[rst]

Or a second referendum held once the terms of the actual withdrawal deal were known, and fell far short of the Leave campaign's promises of, in effect, retaining all the benefits of membership. The EU was still declaring at that point that were the UK Parliament to vote to end the Article 50 process and retain membership, they'd be willing to forget the whole thing.

[c7DJTLrn]

>Or a second referendum held once the terms of the actual withdrawal deal were known

Exactly, nobody voting for Brexit even knew what they were voting for! Many just had some nebulous, fantastical idea of independence from some "evil" organisation in Brussels.

[pasttense01]

Actually a lot of politicians and media were talking about something like the EFTA (Norway, etc) arrangement with the EU--and this is what a lot of voters wanted. So they ended up with something vastly different from what they wanted [and would have voted Remain if they had known what the final result was going to be.]

[disgruntledphd2]

To be fair, this made absolutely no sense. It would have been less harmful yes, but a large financial power like the UK would never have accepted being a rule taker.

I mean that happened anyway, but at least they don't need to keep all of the laws.

Honestly, I never understood why EFTA made any sense for the UK (although as an Irish person I'd have been very happy if they went that way).