AND here is what a voter told the BBC:

[Igel]

23. And people are people.

A majority of voters are convinced they're the cat's meow, fully informed with all the facts and of sound mind and reason.

Most of the rest just act on emotion and at have the wisdom to admit what most of the majority is too self-absorbed to admit.

Just remember, most revolutions are emotionally satisfying and empowering when they happen, but suck for most of the people.

"I want change" can involve restructuring things in a stable way that's good, but even the American Revolution led to

--years of war
--years of depression
--a failed state and constitution
--a new state and constitution with a lot of instability
--a civil war, for some about slavery, for some about states' rights, but ultimately about the strength of the federal government

It was bloody and messy to achieve stability, and that's being upset again. But the French, 1848, Russian, Hitlerian, Maoist revolutions all ended badly and were mostly undone (or should be ... China is basically a fascist state but we're blinded by the label "communist" to notice). The Velvet Revolution might still go wrong, but arguably what's going on there isn't a result of that revolution at all. The Orange Revolution turned bitter, the White Revolution never got off the ground.

Most revolutions suck, but if we don't know history we still go dewy-eyed at the idea of empowerment and our upcoming revolutionary apotheosis. Most revolutionaries suffer Lucifer's fate for all the same reasons.