What message were you trying to send? [Not "why did you vote No?"]

Mr.Nice Guy

I'm loving it so far!

But I will try to stay reserved until the result is confirmed.

The no vote was a message to the EU to respect our democracy! A great deal for Europe eh? So great that no one else was given an opportunity to vote on it!

RESPECT OUR DEMOCRACY YOU FASCISTS.

whitser

molloyjh wrote: »

The EU did nothing of the sort. a couple of daft politicians did, but they the EU does not make. Yet another non-reason......

spokes people for the eu were warning us the whole time to tow the line or else. now the question was put to the people and we said no. are you so arrogant that you believe you that that the yes campaign failed only because people didnt know what they wanted. the irish people rejected something they felt was bad for ireland. and we rejected the eu idea that it can bully a small nation like us. this result is good for other small nations in the eu.

molloyjh

grahamo wrote: »

I voted No because the government told us to vote yes. If they had asked us to vote No I would have voted yes.
I am just an ordinary Joe PAYE worker and successive governments have done nothing for me. All the celtic tiger BS doesn't apply to the likes of me ( I may earn more these days but I pay a lot more for the necessities and I had to get a massive mortgage to buy an overpriced house that I will now spend the rest of my life paying for so my pockets are just as empty as they were in the 80's.) and as for their lies about the health service etc.......The govt. have a cheek to ask me for any favours

That is the Irish Government, not the Lisbon Treaty. Believe me I have all the same grienvances as you and I would wager there are a good few others on this thread in the same boat. It is not a reason for voting no to Lisbon as it is totally irrelevant to it.

kaiser sauze

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I'm loving it so far!

But I will try to stay reserved until the result is confirmed.

The no vote was a message to the EU to respect our democracy! A great deal for Europe eh? So great that no one else was given an opportunity to vote on it!

RESPECT OUR DEMOCRACY YOU FASCISTS.

:rolleyes:

eigrod

molloyjh wrote: »

The EU did nothing of the sort. a couple of daft politicians did, but they the EU does not make. Yet another non-reason......

More than a couple, to be honest.

And I think this is part of the problem here in Ireland. Most of our politicians are not competent enough to make the leap from local politics to the far more intellectually challenging issues thrown up by complex treaties such as this.

Many of them reside in a comfort zone whereby their day consists of arranging to have the local potholes filled in, or being seen to get a new factory in the locality or dipping their noses in refused planning applications or making sure that a few hundred civil servants will end up in the region.

It's a long standing problem that manifests itself in many ways.

cornbb

alanmurphy83 wrote: »

Nobody answered me.:(

It doesn't make you a bad person. But I don't believe its a logical way of choosing to use your vote. Its they are not being denied a vote, their governments (who they elected) are ratifying the treaty on their behalfs (mostly by overwhelming majorities). If they feel hard-done by for not getting a referendum, thats a matter for them to take up with their own governments (not the EU). I think voting No on "their behalf" is a bit presumptuous, and it does not directly address any of the issues within the treaty.

themont85

cornbb wrote: »

It doesn't make you a bad person. But I don't believe its a logical way of choosing to use your vote. Its they are not being denied a vote, their governments (who they elected) are ratifying the treaty on their behalfs (mostly by overwhelming majorities). If they feel hard-done by for not getting a referendum, thats a matter for them to take up with their own governments (not the EU). I think voting No on "their behalf" is a bit presumptuous, and it does not directly address any of the issues within the treaty.

Conversly you could also say that why should we deny the rest of Europe this treaty.

How Strange

kaiser sauze wrote: »

Have the YES side been proven wrong?

Has the EU, formerly the EEC and EC, actually been shown up as the wrong decision? No, they have not.

You see, I am applying the logic as you state.

What is that suppose to mean. I presume you mean that as a Yes supporter (YOU) you feel that Yes is the way to vote. So good for you. But that doesn't mean you're right. That doesn't mean the EU is wholly a good thing.

I am in the main a supporter of the EU. I would've always considered myself Pro EU but this rehash of a treaty, already rejected 3 years ago by France and Holland, being forced on the EU people undemocratically all in the context of Nice 1 and 2 galls me because it's categorically undemocratic.

There is nothing democratic about a large organisation such as the EU ignoring the voices of the people it purports to represent and ploughing ahead with its agenda anyway.

As I said the democractic deficit is a fast becoming a chasm.

I want to see evidence that the EU as a governing body listen to us. I exercised my democratic right to vote and just because it doesn't fit the pro EU agenda doesn't make it the wrong vote.

Is the EU good or bad? IMO, we'll find that out for sure in the next 20 years when we are alongside global players like India, China, Brazil, Russia.

But if the treaty isn't ratified it means that Ireland, France and Holland are a clear indication that the people of Europe are not connected with or happy with the EU as a community.

molloyjh

jackal wrote: »

Telling someone they should abstain if they do not understand fully is really really condescending and annoying. Good on you for understanding the treaty, but YOU ARE IN THE MINORITY. Get it?

I'm sorry you feel that way, genuinly. However it is just common sense to say that if you don't know what you're talking about then don't talk about it. I won't go into the whole "we don't get a vote and EU law supercedes ours" argument again - its been done todeath, re-animated and done to death all over again. Instead I'll just provide the same link I've provided previously:

http://www.lisbontreaty2008.ie/lisbon_treaty_changes_gov.html

Suffice it to say that we do get to vote on matters affecting the Constitution, but not on the others, which is exactly as it is now.

How Strange

molloyjh wrote: »

Simply put, yes. Anyones who makes no effort to understand what they are voting for should not be voting. I don't care what way they intend on voting, they have not honoured their responsibility to the process.

So then the crux of the argument is that those sheep switched sides.
Damn pesky sheep, just when you think they do what they're told they start listening to the other side. Orwell's Animal Farm comes to mind!

molloyjh

Darragh29 wrote: »

Here here, to be honest, it should be us asking you why on earth you voted yes. I voted no for perfectly good reasons, the way this treaty was being pushed on us was not acceptable, in particular I noted Eamon Gilmore coming to a joint press conference on this earlier on this week acting time some kind of kindergarten school principal telling us, "now is not the time to be throwing a wobbly on Europe". Who does he think he is, first of all speaking to us like that and secondly making out that anyone who was not in full communion with his opinions was therefore "throwing a wobbly on Europe"??? The stupid cu*t.

That is totally irrelevant to the Treaty itself, as has been stated countless times at this stage. I agree that the Yes campaign was utter, dire tripe. I didn't let it affect my decision at all though. I based mine on what we were voting for. The Treaty, and nothing else.

jackal

Well, seeing as simply not liking what was in the treaty, or not understanding the treaty seems to be not a good enough answer for the Yes-camp...

W0000tttt11111!!!!! Shove it, euro-lovers! lulz.

The arrogance of the yes camp is just breathtaking. "How dare you vote without reading the treaty".

Reading is for geeks, when has that gotten us anywhere...? We are not going to read ourselves out of the recession caused by the EU now are we? we all know this was a vote against Bertie and the clowns in the FIA and a vote against abortion, and the fat cat corporations who conspired on 9/11 in cabal with the CIA and Libertas. Remember 1916! (and those cute chimps on the posters).

cornbb

jackal wrote: »

W0000tttt11111!!!!! Shove it, euro-lovers! lulz.

Reading is for geeks, when has that gotten us anywhere...?

Here, ladies and gentlemen, are today's winners :rolleyes:

raido9

grahamo wrote: »

I voted No because the government told us to vote yes. If they had asked us to vote No I would have voted yes.
I am just an ordinary Joe PAYE worker and successive governments have done nothing for me. All the celtic tiger BS doesn't apply to the likes of me ( I may earn more these days but I pay a lot more for the necessities and I had to get a massive mortgage to buy an overpriced house that I will now spend the rest of my life paying for so my pockets are just as empty as they were in the 80's.) and as for their lies about the health service etc.......The govt. have a cheek to ask me for any favours

I cant believe there's people with this train of thought. That is the most backward thinking I've seen on this thread (and there were some contenders). You really are whats wrong with this country.

Its too late, but next time there's a referendum, vote on the issue, not as a grudge against those you and your peers voted in democratically.

Mr.Nice Guy

cornbb wrote: »

Here, ladies and gentlemen, are today's winners :rolleyes:

No the losers are the likes of the old woman interviewed on BBC who said she didn't read it, didn't know what it was about but decided to vote Yes because of what her minister told her.

I read the Treaty and followed the issues since the EU Constitution in 2005 and I strongly believe this Treaty would have been wretched for the people of Europe.

Go count your sour grapes before they hatch as Father Ted would say.

molloyjh

whitser wrote: »

spokes people for the eu were warning us the whole time to tow the line or else. now the question was put to the people and we said no. are you so arrogant that you believe you that that the yes campaign failed only because people didnt know what they wanted. the irish people rejected something they felt was bad for ireland. and we rejected the eu idea that it can bully a small nation like us. this result is good for other small nations in the eu.

I never heard any official EU statements telling us to tow the line. Care to provide a source?

Also that was a nice sweeping generalisation there re the Yes campaign. However should you bother to read through my posts on this thread you will see that I have not only recognised that many No voters did so for genuine and understandable reasons, but I also said that anyone, regardless of whether they said Yes or No, that didn't understand the Treaty had a) no excuse for it and b) no right to vote for not honouring their responsibility to the voting process (i.e. informed decision).

kaiser sauze

How Strange wrote: »

What is that suppose to mean. I presume you mean that as a Yes supporter (YOU) you feel that Yes is the way to vote. So good for you. But that doesn't mean you're right. That doesn't mean the EU is wholly a good thing.

I am in the main a supporter of the EU. I would've always considered myself Pro EU but this rehash of a treaty, already rejected 3 years ago by France and Holland, being forced on the EU people undemocratically all in the context of Nice 1 and 2 galls me because it's categorically undemocratic.

There is nothing democratic about a large organisation such as the EU ignoring the voices of the people it purports to represent and ploughing ahead with its agenda anyway.

As I said the democractic deficit is a fast becoming a chasm.

I want to see evidence that the EU as a governing body listen to us. I exercised my democratic right to vote and just because it doesn't fit the pro EU agenda doesn't make it the wrong vote.

Is the EU good or bad? IMO, we'll find that out for sure in the next 20 years when we are alongside global players like India, China, Brazil, Russia.

But if the treaty isn't ratified it means that Ireland, France and Holland are a clear indication that the people of Europe are not connected with or happy with the EU as a community.

France and The Netherlands voted on a different matter. Your arguments there are null and void.

So this would have made the EU less democratic?

The Citizens' Initiative?

Stronger National Parliaments?

Representation on an equal basis in the Commission?

Representation on a higher weighted basis than Germany in the EU Parliament?

Qualified Majority Voting, with a double criteria?

Sounds very un-democratic to me.

molloyjh

How Strange wrote: »

So then the crux of the argument is that those sheep switched sides.
Damn pesky sheep, just when you think they do what they're told they start listening to the other side. Orwell's Animal Farm comes to mind!

Don't quite follow what you mean about switching sides. IMO voting is a right that bears with it the responsibiltiy to be informed about what you are voting for to the best of your ability. Anyone who makes no attempt to inform themselves of the issue(s) at hand are in no position to give reliable judgements on the issue(s).

Mr.Nice Guy

kaiser sauze wrote: »

France and The Netherlands voted on a different matter. Your arguments there are null and void.

His argument isn't null and void because independent, neutral commentators have acknowledged it was 95% the same document.

If you think they were different matters you are talking out of your arse. They changed the name and made a few tweaks but it was the same damned thing and it's been rejected.

God bless democracy.

Phototoxin

I voted no because I wanted to and I am thankful that I live in a country that gives m the choice to say yes or no to something.

OP you dont deserve nor are you getting any justification for why I voted no other than I wanted to. And that's all that counts in a referendum.

Rented Mule

cornbb wrote: »

Thats a ludicrous suggestion. They led the negotiations for a lot of the document!

So you are saying that I imagined the Taoiseach admitting that he hadn't read the entire document just a few short weeks ago ?

kaiser sauze

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

His argument isn't null and void because independent, neutral commentators have acknowledged it was 95% the same document.

If you think they were different matters you are talking out of your arse. They changed the name and made a few tweaks but it was the same damned thing and it's been rejected.

God bless democracy.

You've just accepted that the treaties were different.

Thanks, my point stands.

molloyjh

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

No the losers are the likes of the old woman interviewed on BBC who said she didn't read it, didn't know what it was about but decided to vote Yes because of what her minister told her.

I read the Treaty and followed the issues since the EU Constitution in 2005 and I strongly believe this Treaty would have been wretched for the people of Europe.

Go count your sour grapes before they hatch as Father Ted would say.

Most of us here would have no problem with that opinion as long as we knew why you had it. Sadly a large number of No voters are either ignorant of the details of the Treaty or have a mis-represented view of it (the same can be said for a lot of Yes voters). You only need to read some of the posts on the threads to see this. Why can't you just say that you didn't like aspect X, Y and Z of the Treaty, and that way we can say "Fair enough you have a point".

JC 2K3

molloyjh wrote: »

What was wrong with the expansion of QMV? I didn't think it stepped into any areas it shouldn't have, especially given all the opt out we got. And I also felt that the new QMV method for voting was quite reasonable. What was the issue with that?

Because the EU is a union of nations, not a superstate. I don't think population should come into how much voting strength a country has. Yes we have opt outs in a few crucial areas (though I have my doubts to how long they would have lasted, and anyway, why swap a veto for an opt out?), but that doesn't change the direction in which the EU is moving. It's not a "more democratic" system, it's an alternative democratic system more suited to a superstate than a union of nations.

uptherebels

kaiser sauze wrote: »

France and The Netherlands voted on a different matter.

no they didnt.The lisbon treaty is the eu constitution.

VoidStarNull

Phototoxin wrote: »

I voted no because I wanted to and I am thankful that I live in a country that gives m the choice to say yes or no to something.

OP you dont deserve nor are you getting any justification for why I voted no other than I wanted to. And that's all that counts in a referendum.

I suggest you post that view to Brian Cowen, Phototoxin, it might help him figure out what to do next.

molloyjh

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

His argument isn't null and void because independent, neutral commentators have acknowledged it was 95% the same document.

If you think they were different matters you are talking out of your arse. They changed the name and made a few tweaks but it was the same damned thing and it's been rejected.

God bless democracy.

So the 5% difference means they were, wait for it, different and therefore not the same......

Unless you can tell me exactly what in the Constitution the French and Dutch didn't like and whether or not those particular points were addressed I'm afraid your argument is in fact null and void.

offaly1

My main reason for voting NO was that i didn't understand anything bout the treaty.. i personally not enough information was made available to the public. Maybe if more information was made available i might have been swayed the other way.....

molloyjh

Rented Mule wrote: »

So you are saying that I imagined the Taoiseach admitting that he hadn't read the entire document just a few short weeks ago ?

Thats not what he said. Cowen was involved in drawing the thing up and so didn't really need to read it. Its like saying a novelist has to read his book to know what happens in the end! Anyway politicians haven't the time to go through these things in detail. They have legal experts that do it for them and present their findings.

whitser

molloyjh wrote: »

I never heard any official EU statements telling us to tow the line. Care to provide a source?

Also that was a nice sweeping generalisation there re the Yes campaign. However should you bother to read through my posts on this thread you will see that I have not only recognised that many No voters did so for genuine and understandable reasons, but I also said that anyone, regardless of whether they said Yes or No, that didn't understand the Treaty had a) no excuse for it and b) no right to vote for not honouring their responsibility to the voting process (i.e. informed decision).

look. the words tow the line were obviously never used by eu politicians but that was the jist of what they were saying. how hard is it to comprehend that the people of ireland felt this was bad for ireland and voted no. end of. just cos somone didnt understand the treaty doesnt mean they shouldnt vote,the treaty was designed to confuse. if the poitical elite cant draw up something that easily understood then bin it.