However, it didn't specific what either would consist of, in binding terms at least
3/
It wasn't an election, so no new gvt, plus no manifesto commitments either
That meant both sides cld pitch for votes however they liked
4/
Thus both sides built up huge coalitions of voters, bound only by decision that their interests would be served by voting a particular way
5/
So intrinsically the case that the winning coalition would contain many disappointed voters, who'd not voted for whatever particular version actually happened
6/
(NB would have happened if Remain won too)
7/
Put differently, Leave campaign didn't care why you voted Leave, just that you did
8/
However - and this moves us to the 2nd element - having chosen to leave, also evident that costs have to be apportioned
9/
Costs come in two flavours.
1st, there's the transitional costs: moving from status quo ante to new situation implies change, and thus costs
10/
But also, 2nd, there are more permanent costs, arising for reduced level of economic integration, whatever form of Brexit occurs
11/
(NB it's not that no-one can benefit, but that overall there is a cost)
12/
As shape of Brexit becomes clearer (even if Chequers isn't necessarily it), so too do costs, so to be expected that more people are unhappy about it
13/
Brexit is and always has been an exercise in apportioning costs.
That further collapses the #EUref coalition, as chickens come home to roost, scaring away the unicorns
14/
The difficult will be that opposing one form of Brexit does not necessarily make finding another, more acceptable form any easier
All forms will have costs to someone
15/
Thus outcome might say more about relative power/influence of groups to resist costs, than about intrinsic merits of that outcome
16/
Which is probably another reason to unhappy about it all
Possibly more for me than for you, let's try to pull this week together a bit:
1/
Let's start with the EU side
Having largely kept heads down during conference season, yesterday's Tusk/Varadkar presser demonstrated that EU is keeping the pressure on
2/
The tension seems to be between COM/EUCO and IE, as @pmdfoster explained well yesterday: IE making conciliatory noises, central EU bodies pushing EU integrity line
Back in Sept, there was much talk about this being a crunch point in the UK debate, as May would come under fire for Chequers and there would be scope for changes/realignments/whatever
2/
Certainly that first bit has happened, with numerous op-eds over the weekend and assorted fringe events (inc. yesterday's Johnson speech)
3/