I keep pointing out (to no effect whatsoever) that Vote Leave absolutely refused to define Brexit because it calcualted it would be easier to win if it didn't spell out the detail
The first reason was shabby opportunism. It's easier to win a referendum if you attack rather than defend. If Vote Leave put forward an exit plan it would offer " undefendable target and open an unwinnable debate" said its head Dominic Cummings dominiccummings.com/2015/06/23/on-…
There was also the small matter that, as you may have noticed, Brexiters couldn't agree among themselves. "Creating an exit plan which all reasonable people could unite around seems an almost insuperable task. Eurosceptic groups have been divided for years."
And, incidentally, Cummings was also all in favour of a second referendum. " given the enormous importance of so many issues that would be decided in an Article 50 renegotiation – a far, far bigger deal than a normal election – it seems right to give people a vote on it."
When Ireland had its abortion referendum the government spelt out precisely what a vote to remove the constitutional ban would mean. The Leave campaign quite cynically, refused to say what Brext would mean, and Cameron, quite stupidly, refused to make them
All today's chaos flows from the rank amateurism of allowing a poltical faction to demand a shuddering change without defining what that change should be. The con pulled, they can all turn around and say Brexit means whatever we want it to mean.
