Yes for in, No for out

[TheFaQQer]

EU referendum: Staying in 'will be Yes campaign' - BBC News

[TykeMerc]

I wonder if they will do a binary vote or something a bit more complicated with options.

[MicrosoftBob]

They'll just get us to keep voting until we make the right choice, the public isn't to be trusted after all

[VectraMan]

They'll just get us to keep voting until we make the right choice, the public isn't to be trusted after all

Only about half the Irish people voted in their first referendum; they had another go as the vote didn't really represent the public (and the second time they voted in favour of whichever step of the EU it was so you can't say it was against the wishes of the public).

IMO If it's going to be a major change, it really should be a clear majority and that means counting the "leave us alone" non-voters as happy with the status quo. That's the only way to make it a fair representation of what the public wants because the people that want change are always going to be motivated to vote.

[DodgyAgent]

Only about half the Irish people voted in their first referendum; they had another go as the vote didn't really represent the public (and the second time they voted in favour of whichever step of the EU it was so you can't say it was against the wishes of the public).

IMO If it's going to be a major change, it really should be a clear majority and that means counting the "leave us alone" non-voters as happy with the status quo. That's the only way to make it a fair representation of what the public wants because the people that want change are always going to be motivated to vote.

If people do not vote they do not deserve ANY influence in the outcome of the EU. Just saying "they are happy with the status quo" is ridiculous. If they are happy with the status quo then they are equally happy with change.

[TheFaQQer]

If they are happy with the status quo then they are not happy with change.

FTFY to make more sense.

[DodgyAgent]

FTFY to make more sense.

If they are not happy with change then they would vote against it. If they don't vote it is because they are not interested in the outcome.

[TheFaQQer]

If they are not happy with change then they would vote against it. If they don't vote it is because they are not interested in the outcome.

Do you understand what status quo means?

I'll paraphrase what you wrote for you: "If they are happy to leave things as they are and not change anything, then they are equally happy to change things"

[VectraMan]

If people do not vote they do not deserve ANY influence in the outcome of the EU. Just saying "they are happy with the status quo" is ridiculous. If they are happy with the status quo then they are equally happy with change.

In what way is a referendum about what people deserve?

There's a difference between being happy with the way things are, and getting off your arse and going to a polling station to express it. Naturally people who want change are much more likely to express it; nobody takes to the streets to protest about how happy they are with everything. So any vote is going to be heavily skewed in favour of the Nos. If we agree that we want a referendum so the people can have a say on the EU, then the result needs to be clear. Only about 33% turned out for the last round of MEP elections where UKIP did so well. If we had 33% turn out for a referendum, and just over half voted us out, the future of the country would be decided by only 16.5% of the population. Would you be satisfied that democracy had been served; that the will of the people had been expressed?

[TheFaQQer]

Would you be satisfied that democracy had been served; that the will of the people had been expressed?

If they vote "no", DA will be delighted. If they vote "yes" then he'll explain how it wasn't fair because the turnout was so low.