I suppose you could say that I am one of this group. But having been in wartime I don't qualify as being a baby boomer.
I voted to remain. (Does that make me a traitor to my age group?)
For me, the REAL tragedy of this situation is that by the time the real problems of Brexit take hold, many of the people who voted for it will be dead. Their short sighted, ignorant, ill-informed, self-indulgent little moment of idiocy will be their bequest to their children and their children's children.
I fully understand I am talking in generalised terms, and of course there are plenty of elderly people who voted remain - but the point is that disproportionately that age group voted leave and their votes were decisive in such a close result.
And your point about many of those voting being dead creates a real democratic issue - the vote to leave won't actually be enacted until 2019 at the very earliest (I suspect it will take several years longer) - by then quite a lot of the elderly 2016 leave voters will be dead, and a further group of current 15-17 year olds will be able to vote. SO even if none of those who actually voted in 2016 change their vote at all it is quite probably that the result would go the other way at the point of leaving, as the disproportionately leave elderly are replaced by disproportionately remain new voters.
I can't think of any other democratic example where there is such a gap between a vote and enacting its decision - in a general election you get a new government in a couple of days, the devolution votes produced assembles and parliament voted in place within 18 months.
And what this leads to is a strong argument for a second referendum at the point when there is a clear deal that can (if the vote is in favour) be enacted rapidly so is clearly the will of the people. I see today that John Major is now putting his weight behind calls for such a referendum.