Thread by @syrpis

One more thought from me on the PV v revoke debate; prompted by a number of interesting exchanges on here over the last days. I'll look here at the way these options look *from the perspective of leave voters*. Thread. 1/

First, there is one strand of leave voter who will not accept any path which leads to remain. The 2016 vote was an instruction which must be delivered. It represents the will of the people. Those who oppose it are anti-democratic. etc etc. 2/

This group will not be reconciled either to a PV or to revoke.

But... there is another strand of leave voter who would or might accept remain *so long as it is arrived at via a fair/legitimate process*. And that is the group I am interested in here. 3/

The question is whether they (and who knows how big/significant that group is...) would be more easily reconciled to remain via a PV or via revoke.

I would be interested in others' views. 4/

The case for revoke (as per the LDs) is a straightforward one. If revoke parties win a majority of seats in a GE, they will have a mandate to revoke.

There are problems with this approach. Can a GE win (with eg 35% of the vote) 'trump' the 2016 referendum? 5/

To me, the 'legitimacy' problems are the same as those facing any Govt elected with under 50% of the vote. They exist, but they have long been overlooked. 6/

They certainly didn't restrain Thatcher, Blair etc. More to the point, they will not restrain Johnson. In general, GE wins are taken as strong mandates to implement manifesto promises. Many leavers see this. 7/

But, perhaps the referendum changes things. Perhaps, leavers might think, only a second referendum can 'undo' the vote of 2016. 8/

The argument is (presumably) that while a GE win cannot 'undo' the referendum result, a second referendum can. The 2016 will of the people can be superseded by the 2019/2020 will of the people (but not expressed via a GE, only by a PV). 9/

To be honest, this is not a view I have encountered from leavers. I have heard it often from remainers, but not from leavers. In general, leavers are dismissive of the call for a PV. 10/

Many are dismissive because they think the 2016 vote cannot and should not be undone (and this group would oppose revocation too, of course).

But, some others might be inclined to endorse a PV... but only insofar as it is 'fair', and affords them 'credible' options. 11/

So... for example, they might endorse a PV without a remain option, in order to enable the public to pick the 'best' leave. Or... they might endorse a PV with a range of options; deal, no deal or remain. 12/

What they will not accept is a PV which does not give them their preferred options. A PV which offers them a choice between the WA (or something softer which Labour negotiates) and remain would, for many leavers, be no better than an establishment stitch-up. 13/

The LDs' revoke policy has (quite rightly) been scrutinised closely over the last week or so. The remain alternative, the PV, has, somewhat surprisingly, received rather less scrutiny. 14/

The key question for me is whether the PV (with a choice between the WA (or similar) and remain; as proposed by Labour and the Greens) represents a process which sufficient numbers of leavers will perceive as legitimate. 15/

My worry is that it will not. And that the PV campaign would stoke, rather than heal, divisions. Isn't it better to take the chance offered by the GE to obtain a mandate for revoke? 16/16

PS And then I saw this (and the various replies).

https://twitter.com/isaby/status/1174310086891769859