It's not a 'try' Pete, it's how things are. All the data regarding leave-voting correlations is in the public domain, but, like with religion, the true believers in Brexit aren't interested in any of it as they have their own gut feeling and internal story to follow rather than any need for harsh reality. Arguing against being portrayed as a zealot by acting like one isn't fooling anyone. Just because you personally buck a trend doesn't deny the trend exists.
And no, if you move the words the other way round it wouldn't mean the same thing, that's a pathetically weak argument akin to the theist claims of "oh, you just have faith in science, it's the same thing". It's a sad state of affairs that you can't really understand what's driving your own beliefs and behaviour and have to take the immature attitude of "Oh all the remainers are the same as me and therefore I'm justified in wearing my blinkers".
I respect the sovereignty of Parliament, Pete. I don't believe the result of an advisory referendum (one that would have been declared void if it had been binding) should be respected over the informed processes of the elected representatives if the result of that referendum has been shown repeatedly to be unworkable. I would have agreed that it would have been wrong of Parliament to just ignore the result altogether but years down the line and with no sign of resolution across the border, it's time to accept that there isn't an acceptable path to any Brexit resolution that could be considered 'successful', unless your single measure of success for the country is 'not in the EU'.
And I'm not interested in your glib 'oh so clever' one liners that end in an ellipsis as if you're twisting the knife on a particularly barbed point...
