Ratified? Remain lost. No ifs, no buts. It failed. Was rejected.

Can you tell me in what way, shape or form putting Remain on a second referendum is 'democractic'? Types of Leave, then perhaps (and I write that through gritted teeth) but having 'Remain' again? Makes no logical sense.

An election with parties standing on clear manifesto promises to Revoke A50, that I get. No issues at all. Despise them for it, would rather smash myself in the face with a hammer than vote for it but it is a valid political ambition to promote and then subject yourself slings and arrows of the democractic process on.

But another referendum with Remain on the paper when the result of the first one has not been implemented, that has ZERO democractic legitimacy. Absolutely nothing.

You could perhaps argue that if you have a clear manifesto promise in an election prior to this second referendum being held then you might just be able to still use the 'D' word to describe yourself but let us be clear. The plan is to foist another referendum on us without a GE first. That is what all this wrangling is about.

If they wanted a GE we would be in the middle of the campaign now. In fact we should be, given all the conventions around how our democracy is meant to work. We have a Zombie Government and a Zombie Parliament. It should be submitting itself to the British people today for a chance to resolve that awful situation. But it is not. And that is because of Remain Retards not wanting to actually submit this second referendum nonsense to the stress test of a GE.

LOL. Control? If he was truly a leader of the 'Opposition' then he would have submitted a vote of no confidence and we would be in a general election campaign. Or do you think it is positive that we have an executive unable to achieve anything.

Corbyn was a man of principle (his record of voting on the EU shows that although I suspect you wont be championing that) but that has faded. Now he leads a party with whom he disagrees on much with when it comes to the only major issue.

Because he's openly supported pretty much every enemy of this country for his entire political career. This includes a long list of terrorists.

Because giving him privileged access to classified information would present a major security issue. How would you feel for example as a British agent working in a hostile foreign country knowing Corbyn holds his life in your hands?

Because we all know he is a communist which in many peoples eyes (people that pay attention to history) is just as bad as being a fascist. How many times have you seen him making a speech alongside the hammer and sickle?

Because people know he would be unwilling to protect his own citizens if it came to it. He would remove our nuclear deterrence, ruin the relationship with our major allies and likely direct funding towards our enemies.

Because he will introduce discriminatory laws under the banner of "social justice" that will effectively turn the native British population into second class citizens.

Because people know he would ruin our economy in very short order due to his plans to aim multiple punitive taxes mainly to the top 5% of earners in this country.

Because he values "equity" over freedom and only they get to decide what that means.

It is funny when people who will call any mild economic forecast ‘Project Fear’ will happily rattle off paragraphs like this.

It is funny when people who will call any mild economic forecast ‘Project Fear’ will happily rattle off paragraphs like this.

I think that's the least contentious claim.

Then there is always his personality to take into account. I would never trust anyone displaying his extreme level of repressed anger.

I'm convinced from all I've seen of him that he wants to hurt people.