I'm curious how that's even a rebuttal of anything. The majority in 2016 disagreed with me, to be sure, and I reluctantly accepted that at the time. But that was three years ago. Democracies are free to reevaluate their decisions. What was it David Davis once said? "If a democracy cannot change its mind, then it ceases to be a democracy." He was correct; oddly, he seems less keen on accepting this argument now that it works against him.
There is no time limit to this, either. A letter in the Times today points out one remarkable example from the cradle of Democracy, ancient Athens, where they held a vote one day and then the very next day reversed their decision. We've had three years, in which time it should have become clear that, at the very least, the current direction in which Brexit is being pursued is completely unsatisfactory.
I am, admittedly, arguing for reversing or stopping the process altogether, but how can I do anything else? It's what I believe in. And, even though you do not, then, in the first place, we agree that Parliament must reject Theresa May's deal, and in the second place we should both agree that Parliament will need to find a different direction. It will need to create the time needed to do this, and if not, then you are grossly underestimating the effects of that decision.