Seanchaidh said:
So... looks like George Galloway was right about Labour's position on Brexit? Or is there a better explanation?
There was really no electorally strong position for Labour to take on Brexit, because Labour rests on several large demographics with diametrically-opposed views on that issue. If they supported leaving the EU at this election, the urban voters, students, and youth would abandon them. If they supported remaining in the EU, the leave-voting working class in Northern England and North Wales would abandon them (as happened to some degree anyway). If they supported a referendum, they would keep some measure of both groups, and lose some measure of both groups.
What
could have ameliorated the damage Brexit did to Labour would have been adopting a position much earlier than they did, and providing a better defence of that position. I saw no politicians from Labour or the Lib Dems-- the "revoke and remain" party at this election-- making the point that the first election was decided
through proven illegal means.
Besides, 56% of the vote went to candidates supporting a second referendum or revoking altogether. And yet, it just doesn't matter. Under PR, this would be a hung parliament, with the Tories the largest party but a parliamentary majority for a second referendum.
The voting system decides the outcome. Which, one suspects, is the intent.