The significant change in any new vote, particularly a new referendum, would be that there are nearly three million people on the electoral role who were not there in 2016. Most of them would be young people, who, if electoral research is correct, would be 80% likely to vote remain. That is far higher than the 1.4 million margin for leave last time.

The relevant thing isn’t whether a referendum is preferable to a general election, or the other way round. It is a matter of which option is capable of being established.

The catchword "affront to democracy" which has become attached to the notion of a fresh referendum, but evidently not to a new general election is very strange. It just doesn't stand up to critical examination.

Unfortunately the fact that it is essentially a nonsensical label doesn’t stop it from being a very powerful one . It's rather like a term like "stab in the back" after a military defeat, or the lie that the 2008 crash was caused by Labour overspending. It's treated by many as true beyond question. It's an emperor parading openly with no clothes.