It will be seen as 'give peoples vote version 1, get wrong answer, give peoples vote version 2'. Come off it it has nothing to do with democracy, its been the only gig in town by remainiacs since they lost the last one.[/quote]How is it not democratic to give the people of the UK the final say in the most important decision facing the UK, frankly in my lifetime - certainly in my voting lifetime. The notion that it isn't democratic to have a democratic vote is as wide of the mark (albeit in the opposite direction)as the old East Germany describing itself as the DDR (the second D being democratic) when it wasn't a democracy.
There will be outrage if there is another vote, it will be total carnage, the country will be more divided and that division will get worse regardless of who wins.
There will be outrage just as much if the government forces through an option without clarity that it has a direct mandate for that choice, particularly as parliament is hopelessly split.
You would put no deal on a ballot paper? Wow.
If I am talking a non partial view, on fairness, then yes I would - no deal is the last thing I want, but it is a deliverable option and some people do want it. If I was being partial then sure I wouldn't want it on the ballot paper, but that isn't what I said when first suggesting it previously. If you believe in democracy then you have to accept that voters need to have the option to vote for something that you might, yourself, not want.
I think if others took a step back from their partisan view (I mean you Jakswan) they too would recognise that the only appropriate and democratic way out of this mess is a vote of the UK electorate on the final deal, with the other 2 deliverable options also on the ballot paper.
