. However, with both the EU referendum and the US presidential elections in 2016 I'm not convinced there weren't parties trying to subvert the results, possibly individuals or nation states. This is for several reasons: 1) reading various reports and articles on Facebook's and Cambridge Analytic's activities and some of the individuals allegedly involved; 2) having the opportunity to view some of the analysis of tweet-bot traffic recorded prior to both ballots; 3) the alleged intermixing of leave campaign and insurance company personal date at a call centre; 4} report of liaisons directly or indirectly between certain individuals (Fox, Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Farage, Banks, Bannon, Trump, Putin, et al). At present I'd admit there's no smoking gun but I'm very suspicious. Why would there be a conspiracy? Well, they're all very right wing senior wealthy white males and seemingly have an interest in financial regulations with a desire to maintai their status and the status of like minded individuals but that's obviously only speculation ... and, of course, many voters in the UK and US were, justifiability, very unhappy with their circumstances so were very easily influenced. I believe a three way second referendum along the lines suggested by Ms Greening is the beset option to get closure on this matter - incidentally I didn't vote for her and am a member of another party but fully support her in this matter. (Just to add, I don't believe Facebook deliberately contributed to any conspiracy, I think they were just cavalier and sloppy with data management for commercial reasons.)
Michael Ixer ● 2856d