See here. This essay was written for Britain’s Guardian newspaper by someone (Larry Elliott) who was in favor of Brexit and who points out that a number of horrible consequences that were supposed to happen have not happened:
Unemployment would rocket. Tumbleweed would billow through deserted high streets. Share prices would crash. The government would struggle to find buyers for UK bonds. Financial markets would be in meltdown. Britain would be plunged instantly into another deep recession.
None of that has happened, though the author admits that Britain is still in the early stages of its new status. But he also makes clear that too many people talked about how terrible conditions would be if Britain were to exit from the EU, and that this was a bad strategy:
The remain camp was ill-advised to rely so heavily on its warnings of economic Armageddon, when only two regions of the country – London and the south-east – had seen GDP per head rise above the level before the 2008-9 recession. After weighing up the pros and cons, plenty of voters didn’t think they were risking all that much.
Also, once Brexit was voted on, lots of people in business and government began working on making sure that the economic Armageddon didn’t happen; in other words, all the horrible predictions were based on the idea that no one would actually do anything sensible afterwards.
I regard the Brexit vote as a rare example of the poor winning against the rich. Or perhaps the better analysis is that of the people with no access to the media winning against the media.