Well the rebuttal to that would be that the Common Market was not on the referendum ballot, all polls leading up to the vote also showed the Norway Model was a non-starter .
1) Well, failure to put the proper options on the ballot does not effect what the voters want, which is staying in the Common Market
2) A government lying to its voters, we get everything we want, still free to travel and of course stay in the common market and so on, doesn´t change what the voters want when the bluff is called either, it does however remove all the cloud the vote had. One could make the argument that the actual vote was staying in the EU, as Norway model was a non-starter as you say and the only other option to stay in the common market, what is what the majority wants, is to stay in the EU. Implying to the voters that they can leave the EU and stay in the common market basically makes the whole thing voter fraud.
However, once the vote came in, we suddenly had Hard and Soft Brexit, Norway Model,
Funny, how you manage to say that no one talked about all that stuff and point out that the Norway model was a non-starter before the vote in the very same posting. ... which one is it?
Or course everybody was talking about hard vs. soft Brexit before the vote, they just didn´t call it that at that point.
As in all things, time will tell, the interesting thing is that there is a count down clock, which does not have an off switch.
No one is preventing the UK government from getting a mandate that can actually bare some weight. Put staying in the common market vs. not doing so on a ballot and have a vote, and you are all set. Of course that minority of people that want a hard Brexit is all the government cares about, and since the outcome is clear, they won´t do that. if a hard Brexit even had just the chances of a snowball in hell, they would have asked that question.
and their financial supporters.
you know in that kind of context that is code for "the jews", right?