That's heavily down to the way our democracy works in a general election (first past the post) versus the referendum. 

In the referendum it's a straight split, and there is some evidence from polls that the result may change if it was held now although it's always pretty close.

In a general election though, there are far more constituencies in England and Wales that voted to leave versus remain, especially when you leave the cities so the politicians who have seats in those areas have no choice but to support Leave to save their own careers (even if they support remaining in the EU). The one exception is Scotland but Labour have pretty much given up on getting back any seats in Scotland from the SNP.  

The other caveat is that the opposition leader is a closet Leave supporter albeit from a far-left perspective. 

The other thing is a person votes leave and changes thier mind, they do not become a Remain person either. 

They of course sympathize with leave ideas even still. 

True, although most polls account for that (they take how you voted and ask how you would vote if asked again). 

One thing that isn't mentioned and isn't picked up that well by the polls is voting demographics. A lot of leave voters were part of the older generations who vote in numbers but are (as horrible as it is to say) likely to die before the UK leaves the EU. 

A lot of Remain voters were young and don't vote in numbers, but there will be more people that weren't eligible to vote that will be eligible by the time the UK leaves the EU. 

With such fine margins, minor points like this can tip the scales. 

I don't think he hates women, he's definitely not racist and he doesn't constantly lie. He never stops running his mouth though so he's bound to get things factually incorrect at times, which makes him look silly.

People voted for stricter controls on immigration, jobs, destruction of the PC culture and they voted for a reformation of the dishonest media.

Trumps seems to be working on all these things already.

Respecting democracy means coming to terms with the unintended consequences there afterwords ...

Elected leaders are only legally binding to to represent the people, not to enforce the will of the citizens ...

Which is why representative democracy is not true democracy. It's more like one-day democracy.

lol i think it's an english thing. Every once in a while they feel the need to break things just cause they can. Obviously, they later regret it. But it's a cyclical short memory cycle.

In a way, i wish the worst case scenario happened because i get amused seeing them burn themselves. It's a karma thing. It makes you feel like theres a sense of justice in the world when people get what they deserve.
Sadly only about under half of the voters deserve that. The other half i feel sorry for.

Imagine... just imagine if he went and sank the russian vessel to make himself look like a "hero". Many people still don't realise what they have done, but what a wake up call that would be. 

If we had a fine and granular democracy where we would have to vote on every issue, it would cripple our voting system ... 

It's a miracle that democracy works even with a potential upwards hundreds of millions of electorates when many of the founding fathers didn't even have democracy in mind and it shows in the original consitution ... 

Well, obviously I don't just want to switch into direct democracy with everything else the same. The whole system would have to change.

What part of the system are you speaking of that would have to change ?