> You don't get a re-do just because you didn't like the outcome. To say otherwise opens you up to the same kind of bullshit when things turn out the way you li

> You don't get a re-do just because you didn't like the outcome. To say otherwise opens you up to the same kind of bullshit when things turn out the way you like and the _other_ side doesn't like the result. Sure you do. Why not? And everyone is always vulnerable to revisions of their accomplishments: the fact that, in the US, the ACA was passed in 2010 doesn't mean that Republicans are banned from amending or changing it for all eternity. Every two years, Americans get a re-do on voting for their representatives. And we... kind of get by. I don't see why giving UK voters another vote is some terrible Stalinist undermining of democracy. It's split near 50/50 either way, and it seems silly to let whether it's raining or not, or Russian-sponsored media campaigns, determine an important policy matter like this. Voters in 2016 are not sacrosanct, brilliant policymakers whose decisions have to be respected for all eternity.