I've long argued that 50.1% is a majority, but only if they vote for what the people calling the vote want, apparently.

There are much more grown up ways to hold referenda, and they are used around the world, but we chose a politically illiterate binary option on one of the most significant political decision for several generations - it was always going to end badly, especially when, as someone else pointed out, the two sides were not aligned with party lines. I guess we have David Cameron and his advisers to thank for that - but as Danny Dyer so eloquently said, "Where is the geezer?"

I can't see May lasting until the end of the week - and in some ways, she could salvage a minor scrap of credibility by throwing her hands in the air and saying, "I tried - but the HoC wouldn't play ball." She'll then sail off into the sunset with Philip's arms deals £billions to scrape by on, and the Johnson's and Rees-Moggs will be left to face the ire of the electorate.

I want a GE - but I fail to see how even that could bridge the divide; there is no consensus for anything in Parliament other than Remain, but a tiny majority of those who voted will never accept that, because they won, and they want their prize - even if they don't know what the prize is, and it's actually a different prize for every Leave voter you talk to.

No, because we had the likes of Liam Fox stating that "the Brexit deal would be the easiest thing in human history".

Also, a couple of months before the referendum, that trusty ally Gove stated "the day after we vote leave, we hold all the cards & we can choose the path we want."

I must admit, I am torn, the majority voted leave, but didn't know what a shambles it would be, so maybe a second vote, with (as bren2k has said) a less binary set of options, might be needed.

And that’s why we have an insoluble problem. A GE won’t change a thing because parties would remain split and their respective policy on Brexit would dominate the election campaign and skew the whole thing. Brexit needs to be sorted first. If MPs can’t put aside political ambitions and agree on a cross party consensus along a customs union/Norway option then it could be another referendum with a less binary question.

What question you put and the options is another argument in itself and likely to get all the extremists on all sides crying foul. As I see it there is Hard Brexit (No deal), Soft Brexit (Norway) and Remain as options. Or if you want to respect the referendum result you could issue a choice between Hard Brexit (No deal) and Soft Brexit (Norway).

The trouble is that it could again be a very slim majority for an option that has enormous ramifications.

Anyone now think referendums aren’t always the best way of solving an issue? Special thanks must go to the right wing of the Tory Party for getting us here.

And all the old, racist people that voted leave.

I’ve more of an axe to grind with those that thought a referendum would solve the issue “once and for all” and those who agitated for it since 1974. Looking at the characters involved they weren’t all old and/or racist. They were all Tories though.

Your right, I really want us to leave the EU, however, I don't think I could stand this embarrassment much longer, like you I don't know what a GE will achieve, until recently all Labour would say is that everything is on the table. I might be wrong but I think our only option now is another divisive referendum. I also agree its just what the question will be

Tempted to quote Stewart Lee here - but I don't want to get banned.

You're not far wrong though - a lot of people voted leave because they were exercised about FoM - fuelled by lies and rhetoric, which convinced them that all the things that were wrong in their lives, were caused by immigration.

As Will Self said the other day in his real-time humiliation of Mark Francois, not everyone who voted leave were racists, but most racists probably voted to leave.