Straw man. I say nothing that would suggest "keep asking". A single re-ask is justified by the change in available information. And in indeed, if the stay option was selected on this re-ask, but there was enough momentum for one of the leave options, that could merit another referendum in two, five, ten, whatever years— the key is to make certain that any future referendums on this subject are asking about clear, concrete options that are grounded in reality, and not fairy tales.
In any case, the point of a ranked ballot is you use runoff to reallocate the last place option votes, so you do get a clear majority in the end.
It's unclear (to me, at least) that "use runoff to reallocate the last place option votes" would be the best method here. And if such a three-option ballot were to take place, choosing (and explaining) the ranking/counting method to be used would be a crucial element.
In particular, "reallocate the last place votes" could lead to quickly rejecting an option that is hardly anybody's first choice, yet is everyone's second choice (or preferred fallback if they can't have their first choice). That doesn't seem like a desirable outcome.
Let me refine. The reason why I say “keep asking” is that what would happen if the 2nd referendum resulted in leave? It’s hard to tell if that would make me comfortable enough to not want another.
And what about the leavers? What justification would be sufficient for them to not call for a 3rd referendum.
I didn’t know that the UK used ranked ballots or how common they are.
My concern is largely that it’s hard for me to understand well given that all of these issues existed before the referendum and are not novel.
In any case, the point of a ranked ballot is you use runoff to reallocate the last place option votes, so you do get a clear majority in the end.