> I will accept whatever number of referendums there is > support for. If there is a push for an ongoing series > of referendums > The swing in the subsequent

> I will accept whatever number of referendums there is > support for. If there is a push for an ongoing series > of referendums > The swing in the subsequent referendum was big enough > crazy low turnout Given the harshness and stridency of your evaluation of my attempt to remind you that the UK is quite unlikely to pose such questions in a referendum I think it's fair to echo your own criticism back... and then some! I think you've failed to make the case that there are any countries besides Lichtenstein which operate democratically, or propose even roughly what counts as reasonable margins or mechanisms. I think you have failed to grasp that change ratchets towards centralized power and that the Brexit was a horrible mistake in which the operators of this machinery temporarily took their eye off the ball. Calling for a second referendum without specifying the exact terms under which referenda should be callable is just an attempt to have another roll of the dice, no matter which side of the Brexit issue one is on. W.r.t. Nice specifically, both turnouts were low. And now it looks as though Ireland will be dragged into a "common defence pact" although they will not be "part of an EU army. ( The only recent example of a high turnout that I can remember was Norway... in which a clear majority decided they wanted to retain independence from the EU in a large number of areas. ) I do agree that no decision _should_ ever be final in a democracy though and that there should be democracy (not constitutional monarchy with electoral representation, nor representative democracy in a republic or any other of the not-democracies).