I could set out the factual errors in your summary, but I think I'd just be doing it for my own benefit. I admit that I'm an avowed Remainer, because I believe that, flawed as it is, the EU does a pretty good job in offsetting the pendulum swings of national politics and providing a trading environment that unifies tariffs and regulations in the world's biggest single market. It has also done far more for the UK than any party political govt has ever done to stimulate regional growth and infrastructure. Three cheers for 'our' sort of democracy. So much misinformation has been spread - and a lot of it repeated in this thread - that truth has become almost irrelevant.
Also almost irrelevant is that the referendum was flawed, tainted and fundamentally ill-conceived. I honestly don't believe that a second referendum (whether it is given a confrontational title like 'People's Referendum' or not) will repair the damage that has been done. I also don't believe that it will achieve a meaningful result. You have a system of democracy and 650 MPs to deliver not you want, but what they conclude is best for you. All the referendum achieved was to provide a cloak of public opinion for these 'representatives' to hide behind and convince themselves that they are fulfilling The Wish of the People.
It could have been handled differently, to be a less abrupt and less damaging process, but we have David Cameron to thank for that. The one glimmer of hope is that he will face retribution, if not in this life, then in the next, for the damage he has done to Britain for a generation to come.
As of this evening, it appears that you are in the hands of the DUP again. A small religious faction on the fringe of British politics will decide the fate of the country. I can only wish you well.
You are correct the establishment only believes in the results of election / referendums if it meets their aims, anything else is a mistake and must be corrected. Hence the media histrionics after Donald Trump was elected, our Brexit votes and numerous contested results in third world countries.
Even the language has changed, from holding what used to be called "differing views", now is called just "wrong", with the expectation that a differing opinion is incorrect and therefore worthless and may be disregarded.
Whatever the outcome of Brexit there will be interesting times ahead for democracy. But then democracy is too old fashioned for the twenty-first century isn't it?
If I have, then I apologise unreservedly.
I have tried to inwardly digest the whole thread, as it has progressed, so may very well have forgotten some of the views offered . . . . .who says retirement is fun?
I have to admit being somewhat frustrated at the apparent entrenched positions of both sides of this arguement.
(At this point I have to state that I voted leave, for a myriad of reasons), but, I can remember, see and hear the constant stream of distortions being delivered by both cabals.
The thing that really sticks in my craw is the constant whining about a 'peoples vote' which is another refurendum, disguised so that (they think) the great unwashed won't recognise it.
IF there is another refurendum, irrespective of the result, I want at least best of 3 and would prefer best of 5.
We have the political system we have. Right or wrong, it is what it is.
There was an election, a refurendum and another election. The results are what they are, they cannot be changed.
If the result had been to remain, would I be screaming cheat, liar, I want another one? No I wouldn't.
I lost the refurendum i n 1975 and suffered 18 years of the EEC (OK, not so bad) and 25 years of the Eu as a result. I have never whined about wanting a 'peoples vote' just because I didn't like the outcome . . . . .which I didn't.
There has never been a vote or refurendum, on being part of the Eu, until 2016. The result was leave.
Please, everyone, lets just get on with it.