[jldugger]

Opinion polling put Statehood at 52%, with a 3.2% margin of error. Sounds close, but the referendum had 3 choices, and neither were very close.

It seems like those opposed to Statehood realized they'd lose as they split the vote, and ran a boycott campaign, effectively turning it into a yes/no vote on statehood, with the fringe benefit of claiming all non-voters as on their side, which going by 2012, is a free 20 percent of the vote.

For better or worse, there's not really an objective way to evaluate this state of affairs =/

[dragonwriter]

We could do what we do with every other election, and treat nonvotes as irrelevant to the validity of the outcome unless they result from people being improperly prevented from voting rather than voluntarily abstaining, whether in protest or otherwise.

[jldugger]

Obviously "what we do" is influenced by Congressional makeup and how PR alters it, but that's pretty much what the diff between a binding and non-binding referendum means in practice.

And maybe forcing the issue is a bit too colonial, optically.

[dragonwriter]

Yeah, it would be a bit “too colonial” to respect the results of either of the last two status referenda, or the multiple requests of the elected governing bodies of PR to abide by the previous one; clearly, maintaining Puerto Rico’s subject status with no vote in the federal government that it is subject to despite all those things is the non-colonial thing to do.

Or...maybe that's the exact opposite of what is going on.