Should There be a Revote on Brexit?

[Stranger in a strange land]

It's unbelievable to me that people support this. So the government doesn't like how people voted-- now they can just hold the vote again, and again, and again, waiting for voters to get frustrated and fatigued, until they finally get the result they want? What an Orwellian approach to democracy.

52% voting to leave in a non-binding referendum - having no idea what the final divorce arrangement would look like - should not be held as the inviolable will of the people for all time. Times and circumstances change, which is why regular, recurring elections are essential to any healthy functioning democracy, and a threshold higher than a simple majority should generally be required for popular referendums.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Which seems to have been the objective of the EU negotiating with Britain over Brexit -to deter anyone else from going through the same process. 

Perhaps, but they've also made it damn certain that no further countries will want to join the EU without a prenup specifying what happens if there is a divorce.

Which doesn't seem like it would be such a bad thing... it certainly would have avoided a lot of problems if such a prenup between the UK and the EU had been in place. However, I can't really see who else would join the EU at this point: Turkey is obviously never going to happen and both sides have lost interest, Ukraine isn't going to happen either, nor is Russia (lol). Norway and Switzerland both have their own reasons why they won't join. Who else is there?