Let the mud slinging begin, who's fault is it that the YES side lost?

Silent Rain

I believe that in general the Yes campaign was a shambles.
If they had concentrated on stating the benefits of the Treaty and explaining
why most of what the No campaign was saying was scaremongering they would have won. I know that there were too many varying points to focus on one, but an attempt could have been made to at least highlight a few.

Instead most of their statements went along the following themes:
Vote Yes -- Or it will be terrible
Vote Yes -- If you vote No It'll be a disaster
Vote Yes -- Trust us, we know what's best
Vote Yes -- I haven’t read the treaty myself, but I've been told we should
Vote Yes -- Or it'll be embarrassing
Vote Yes -- Sure the No party are all Crackpots

The blame for the failure of the Yes Campaign rests squarely on the shoulders of the
government. I'd be much more worried about their obvious incompetence than any effects
of the Treaty not being passed.

vandermeyde

nesf wrote: »

Fortunately I came to terms with me being an arrogant bastard a long time ago, so I'm not overly bothered about it.

It gets lonely up on these pedestals sometimes

FrankGrimes

For the Yes campaign to come out with the references to the implications of voting No was a BIG mistake and always likely to get an almost childish reaction of 'don't be threatening me, I'll show you' from certain portions of the electorate, some of whom probably had no idea of the actual meaning of the treaty but will just react that way if they feel pressured (e.g. gf just told me she heard on radio some part of Cork had a 65% No vote - doesn't surprise me one bit).

Terrible approach. Yes campaign should have just focused on defining a simplified way of articulating what this was all about and should just have re-iterated ad infinitum 'it only means this......it does not mean XXX, or YYY'. Every time Libertas came out with one of their misleading comments, the Yes campaign should have been simply repeated to death 'the treaty has nothing to do with that', 'that is simply untrue' etc. That way a higher proportion of the 90% of voters that backed them at the last general election would have heard that message and blindly trusted them as a certain portion always do. But the Yes campaign kind of stepped away from the actual debate and focused on trying to incentivise a Yes by highlighting the negative consequences of a No.

The Bertie saga was another big factor in undermining trust in the government and delaying the Yes campaign, but Michael Martin has to take a lot of the blame here.

But in my opinion, the bottom line is that a large portion of the electorate failed to educate themselves on what this was all about and a large portion of that same group seem to be of a very narrow-minded and insular mentality. The majority of people posting on discussion forums such as this, in my opinion, seem to be of a reasonable level of intelligence, so it's no coincidence that all the best No arguments I have seen have been on such forums.

I did not hear a single intelligent or informed argument for a No vote in my daily life outside of discussion forums (again, in my personal opinion). Every time a friend/colleague/barman/taxi driver/people I overhear in pubs said they why they were voting No it was for something that had no grounding in reality (e.g. "I'm not letting them pricks in Brussels bring in abortion here", points on losing a Commissioner that when questioned revealed a lack of basic understanding of what a Commissioner should do etc, "I mean, the EU has worked out well for us till now, but now they want too much back so feck that", "I don't want the EU setting our tax rates, they'll go through the roof").

I believe a very significant portion of No voters were either extremely misinformed or mislead about the meaning of this referendum and I feel that is the main reason for what I see as a highly regrettable and foolish No vote.

deisekid

Firstly I'd say the the majority of the people have spoken and I am not questioning the decision by the people to reject the Lisbon Treaty.

In terms of who is to blame for the Referendum not being passed, I would point the finger at the Yes side. Not one representative came to my door canvassing for a Yes vote nor did I seem them canvassing elsewhere. The No campaign ran a much more vocal and public campaign than the Yes side, who spent most of their time clapping Bertie on the back rather than getting out on the road a few months back.

The days of politicians telling us to vote Yes because we should trust them are long since over and probably will never return again. People are far more educated and far more suspicious than before but the political parties don't seem to have copped on to that.

The No campaign could pretty much say what they wanted about the Treaty and expect to get away with it so the Yes side set about putting out the fires started by the No side. Instead they should have said "Look, this is the way things operate at the moment and if this Treaty is passed this is the way that things will be done from now on".

I think alot of people wanted to be able to vote yes but either didn't bother voting at all as they didn't know what the Treaty entailed or they voted No to punish the Yes side for their ineptitude.

Tazdedub

The blame for the No result lies firmly at the feet of those supporting a yes vote both at home and abroad.

To list just a few things that I disliked about the Yes campaign,

1. Cowen buying the farmers votes.
2. French ministers coming out with bullying unhelpful statements
3. Cowen threatening every member of the FF party with expulsion if they went against him.
4. Those posters with the politicians faces on them. Haven't the politicians realised that some of the electorate do not trust a word that comes out of their mouths especially after what was promised after the last election.
5. Mr Ahearn and he won it on the horses.

I reckon if the Yes campaign had of been a faceless campaign, then the yes side would have won.

CrowdedHouse

deisekid wrote: »

In terms of who is to blame for the Referendum not being passed, I would point the finger at the Yes side. Not one representative came to my door canvassing for a Yes vote nor did I seem them canvassing elsewhere.

Same with me,both at home North Tipp and spent time in Galway West too.
All leaflet-in-letterbox-and-run.

PH01

OK this is typical deflection and I'm a bit surprised that it hasn't come up yet (but look out for it in the meeja in the next couple of days)...

Where were FG, Labour, and the Greens in the YES campaign?! No where! All the work seemed to be done by Fianna Fail (and it is likely why it was lost).

BlitzKrieg

Where were FG, Labour, and the Greens in the YES campaign?! No where! All the work seemed to be done by Fianna Fail (and it is likely why it was lost).

I remember a brief advert in the metro the day before the referndum by FG, I think Labour had a 2 day spread in another paper.

And I saw Kenny was around a bit debating.

nesf

PH01 wrote: »

Where were FG, Labour, and the Greens in the YES campaign?! No where! All the work seemed to be done by Fianna Fail (and it is likely why it was lost).

I saw a fair bit of FG stuff around the place. Hardly any Labour stuff, and practically nothing from the Greens.

dead air

As a Yes voter, I am both disappointed and unsurprised. Here are my thoughts as to why the Referendum was lost:


* No campaign (principally Libertas and Sinn Fein) were very well organised and concerted an effective campaign.

* Unconvincing Yes campaign, started too late to counter No side claims.

* Yes campaign has no obvious youth wings campaigning.

* It's very hard to glam up the advantages of this treaty. But it is incredibly easy to scaremonger on the supposed evils.

* No campaigners were scaremongers and bullies. I saw some posters calling for people to organise for a change in the social order. Were they looking for another Rising? Others shouting "People died for your freedom! Vote No!", Yes, people died for my freedom to vote as I wish. Another pamphlet I read called for a No vote because the 6 counties in NI are occupied by the British. Why? These are not relevant issues. We have guarantees on our neutrality and corporation tax, yet these were still given as reasons to vote no. Joe Higgins going on about privatisation in health and education that we already have in existence.

* British tabloid newspapers publishing in Ireland with sensationalist "Frog Off" headlines.

* People who voted no because they didn't know what they were voting on. Sinn Fein capitalised on this.


I'm happy my Yes vote in Dublin North made a difference.

LoLth

I personally think the entire campaign on both sides was a confusing joke. if there is any justice the EU will create a commission to investigate how member states represent EU decisions to their populations and put standards and requirements in place, along with disciplinary actions for political parties that fail to mee tthe requirements. both sides of the campaign we've just seen should be severely slapped for grossly and deliberately misrepresenting the Lisbon Treaty and using it as a spring board for what I can only deem their own political agendas and platforms.

We were asked a yes or no question on a complicated and important issue and instead of helping the public understand, in plain English (and translated to Irish) the exact matters under consideration, the political parties in ireland deliberately muddied the issue with scare tactics and outright lies (both sides!) , misinformation and a complete disregard for information accessibility.

"its simple. if you want to make a change to the rules set out in the old treaty , page 5 paragraph 1 , you vote yes"

reader takes the time to go look for the details of Old Treaty.....

old treaty , page 5 , paragraph:
"Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah tax blah blah blah"

all relevant information should have been made available , in simple language in a single publication inlcuding any and all excerpts from relevant and referenced documents and laws etc. IMHO our political representatives seriously failed their constituents in this matter.

/rant

ps. this post is not a statement of fact. its my opinion.

Call Me Jimmy

LoLth wrote: »

I personally think the entire campaign on both sides was a confusing joke. if there is any justice the EU will create a commission to investigate how member states represent EU decisions to their populations and put standards and requirements in place.

I don't know, some people won't accept that because they'll say that that commission is biased.

edited: was slightly harsh

BlitzKrieg

if there is any justice the EU will create a commission to investigate how member states represent EU decisions to their populations and put standards and requirements in place, along with disciplinary actions for political parties that fail to mee tthe requirements.

Personnally I would think it would set a bad policy to have the EU directly dictate requirements to our local parties or investigate them purely for referendums.

We are a country ourselves we should be able to run our own affairs.

Even if at the moment it looks like we cant.

DJDC

I completely agree. It's very hard to dismiss No points and argue that because you understand it and agree with the treaty other's should vote Yes, without coming across as arrogant.

Fortunately I came to terms with me being an arrogant bastard a long time ago, so I'm not overly bothered about it.

Look at some of the areas that voted YES:
Dublin South East
Dublin South.
Dun Laoghaire

All predominantly middle class areas. I am sure this class divide was replicated right across the country highlighting the increasing divergence between those who have benefited in the last 20 years and those who have not. I would really like to see a break down of the results to some categories like educational attainment, income status etc to see the magnitude of this divide. I would imagine, people in low income jobs or recieving social welfare payments would have voted overwhelmingly in favour of rejecting the treaty.

nesf

DJDC wrote: »

Look at some of the areas that voted YES:
Dublin South East
Dublin South.
Dun Laoghaire

All predominantly middle class areas. I am sure this class divide was replicated right across the country highlighting the increasing divergence between those who have benefited in the last 20 years and those who have not. I would really like to see a break down of the results to some categories like educational attainment, income status etc to see the magnitude of this divide. I would imagine, people in low income jobs or recieving social welfare payments would have voted overwhelmingly in favour of rejecting the treaty.

Versus Dublin North Central, Dublin North and Clare? None known as overwhelmingly Middle Class Bastions, versus say Dun Laoghaire. There was a class divide, and there generally is in these things but I think it's an oversimplification to apply that as a rule here. The Treaty lost in plenty of the more "middle class" constituencies in the rest of the country, Cork South Central for instance 55/45 against and there's plenty more of it around the place. The vote was tighter in Cork North West which is far, far less prosperous than Cork South Central. There was a lot of people crossing the party line on this one I think which is an interesting message for the main parties. The days of not having to campaign hard outside of General Elections might be over.

Phototoxin

there are people in Ireland who live outside of dublin ya know.