In what world is 51.89%/48.11% "so clear"? You make it sound like it was 90%.
A tiny majority believed the unicorny promises, and voted for the unicorn in 2016.
After three years of mucking about, it turns out that the best the town council can get is either a very old and haggard pony with an inflatable novelty unicorn horn (Johnson's deal), or the rotting cadaver of a dead horse with a carrot glued on its head (no-deal Brexit).
Obviously, one of these two must happen, because the people voted for it. Keeping the perfectly serviceable horse they have now is not an option, because democracy has spoken, and changing your mind is not allowed (because democracy).
Granted, as a European I may be a bit cynical about this mess.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_United_Kingdom_European_C...
Maastricht and Lisbon treaty would of been key changes in that transition that many countries had votes (and also revotes) upon. The UK, did not alas and it is pretty obvious that it should of.
Ironically, the children of 1975 era had no say in their future until 2016 and you can see how they voted. Also those that who in 1975 voted to join the ECM, turned out to be twice as likely to vote to leave the EU in 2016.
But the whole aspect of thresholds is one that does need some thought and equally turnout. Maybe voting should be compulsory? Maybe threshold standards need to be defined. After all, does the EU really want to have members who are not that commited to the goals?
Democracy is a fickle matter depending upon how you measure it.
Both predicting and contributing to this crisis was George Soros, who shorted the pound sterling and profited immensely from it. This is one of many reasons he is a controversial figure in some circles.
If they did a referendum upon the Pound and the Euro in the UK, the result would be much clearer and conclusive than any membership referendum. Heck, even Scotland if it leaves the UK, wants to keep the Pound.
AS for the Euro, it worries me, so much QE has been actioned by the ECB, that it just feels like, once that eventually stops https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eurozone-ecb-qe/the-life-... though they have instigated new QE measures this year.
One aspect the UK has impacted the Euro has been in blocking (as a members vote) many initiatives to control the financial markets and with that, been instrumental in curtailing the controls needed for a large encompassing currency.
But I totally disagree that the UK's primary reason for adopting the Euro was due to the ERM shenanigans. https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/215/uncategorized/why-uk-... covers some reasons. But to say it is complicated is part and parcel of any currency control.
Remember, the UK's key income area's are Financial and Services, two area's in which the EU has been stymied to take control of, mostly due to it not being in the UK's main interest. Heck, even opening up services has been a backfoot EU initiative with members still not opening up those markets. But that is another matter, equally complicated and hard to summarize in a few sentences.
It's not the referendum that's to blame here, it's the government that's using the referendum as an excuse to push through their own ideas.