The 51% figure is merely the “finishing line” for where one has an unarguable outright majority.
Because “IN” represents the status quo - you are NOT going to have that turned over on a 33% “OUT” 32% “IN” poll. “First past the post” WILL be held up for the INs if they should “win” with this amount, BUT there is no way that this government is going to let everything get turned over without an outright majority - which is just over 50%. Sure, it could be 50.000000001%, but I simplify it by calling it 51% for this argument.
Any result which gives the OUT camp below 50% but with more votes than IN got - is going to be challenged - which will take months…
Meanwhile, the EU will just suggest we hold another referendum, with some extra concessions added to sway a few people that didn’t vote at all - to vote IN to bring back stability to the country.
All the time this “uncertain” period lags on - our domestic markets will be in turmoil.
Meanwhile, instead of giving some concessions to the public in his budget - Osbourne apparently intends to cut further.
If I were him, I’d match what we’re giving Brussels each year - and throw that into the pot for a “giveaway” budget distribution, and declare that the EU has kindly asked us for no further money for the tax year 2016-17.
They’ll not deny it - unless they want to pull the rug from Osbourne’s support of the IN campaign… He needs to play his position here.
If we appear to be getting better off this year BECAUSE of Osbourne and BECAUSE the EU accommodated him - a second ballot (NOT a second referendum!) would be a lot easier for IN to win this time.
You don’t so much try and get more people to vote “IN”… You just stop us wavering buggers from voting OUT, and get them to become apathetic, get back in their box, and stay at home instead…
Thus, second time around, the “OUT” poll remains static, but IN drops past it into second place… IN get declared the eventual winners.
The OUT then - MUST get over 50% in the first round - to prevent any further bull from occurring “later”.
