So you are saying, yes, the vote was offered in bad faith.

You gotta let the child touch the stove themselves if you want to lesson to stick

Yeah they are really letting the consequences of voting Brexit burn.

Prime Minister David Cameron promised a referendum on the EU in the 2015 general election campaign, he didn't think he'd win - he thought he'd end up with another Con-LibDem coalition and so could get rid of the referendum commitment during the coalition negoatiations. As it happened, he did win an outright majority and so it would have been difficult for him to back out of that promise.

Also, referendums are quite rare in UK politics, but since 2010 Cameron had given us two; on changing the voting system to AV and on Scottish independence. Cameron won them both, so probably thought that he could win the third one and secure his legacy as the PM who put the European issue to bed once and for all.

Point of contention, i think it is the elite that wants Brexit; they are desparate to leave the EU before 31 December before new tax laws come in that will prevent opaque channeling asset management through foreign lands like the caiman islands. They want to dodge a tax clampdown that will cost them many billions.

The next problem is an existing (Good Friday) agreement between two EU members -Republic of Ireland and Great Britain - prevents a clean brexit; The UK and RoI have agreed there will always be a frictionless border between Ireland (RoI) and Northern Ireland (UK). The problem is when UK Brexits there will have to be a border between EU and UK, ie between ROI and UK, in violation of the Good Friday Agreement. Until this conflict is resolved i don't think there can even be a legal brexit. Hence the 'backstop' negotiations.

Thirdly, under the referendum all leavers campaigned under the idea of having deals with the EU similar to Canada, Norway, Switzerland etc. everyone campaigning insisted we would leave with a good deal and not no deal. The official line of Labour (leader of the opposition to the government) insist on leaving with a deal... The problem is they won't accept the deal that was negotiated.

So yes, the referendum was given for the choice of denocracy, the result got hijacked by tax avoiding aristrocrats, no deal is going to renege an agreement that previously ended a huge amount of fratricide in ireland (and terroism in the uk) and those politicians who want a 'best deal for the country' deal can't agree on the details.

What we need is a referendum 'the negotiated deal as it stands', 'maintain status quo' or 'no deal' (9/11 option).

If the elites in UK want brexit and the people voted for it, who do you perceive is stopping it from happening? Sounds like you’re in a spin tbqh. The idea of having more votes that ultimately undo brexot looks like an absolute disaster from a foreign POV, like you guys are running a complete and utter clown show of a democracy. UK politicians simply have to get brexit through or their democracy is fraudulent. The people have to have faith in the government and if votes don’t mean anything anymore, the social compact is shown to be breaking down.

Breaking an “insistence” isn’t a valid excuse to completely and utterly destroy the idea of your democracy either. That’s ludicrous.

A flaky insistence that never was a guarantee vs hundreds of years of a compact agreement between people/government institution built up

Which is stronger and should be protected?

Maintaining the status quo (aka the remain option rejected by the voters in the last referendum) is not an option. Even the EU is now admitting that Brexiteers were right all along and they're planning further and further integration towards the EU empire. Make no mistake, there will be an EU Army, Turkey will join the EU, and the EU will privatise the NHS.

Also - three way referendums aren't a good way of resolving things unless you use the AV system, which we're not used to in the UK.

It just makes me very angry to see this line of logic because i know exactly where it comes from. Elite's are angry that the common people hijacked the government and voted to take it in a direction that they don't want.

You most likely have a very small group of aristocrats that benefit from Brexit vs the much larger group of UK elites that are weaponizing a propaganda campaign against Brexit now.

Really when it comes to any vote and any outcome, anyone can make the argument "the aristocrats hijacked". That line is meaningless and it makes me angry to hear it. In fact, just hearing someone weaponize it makes me believe the exact opposite is true.

I promise you, there's much more room for elite cronyism within the EU than outside. The EU is the giant club of elites that are fucking their countries for a little more wealth.

Drone the Papists. Orange order 4lyfe