brainstatic:

Let me see if I’m understanding the Brexit scenarios correctly. There are essentially 4:

1. Brexit happens as planned, it’s calamitous, the UK dissolves because no one wants to starve to death because of England’s bad decisions.

2. They find a way to do a “soft Brexit” whereby the UK stays in the eurozone but has no representation in the EU parliament, essentially becoming an EU vassal state that’s in some ways less sovereign than it was before, but they get to avoid food and medicine rationing.

3. They rip up the whole thing because it was never technically binding, there’s a mass outcry, the legitimacy of the government takes a hit, but life goes on.

4. They do a kind of pocket veto because they can technically prolong this forever. They hope that everyone will just sort of forget it’s happening, and in 200 years the fact that the UK is still trying to leave the EU on paper becomes one of those quirky historical factoids.

And, not to belabor this again, but they’re only in this mess because David Cameron wanted an official dick measuring for himself and pensioners got convinced by words on the side of a bus? I know I keep asking that, and I keep getting the same answer, but I just need to hear it reaffirmed every time, because I don’t totally process that this isn’t the product of a war or something.