How, should I vote in the EU referendum ?

[Hazir]

In 2 days I will have to make a choice on what to do about the EU referendum in The Netherlands. The question of the referendum is: Are you in favour of or opposed to the law for the ratification of the association treaty between the EU and Ukraine?.

First of all let me state my opinion on the ratification of the treaty itself; allthough I have some doubts about the regime we'd be agreeing this deal with, I think that the chances for Ukraine to benefit from this deal are rather big, while the costs for the EU are tiny. With minor reservations I am in favor of ratification.

If only things were that easy.

The rules of the referendum are; 30% of the electorate has to cast a vote, if a majority votes against the law the Second chamber of the parliament has to reconsider. Technically that means they could still vote to ratify, but it's extremely unlikely.

Polls in The Netherlands show that there is a substantive minority against the law. I don't know what the figures right now are, but think arond 20%. However, they are a huge majority of the people who are likely to go and vote in the referendum. If the 30% threshold is just reached there's a good chance two-thirds of the vote will have been cast in opposition.

In general I am in favor of voting as a principle; it's a civic duty as far as I am concerned. This time however I feel like I am forced to vote in a referendum that was cooked up by people who merely saw the EU Ukraine ratification law as the first stick they could find to hit. The organizers have pretty openly stated they don't care at all about the deal itself, they want this to be the first step on the path out of the EU. Part of them are honest eurosceptics, part of them are Putin admirers of the worst kind (we're getting a nice example of how that whole fifth column thing works).

Now, I could go and vote in support of the law. That however could mean that my vote just helps that the 30% threshold being reached so that the 'no's' have it. Which I really don't want.

So there you have my dilemma for this wednesday; to vote or not to vote?

[RandBlade]

Vote for what you believe in.

If you abstain in order to decrease turnout then that's only going to increase the majority for the no's giving them more moral authority and momentum.

Besides your vote is only one in millions. At the end of the day your individual vote is not going to decide whether turnout threshold is reached or not, so vote for what you believe in and sleep easy.

[Aimless]

Vote, and spend tomorrow publicly laying out some of your reasons for voting in favor of ratification in order to passively reach as many reasonable but lazy people as you can.

[LittleFuzzy]

In 2 days I will have to make a choice on what to do about the EU referendum in The Netherlands. The question of the referendum is: Are you in favour of or opposed to the law for the ratification of the association treaty between the EU and Ukraine?.

First of all let me state my opinion on the ratification of the treaty itself; allthough I have some doubts about the regime we'd be agreeing this deal with, I think that the chances for Ukraine to benefit from this deal are rather big, while the costs for the EU are tiny. With minor reservations I am in favor of ratification.

If only things were that easy.

The rules of the referendum are; 30% of the electorate has to cast a vote, if a majority votes against the law the Second chamber of the parliament has to reconsider. Technically that means they could still vote to ratify, but it's extremely unlikely.

Polls in The Netherlands show that there is a substantive minority against the law. I don't know what the figures right now are, but think arond 20%. However, they are a huge majority of the people who are likely to go and vote in the referendum. If the 30% threshold is just reached there's a good chance two-thirds of the vote will have been cast in opposition.

In general I am in favor of voting as a principle; it's a civic duty as far as I am concerned. This time however I feel like I am forced to vote in a referendum that was cooked up by people who merely saw the EU Ukraine ratification law as the first stick they could find to hit. The organizers have pretty openly stated they don't care at all about the deal itself, they want this to be the first step on the path out of the EU. Part of them are honest eurosceptics, part of them are Putin admirers of the worst kind (we're getting a nice example of how that whole fifth column thing works).

Now, I could go and vote in support of the law. That however could mean that my vote just helps that the 30% threshold being reached so that the 'no's' have it. Which I really don't want.

So there you have my dilemma for this wednesday; to vote or not to vote?

Paraphrasing here

"Sorry, your not-voting strategy doesn't make sense. Basically what you are telling us is that you don't know what the overall turn-out will be so you move over to a voting strategy that should eliminate the vote you don't like. Given the situation I think the logical approach would be to let your vote be decided by who you'd like to see as the next President of the USA who you'd like to be associated with in the EU.

[Hazir]

Paraphrasing here

"Sorry, your not-voting strategy doesn't make sense. Basically what you are telling us is that you don't know what the overall turn-out will be so you move over to a voting strategy that should eliminate the vote you don't like. Given the situation I think the logical approach would be to let your vote be decided by who you'd like to see as the next President of the USA who you'd like to be associated with in the EU.

See here a not very smart attempt at being funny. It falls flat on its face as I state clearly what I want the outcome to be before I pose the question about strategy. I am not choosing between alternative outcomes but alternative strategies towards the same outcome.

[earthJoker]

Vote, and in case you have lost, you accept the decision knowing it has been a fair voting.

The only reason not to vote is if you are strictly against of any form of referendum and you prefer to have a representative democracy only. If you want to have referendums you need to support referendums also when the outcome is not the one you want.

[LittleFuzzy]

See here a not very smart attempt at being funny. It falls flat on its face as I state clearly what I want the outcome to be before I pose the question about strategy. I am not choosing between alternative outcomes but alternative strategies towards the same outcome.

You knew damn well what he was seeking, he was clear about it and it's not like it was at all hard to work through, but you insisted on being obtuse and pretending that the simple and straightforward method was the only thing that could make sense. Nor was that the only time you've dismissed the concept of strategic voting.

[Hazir]

You knew damn well what he was seeking, he was clear about it and it's not like it was at all hard to work through, but you insisted on being obtuse and pretending that the simple and straightforward method was the only thing that could make sense. Nor was that the only time you've dismissed the concept of strategic voting.

1. I did not know what he was seeking at the moment I wrote that, and I still doubt that I know as I write this.
2. Usually simple and straightforward is the sensible thing to do, I have no idea what your problem is with that.
3. I have never dismissed strategic voting in principle, I may have called it overly pensive in specific situations.

Now, do you have anything to add to the discussion in a positive way?

[Flixy]

Vote, and in case you have lost, you accept the decision knowing it has been a fair voting.

The only reason not to vote is if you are strictly against of any form of referendum and you prefer to have a representative democracy only. If you want to have referendums you need to support referendums also when the outcome is not the one you want.

And if a referendum is being held where a) the majority of people have no idea what exactly they are voting on, and b) is actually meant to be like that, given that the groups that got the referendum here admit they don't give a crap about Ukraine but want to "send a message to the EU"? It's not so much the outcome that I don't want, it's a referendum being used in a way it shouldn't.

[Hazir]

And if a referendum is being held where a) the majority of people have no idea what exactly they are voting on, and b) is actually meant to be like that, given that the groups that got the referendum here admit they don't give a crap about Ukraine but want to "send a message to the EU"? It's not so much the outcome that I don't want, it's a referendum being used in a way it shouldn't.

That I agree with, but it's still a referendum. And tomorrow night we'll have a result, with consequences.

[Hazir]

I think today I will not vote unless the 30% threshold is reached. In which case I will use my vote to vote in favor of the ratification.

[Flixy]

And how are you going to know that? I think national media agreed not to report turnout.

[Hazir]

http://moetikstemmenofniet.nl/index.php

[Flixy]

29% apparently

[Loki]

Hazir's non-vote made the difference. Though that 29% figure could still change.

[RandBlade]

I don't read Dutch but it says 31% in big print now. Hope you voted LOL

[Flixy]

I didn't vote either, but mostly because I think this referendum is bullshit.

[RandBlade]

Nearly 2:1 rejection on a valid 32.2% turnout it seems: http://app.nos.nl/datavisualisatie/referendum-2016/

Whoops. Personally I think this Free Trade deal is exactly the sort of thing that the EU should be doing more, not less, of. Lose-lose here, deciding not to follow the will of the people (again) is a bad precedent and shows again what is wrong with the EU, rejecting the very thing the EU should be doing is also bad. Not good either way.

[Flixy]

I don't read Dutch but it says 31% in big print now. Hope you voted LOL

Within margin of error, it adds in dutch.

Technically they can still sign, whether the referendum passes the limit or not, politically it is obviously an issue (especially since the result itself isn't close at all).

[RandBlade]

And if a referendum is being held where a) the majority of people have no idea what exactly they are voting on, and b) is actually meant to be like that, given that the groups that got the referendum here admit they don't give a crap about Ukraine but want to "send a message to the EU"? It's not so much the outcome that I don't want, it's a referendum being used in a way it shouldn't.

Are you surprised? The Dutch are getting shafted again and again by the EU. Voting against the EU Constitution only to have it rebranded as Lisbon and passed without a referendum. Being screwed over by the Euro and forced to bailout the Greeks again and again. No wonder Dutch euroscepticism is on the rise and its interesting that this referendum seems to have been rejected on almost the exact same ratio of votes (though much lower turnout) as the last referendum in 2005.

[Hazir]

Nope, didn't vote. So that gamble didn't work out. Though you could say that there are a lot of buts and ifs, I think we'll have to say that people overhere are not willing to go with anything that looks like the EU - even in the most tentative ways - sets on enlargement. Because even the low turn-out doesn't negate the fact that in both EU - related referenda we had 2/3 of the voters voted against.

I think the EU will have to get used to a very different attitude of Dutch governments in the future when it comes to new developements. Anything that needs ratification can be subjected to a referendum, and if the deal isn't to the liking of people who've got very little lost with high ambitions, then ratification will simply not be possible. Unless parliament takes the extreme step of abolishing the referendum legislation The Netherlands will be a bigger pain in the backside for the EU than Ireland ever was. If only for the reason that those referenda will not be proscribed from above but will be the result of people with an axe to grind collecting enough grassroots support to force the government to hold one.

[RandBlade]

There's a reason that the overly vivid British eurosceptics who imagine other nations following the UK out of the door list the Netherlands as fourth most likely nation to follow us out the door (after the rest of Scandinavia and Hungary).

[Hazir]

I doubt very much that an in out referendum in The Netherlands could be won by the outs. The entire dynamics of such a referendum would be different. Actually I don't even think such a referendum could be held in The Netherlands. It's not like you can just go and collect signatures for a referendum on any odd subject that is your fancy.

The referendum law merely enables corrective referenda on new legislation. To change that law into one that gives referenda more teeth; I don't see it happen in my lifetime. It would mean a majority of parliamentarians would have to vote themselves out of a job basically.

[earthJoker]

I am kind of sad for the Ukraine which seems to be a pawn sacrifice here. But I can fully understand the Dutch for voting 'nee'.

The referendum law merely enables corrective referenda on new legislation. To change that law into one that gives referenda more teeth; I don't see it happen in my lifetime. It would mean a majority of parliamentarians would have to vote themselves out of a job basically.

Still if the Eurosceptics would gain power, I assume the Eurolovers will probably try to hold a referendum.

[Hazir]

I am kind of sad for the Ukraine which seems to be a pawn sacrifice here. But I can fully understand the Dutch for voting 'nee'.


Still if the Eurosceptics would gain power, I assume the Eurolovers will probably try to hold a referendum.

That's too many ifs to contemplate. I think by the way that many foreign media aren't very good at interpreting the outcome. A lot of people against closer cooperation with Ukraine are not against the EU per se.

And can you really blame them if you see how things are on the south eastern flank of the Union?

[earthJoker]

That's too many ifs to contemplate.

There is only one 'if'. If the Eurosceptics gain enough power. At the moment it looks only like a matter of time.

A lot of people against closer cooperation with Ukraine are not against the EU per se.

Being against the current EU policies is not being against the EU per se. The current European elite just think that their vision of Europe is the only vision for the EU, they are terribly wrong.

[Hazir]

There is only one 'if'. If the Eurosceptics gain enough power. At the moment it looks only like a matter of time.


Being against the current EU policies is not being against the EU per se. The current European elite just think that their vision of Europe is the only vision for the EU, they are terribly wrong.

If you mean by eurosceptics people wanting the end of the EU then it's so far off that it's not worth considering.

[earthJoker]

A prediction by Hazir makes the opposite most likely.

[RandBlade]

I doubt very much that an in out referendum in The Netherlands could be won by the outs. The entire dynamics of such a referendum would be different. Actually I don't even think such a referendum could be held in The Netherlands. It's not like you can just go and collect signatures for a referendum on any odd subject that is your fancy.

The referendum law merely enables corrective referenda on new legislation. To change that law into one that gives referenda more teeth; I don't see it happen in my lifetime. It would mean a majority of parliamentarians would have to vote themselves out of a job basically.

I doubted very much that an in/out referendum in the UK would be won by the outs but now I'd probably give it a 1/3 chance of being the outcome. As for how such a referendum would be held in the Netherlands, it wouldn't be as a result of a petition but because the government of the day responds to public pressure and agrees to hold one. I don't see that happening any time soon, but it is now at least plausible that it might happen when a decade ago I'd have found the very idea completely implausible.

[Flixy]

Are you surprised? The Dutch are getting shafted again and again by the EU. Voting against the EU Constitution only to have it rebranded as Lisbon and passed without a referendum. Being screwed over by the Euro and forced to bailout the Greeks again and again. No wonder Dutch euroscepticism is on the rise and its interesting that this referendum seems to have been rejected on almost the exact same ratio of votes (though much lower turnout) as the last referendum in 2005.

Sure, but I hate it when groups like that abuse the process like this. Btw the European constitution referendum was also a joke, nobody (on either side) had a clue what they were voting for, but it obviously pissed a lot of people off and reinforces the idea of the EU doing what it wants without regard for the people.

That said, i would list a Dutch exit very unlikely. The anti eu people are loud but not that many. I mean, since reaching the turnout of 30% was critical you can assume almost anyone who wants us to leave voted, which means at most 20% of the people (actually less since people voted against for other reasons). A referendum on staying in the EU would have a far bigger turnout, for starters, and that's not to the opponent's advantage.