And you'd be wrong. Completely, resounding, and demonstrably wrong.
Actually, you are right about one thing. You're absolutely right that we voted to leave. And we did leave. You got exactly what you asked for.
But here's what I think some people are missing about how democracy actually works. Democracy doesn't stop after one vote.
Think about it this way. Every few years, we have general elections. We vote in a government, and if we don't like what they've done, we vote them out next time. That's not "anti-democratic" - that's literally how democracy works.
Local elections happen regularly too. We don't say "well, you voted for these councillors four years ago, so you can never change your mind." That would be absurd.
The same principle applies here. We left the EU - that's done. But if the British people now look at the results and think "actually, this isn't working out how we hoped," then having another say is exactly what democracy looks like.
And let's be honest about what the polls are telling us. Survey after survey shows growing support for rejoining. That's not politicians pushing an agenda - that's the British people changing their minds based on what they've experienced.
Here's something worth remembering: Brexit was never going to give everyone what they wanted, because different people wanted completely different things.
Some people voted to leave because they wanted stricter immigration controls. Others wanted more global trade opportunities. Some wanted to "take back control" of our laws. Others were frustrated with EU bureaucracy.
The problem is, these goals often contradicted each other. You can't have completely open global trade while also having total control over who comes into your country. You can't have all the benefits of EU membership while also having none of the obligations.
So yes, we left. But did you get everything you were promised? Did immigration fall the way you were told it would? Are we doing amazing trade deals around the world? Is our sovereignty somehow more "sovereign" than it was before?
Actually, the sovereignty argument has always puzzled me a bit, if I'm honest. The UK government still makes UK laws. We always did, even when we were in the EU. Our democratically elected parliament then votes them through.
What EU membership actually did was let us pool our sovereignty with our closest neighbours and trading partners. Think about it like this: if you're trying to negotiate with much bigger countries like the US, China, or India, would you rather do it as one country of 67 million people, or as part of a bloc of 500 million?
Look at other successful regional partnerships around the world. Countries everywhere are forming closer ties with their neighbours because that's how you get things done in a globalised world. Whether it's ASEAN in Southeast Asia, or various trading partnerships across Africa and the Americas - successful countries work together with their neighbours.
We've essentially diminished our negotiating position on the world stage, then expressed surprise when other countries don't offer us preferential terms in trade negotiations.
Our economy has demonstrably taken a hit. That's not political rhetoric - that's what the data shows. When economic growth falters, everything else becomes considerably more challenging. There's reduced revenue for the NHS, for schools, for infrastructure maintenance, for all the public services that actually matter to families.
Higher taxation becomes inevitable because there's less economic activity to generate revenue from. Investment in infrastructure becomes more constrained because there's reduced capital circulation. The improvements that would genuinely enhance people's lives - better transport networks, more affordable housing, enhanced public services - all become significantly more difficult when your economy is underperforming relative to its potential.
Rejoining the single market and customs union wouldn't solve every problem overnight. But it would remove a lot of the friction that's currently making trade harder and more expensive. That means more opportunities for British businesses, more jobs, and ultimately more money available for the things we all care about.
So here's the truth of the matter @brexitbarbie and anyone who voted Leave in 2016: you won. We left. But democracy didn't end that day.
If sufficient numbers of people now believe that leaving hasn't delivered the outcomes we hoped for, then having that conversation represents exactly what a healthy democracy should do. It's not about invalidating your vote - it's about evaluating the consequences and asking whether this remains the path we want to pursue.
The question we need to confront honestly is this: what exactly have we achieved by leaving? We were promised greater sovereignty, yet we're a diminished force in international negotiations. We were promised prosperity through global trade deals, yet our economic performance has deteriorated. We were told we'd have more control over our borders, yet immigration levels haven't fallen as promised. At what point do we acknowledge that the promises made simply haven't materialised?
Democracy demands that we think critically about results, not cling to decisions regardless of their outcomes. If Brexit was supposed to make Britain stronger, more prosperous, and more in control of its destiny, then surely we should be able to point to concrete evidence of these improvements.
The absence of such evidence isn't a reason to double down - it's a reason to reconsider.