“If the general public was the parliament then you’d see the same divisions:”
But the general public is not the Parliament. Parliament agreed to implement the result of the referendum. A new Parliament then went on to trigger A50 and enacted legislation to facilitate our withdrawal. The deadlock that has occurred has happened because 80% (or thereabouts) of MPs had any intention of securing a proper Brexit (one which saw the UK free of the Single Market, the Customs Union and the jurisdiction of the ECJ as a minimum). All the various options that have been debated are ways to avoid that proper withdrawal. Whatever your interpretation of “Leave” is, it must include those three elements as a minimum. That is what people were told (and warned) that leaving the EU would entail. There simply is no point in leaving if those elements are not secured because it would mean following EU regulations, being unable to secure trade deals that are in the UK’s sole interests and being bound by rulings of a foreign court.
It was for politicians to devise a way to secure the UK’s departure and ensuring that at least those three criteria were met. They’ve failed because their hearts were never in the job and they’ve used the excuse that there was a need to satisfy the requirements of those who voted to Remain (i.e. those whose choice came second in a binary referendum). They’ve rejected Mrs May’s deal (which was not a proper Brexit anyway), they’ve dismissed No Deal and ruled out just about any other form of departure (almost all of which were also not proper Brexit). Their (I would argue deliberate) failure means that Brexit will not be secured.