Observer sees through the mist

Poor old Remainers are in a real interpretive battle over the forthcoming Euroelections: they are an exercise involving a popular vote but the wrong side seem to be winning, so they can't be a real expression of opinion after all.Hence the need for several bodily and facial contortions, as in the Observer editorial:

These European elections should not be treated as a proxy referendum: there is no distinct question being put to the public and turnout will probably be much lower than in a general election or referendum....[but] These EU elections should be about one question and one question alone: what happens next with Brexit? 

We urge voters to cast their ballot for one of the five parties explicitly in favour of a confirmatory referendum: the Lib Dems, the Greens, Change UK or, in Scotland and Wales, the SNP or Plaid Cymru.[a second chance after a long campaign,Project Fear Mk 65 etc, and a referendum choice only between May's deal and Remain? One specific proposition versus one romantic identification?

Labour is a Brexit party, under a Eurosceptic leader who has unequivocally committed the party to trying to deliver Brexit.[must be news to all the Remainers, but 'they are deluding themselves']...Labour should swing behind a referendum first because, as the Observer has long argued, it is the right thing to do: voters were not offered a firm proposition for how we should leave the EU in 2016; instead, the Leave campaigns sketched out a fantasy Brexit that would involve Britain seizing back control, freeing up vast pots of cash for hospitals and schools, all while delivering a big boost to the economy. 

And some realpolitik:

Labour should swing behind a referendum first because, as the Observer has long argued, it is the right thing to do: voters were not offered a firm proposition for how we should leave the EU in 2016; instead, the Leave campaigns sketched out a fantasy Brexit that would involve Britain seizing back control, freeing up vast pots of cash for hospitals and schools, all while delivering a big boost to the economy.  

So of the alternatives, there are still problems:

The Observer could not endorse every Green policy but enthusiastically backs their message about the urgency of the climate crisis. In coalition with David Cameron, the Lib Dems enabled five years of punitive and inequitable public spending cuts, but polling suggests they are the strongest national anti-Brexit party...While many are justifiably disappointed in Change UK’s overly tribal political tactics, their MPs undoubtedly did a brave thing in rejecting their former parties over their Brexit handling. And though the Observer is no supporter of Scottish or Welsh independence, the SNP and Plaid Cymru have consistently been strong anti-Brexit advocates for Scotland and Wales.

But, there is one overriding issue:

Brexit is the most important question facing the UK for decades and at last voters have an opportunity, albeit imperfect, to deliver a verdict.

I'll lay odds now that if the verdict is pro-Brexit, there will be further prevarication, denigration of the electorate, reinterpretations, denials, cries of foul etc. Can't wait for future Observer editorials