Part of me wants to do the "out" version of that. I want to say, "I didn't vote for it myself, quite honestly, but now that we're out, I'm determined to make it work." It's democracy and just because you don't agree with the will of the people doesn't mean you should stop them.
A petition to hold a second referendum quickly gained the required 100,000 signatures to be considered for discussion in parliament. I'm not sure we'll be left in there to discuss it. Corbyn may be going. Cameron is going. Looks like we will have a massive Johnson as a Prime Minister soon.
Wanting a "do over" till you get the result you want seems wrong. That's why we end up with so many bad drivers on the road who passed on their 35th attempt. Just when I was about to settle in and accept the result with good grace I spotted this.
"What is the E.U.?" is second most popular question Googled in Britain.
So some people voted in the referendum before they worked out what they were voting about? If you don't know what the EU is without the aid of Google maybe you shouldn't be allowed to vote. Maybe a little test should be included on the ballot. Nothing too complicated, the first part asked you if you want to:
Or "Remain in" ☐
Then the second part gives you a multiple choice
The EU ☐
The FA ☐
Or BHS ☐
I'm not saying it would solve the problem but it would help. I have suggested in the past we have an AV voting system with 9 candidates on the ballot, you number your choices 1 to 9, but then that's connected to a su doku and if it isn't filled in correctly it's a spoiled ballot.
I'm not suggesting the votes from the people who didn't know what they were voting about would have been for leave or remain but it seems that some people may have been taking a side without really thinking about it.
Does that mean we should consider that petition and hold a second EU referendum? Well, do you think the people who only just Googled the EU actually bothered to read anything on that search results page?
Definitely No ☐
Or Not A Chance ☐