To do that, you need to keep the other EU institutions

This was discussed YEARS ago

YEARS.

No use doing anything based on the 2017 election

Well that was the latest results we can use

I suppose you could use the European elections

But even there, remain got a majority of votes.

You know, there is one thing about elections.
You know about safe seats? And wasted votes?
In elections. Votes in swing seats matter more then ones in save seats.
But in the referendum a vote in the north of england matters just as much as a banker in london

I'm not looking at seats, because our system is broken. I'm looking at votes.

The number of individual votes, not seats.

Great for ignoring my point by saying the system is broken.
If we do get vote splitting. Were more people vote for the conservatives and brexit party, who are both leave. But the remain lib dems get in because they have the most votes.
I guess that would be fair for you.
Because your remain side would win.

Sorry: 13,929,001
That is how many people voted remain

> Great for ignoring my point
Your point is stupid, because it's dependent on SEATS which is flawed because of FPTP.

Again, your basing your entire argument on seats.

you know. Define which parties are remain parities and which are leave
Because apparently I don't know

I'm basing it on number of votes.

I don't care about the number of seats, because the system which determines the number of seats a party gets is flawed.

Do you understand that?

Yes I know that FPTP is flawed because of gerrymandering.

FPTP is flawed becuse it requires all the supporters to be condensed into one area.

that is what gerrymandering is

It's also flawed because it does not provide representation in terms of seats to the party that lost.

I suppose, yeah when looking at the definition

Usually there's attached connotation to it, so I don't use it

Actually, I'll argue it *kinda* isn't in some cases

ok.
So what about my next point.
Which parties do you define as leave and which are remain?

For example, UKIP gained ~13% of the vote, but only 1 seat in parliament, BUT the district boundaries weren't manipulated in anyway, so it wasn't *really* gerrymandering

In 2017, Labour, SNP, Lib Dems and SF were de facto pro-remain and the Tories, DUP and UKIP were pro-leave

Looking though the 2017 labour manifesto it say that "Labour accepts the referendum result".
It mentions a *Brexit deal*
So the **intent** on leaving is there. Just that the methods that Labour intend to use are so shoddy.

> It mentions a Brexit deal
A deal which would see us remain in the Customs Union.. For which the EU has stated, that the other EU institutions must be accepted.

So that means. Free movement of people and labour and the EU courts

So that's why I said they're de facto pro-remain.

I agree they are de facto.
But I imagine it's Labour's way of trying to sit on the fence and appeal to both camps.
Something they are still trying to do now.

Now they're fully pro-remain. They're offering a deal they will never get, so will be stuck with ~~Mays~~ Boris's deal; which they will take to the people, since a majority don't support it, remain will win.

labour is stuck between the champagne socialists, the marxists, and the working class theyre supposed to represent

And everything will be overturn.
So just like what the establishment wants

Yep

Both the people and establishment want to remain 🤷

>The establishment want to remain
FIFY

no, the people want parliament to do what they were asked

And looking at the vast-amount of polls and the results of 2017, the people too 😉