I would have accepted a majority vote, I was always under the impression that a majority vote would have decided the fate of the UK's status in the EU, whatever way the results went. I didn't think that the UK would actually vote to leave, but that's another story.

But just because I accept that, it doesn't mean that I'm happy about it, and doesn't preclude my support of a 2nd referendum to get an understanding of what the public want the Brexit settlement to be, if they even still want to continue the Brexit process at all.

we should not and should have never based the future of the country on something as fickle as a popular vote if there was any hint that there could have been a swing

52% is NO enough. 2/4s of the country, both in popultuon and of the nations, voting yes is NOT ENOUGH.

HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO REPEAT MYSELF??

I don't think there is an answer to your question; the losing side in a binary referendum will always complain about the result (the 'acrimony' you describe... which I think would have quite possibly been much greater from the Brexiteers had the result been reversed) obviously because it is not the one they wanted. However, that is in my view totally different from challenging the result, and as Brett and Johnkm above even though I voted remain I do accept the result and respect the decision that was made. It doesn't mean I have to be happy about it, shut up and not complain though.

'Another different poll about the EU referendum' - turns out to be the same as all of the others. Also, you speak as if the acrimony affected you? It was always going to be like this, when it comes to an issue that directly affects all of us on every level of society, people, unsurprisingly, get passionate.

I still maintain that a supra-majority (60%) should have been necessary to quell the issue either way, if the population is divided then there needs to be more referendums (and if you hate those and start throwing the buzzword of 'neverendum' around, then I remind you again, this is vitally important, we should not and should have never based the future of the country on something as fickle as a popular vote if there was any hint that there could have been a swing).

Also, because I'm fanatically pro-Europe to a fault, I don't 'accept' the result and will continue to fight it as much as I can, but what does my acceptance matter to you anyway when I'm one among a population of millions?

52% is NO enough. 2/4s of the country, both in popultuon and of the nations, voting yes is NOT ENOUGH.

HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO REPEAT MYSELF??

You can't really argue about England or Wales sadly as there was a majority leave vote in both regions, but the only undemocratic thing I see is Scotland and Northern Ireland, which voted to remain, they should have somehow had their wishes adhered to.

Actually, our membership (or not) of the EU affects me personally very little - which is why my concerns about it were able to be based on the wider, political, level.

Apart from anything else, what we signed up for was not *supposed* to be political at all!

You realize that there's no guarantee that further referenda would clarify the situation?

As for not holding referenda on important issues, I take the opposite view - they are too crucial to be left in the hands of 600+ members of the Establishment whose overriding concern is to protect their own positions, rather than serve the public they *claim* to represent!

In any case, for Cameron the main reason was to try & quell his own Eurosceptics, plus take the wind out if UKIP's sails - he clearly never imagined Leave would actually win.

I'm glad you said that, as I didn't want to be the first to do so.

The question you'll have to ask yourself though is - which is more important to you : living in the UK, or living in an EU country, as you won't be able to do both in 2 years time.

BY HAVING A SYSTEM WHEREBY 3/4 OF THE COUNTRIES HAVE TO AGREE TO THE DECISION LIKE NICOLA SAID AND CAMERON REJECTED OUT OF SHEER ARROGANCE

THE UK IS NOT JUST ENGLAND

Well, I'm happy for you. Most of us don't have that luxury.

No, there isn't any guarantee. If enough time and referenda pass with no clear result, maybe it would hammer home in all the vote populace exactly what leaving would mean before they've 'committed' to it.

And yet you're happy for these 600 members to do whatever they want with the UK's laws once they free themselves from EU regulation and remove another barrier to their own personal power?

Not won't be able to, it'll just be horrifically and unnecessarily more difficult.... also, why does it sound like you're GLOATING? It's not a good thing that people will now have far less choice where they can work and live. But if I had the opportunity, I'd far rather head somewhere else, I have fleeting moments of patriotism but none of them require me to stay in this country for the rest of my natural life, thankfully.

So, what you are saying is that Scotland & Ireland (total pop.8.2m) should be able to prevent England & Wales (total pop. 57m) from leaving the EU?

I'm half surprised you didn't try & count Gibraltar as a 5th country, in order to 'win' 3-2...

The point you are missing is that each country agreed to abide by collective decisions, rather like we have done iro of the EU. And just like us, they can choose to leave a union that no longer suits them.

You do realie that Scotland and N.I leaving will spell the end for the country as a global power? No UN security seat,that will ho to EU, pressured to give up nukes. Norh East, maybe the North West, veery likely to go with them, away from Tories and their Toy boy chronies like you that hate the north or at least don't give two craps about it.

No, Scotland was FORCED into the Union 100s of years ago and N.I is the product of imperialism. Now there IS a union, a shoddy one with power in the hands of the Eton lot and their brainwashed followers, i.e turkeys votin for Chrstmas, i.e YOU, it should WORK as a union. Forcing through decisions because Little Englanders want them is not a Union; it's imperialism and shows utter scorn to the other parts, so yes, even though they have smaller populations, their vpice should be heard, and there should be a safeguard lock to protect the union. Otherwide it eill split snd England will fall fown the ranks in the world and become no less marginal than Denmark. Oops

You have the same southern Tory mentality - the same mentality that would have the north and Scotland slaves to the whims of the Little Englanders just because you have more people. This is unacceptable. Either there is a Union, and every nation counts equally in decision-making like this, or the Little Englanders rule. You can't have both.