Literally the first sentence of your link:

The vote came after police stopped guarding presidential buildings, allowing protesters in, and parliament made new high-level appointments.

How is that any different from the secession referendums held in the east? Protesters took over government buildings, held a vote, what'dya know, the vote went the way the protesters wanted. In both cases, of course, the protesters were carrying assault rifles.

If the capitol police had stopped guarding the government buildings in Washington and let the Jan 6'ers take full control, and then Congress held a vote in favor of the the Jan 6'ers demands, would that be a legitimate vote?

all regions that are legally part of Ukraine being able to vote.

I'm not sure why I'm supposed to be concerned about what's "legal" when looking at geopolitics. And if I was, I'd probably say that Yanukovych should be reinstated as acting president to oversee new elections (or, if you'd prefer I treat armed men seizing government buildings as "legal," then I would say that the referendums in the disputed territories were legitimate. You don't get to have it both ways). Which, of course, is impossible. About as impossible as thinking that Ukraine is somehow going to break the stalemate and regain all its territorial claims. I am a realist and a pragmatist, not a legalist.

I see little difference for the average person between life under the Ukrainian government and life under the Russian government, including before the war. What are the rights Ukrainians have that Russians don't? I do see a significant difference between being drafted and forced to die in a ditch for the glory of the motherland, vs not doing that. Peace is more important than reclaiming "legal" territory.

War is the continuation of politics by other means, and the political question that led to the war was simply whether Ukraine would send it's resources east or west. That's what the war is being fought over, not some high-minded ideal. And the minerals are not worth the cost, neither in cold financial terms, nor in terms of the lives being sacrificed for them.

It's unfortunate that Ukrainians are being used as pawns in the Great Game like this, and I do feel for them. If my government had sent them more aid for domestic development and to actually improve people's lives, then perhaps people in the eastern regions would've been more inclined to stay. There are countless other countries in the world right now that are in a similar situation right now, where our neglect and lack of investment is pushing them towards China, and we could earn their loyalty for pennies on the dollar of what we're spending on bombs.

There's also regions in the US that are economically neglected, providing a fertile breeding ground to the far-right, which is, frankly, way more urgent to address than any other concern on the planet. I mean, if the US goes full Nazi, then what does it matter if it maintains it's influence over the far reaches of Eastern Europe? We should get our own house in order before we go worrying about expanding the empire.