In reply to ian caton:
> I don't disagree with you hugely. My point being more that when the Brexiteers say there shouldn't be a "second" referendum they are ignoring the inconvenient truth that there have already been two, and therefore a third can't be ruled out. >
After the 1st referendum those who lost had to learn to live with the result and we only had a 2nd after the situation re Europe changed dramatically, hence a 40 year gap.
If in another 40 years the situation has changed dramatically again or the mood of the nation is such that Europe has become an issue which can no longer be ignored then it would be perfectly reasonable to hold a 3rd referendum. What is not acceptable is to have a 3rd referendum so soon after the second because a highly vocal minority didn't like the result of the last one.
> It doesn't feel like the boil is lanced as yet. If there is some sort of vote on the outcome of negotiations that will do for me. >
The boil has been lanced for the foreseeable future, what we're seeing at the moment, from the incessant whinging of the militant remainers, is the puss oozing out.
A large majority now believe that we must accept the referendum result and leave, 69% to 22%. Indeed, even amoungst leave voters, more think the result should be respected than don't, 49% to 45%. See 2nd paragraph here
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/08/18/majority-people-think-freedom-movement...
The fact is that despite not knowing what Brexit might actually look like and despite the fact that a hard Brexit was always a possibility more people still chose that option than remain. Any exit terms better than that are a bonus.