Possibility of a Lisbon #2

dlofnep

ionix5891 wrote: »

so are you saying that the rest of the countries in the EU are un-democratic states? where a majority of the population has no say or influence??

I believe they un-democratic in relation to the Lisbon Treaty. Whatever else happens in their country could be democratic or undemocratic. I don't know and I doubt you do either.

ionix5891 wrote: »

yes it does and its quite polite of the rest of the countries to give us another go next year to double check if thats a NO vote is really what we want, and by that stage hopefully the full consequence of such a vote to Ireland and EU are explained to the people

Polite is not a word I'd choose to describe Europe trying to force a yes vote from Ireland and. If they were respectful, they would of respected our referendum. But they have not. They will only respect the Irish vote, if it suits their agenda.

dlofnep

ionix5891 wrote: »

how very democratic of you :rolleyes:

LOL @ the irony of this remark. Someone who supports multiple referendums until it suits an agenda lecturing someone else on democracy? :rolleyes:

ionix5891

since it was ignored the first time around i will put the question out again


if the No supporters dont want another referendum what exactly do you propose Ireland and the other 26 states do?


lets see if yee can comeup with anything constructive for once

dresden8

ionix5891 wrote: »

if theres a majority who want another vote why not have another referendum, especially when the first time around the turnout is ~50%

whats undemocratic about asking people for their opinion??

What majority that want another vote? I think somebody used the example of Europeans not protesting in the street to demand a vote therefore they must be in support of their government's yes position. Why aren't the disenfranchised yes voters marching on the Dail as we speak to demand a re-run?

What's undemocratic is forcing vote after vote until you get the result you want.

dresden8

ionix5891 wrote: »

since it was ignored the first time around i will put the question out again


if the No supporters dont want another referendum what exactly do you propose Ireland and the other 26 states do?


lets see if yee can comeup with anything constructive for once

I'm a loola and and a fool obviously so how should I know. All you yes guys are so smart come back to me with something.

dresden8

Quote:
Originally Posted by dresden8
so we can choose to ignore their vote?

how very democratic of you

How very selective of you!

caminowebmaster

Well this is no surprise - democracy in action I don't think so.

Scofflaw

dresden8 wrote: »

What Scofflaw saw was Libertas posters all over, and COIR and SWP posters too - and I know that none of those groups represent anything other than fringe elements in society, or people with more money than average. Come to that, there were SF posters all over the country - and we know their level of electoral support.

Well if they don't represent voters you can't claim people voted no in support of these positions. A bit of consistency in you overturning a democratic vote please.

I don't think I have claimed that. It's not really possible to match support for groups' positions and reasons for voting No, since the majority, or even all, of the reasons given were both negative and doubt-based.

For example, one might have voted No to protect Ireland's position on abortion, while considering COIR/Youth Defence quite mad. This is because all COIR (and Libertas, and Bonde) had to do was create sufficient doubt as to whether Lisbon impacted Ireland's abortion stance - they did not have to persuade you to support COIR and the rest of what COIR believes. Similarly, one can have been concerned about neutrality without accepting everything that PANA says - and, indeed, agree with FF that a Yes vote is preferable without supporting FF in any way.

The other issue would be as briefly alluded to already - many of the No campaign groups had overlapping messages which didn't reflect any core position other than getting a No vote. Libertas, for example, could have gone for a reasonably clear position in defence purely of Ireland's tax position - in which case there might be some reason to identify those who voted for that reason with Libertas. However, Libertas also raised neutrality, WTO vetoes, abortion, and any other issue that might put voters off - so one cannot say that.

Further, it is clear that immigration did play a (small) part in the No vote, but to their credit, not one of the No groups played the race card in their campaigns.

So, I think I can cheerfully state that No voters cannot be said to have voted in 'support' of the various No group positions.

cordially,
Scofflaw

ionix5891

dresden8 wrote: »

I'm a loola and and a fool obviously so how should I know. All you yes guys are so smart come back to me with something.

way not to come up with anything constructive :mad:

and we did comeback with something another referendum

if you have any better suggestions im all ears

dresden8

You mean to say people lie?

Well holy God!

Still telling a lie is not as bad as pi$$ing all over a democratically reached decision.

dresden8

ionix5891 wrote: »

way not to come up with anything constructive :mad:

and we did comeback with something another referendum

if you have any better suggestions im all ears

Here's a suggestion, stop whingeing because you lost.

Another referendum is not constructive, as I said above, forcing a re-vote until you get the result you want is the death of democracy.

Unfortunately it's likely you will get your way.

dresden8

Here's another one.

How about a referendum on whether people want another referendum? They do seem to be the fashion.

That should shut all us internet warriors up.

turgon

ionix5891 wrote: »

if the No supporters dont want another referendum what exactly do you propose Ireland and the other 26 states do?

Some people want a different treaty. Some (like that eejit Kathy Sinnot) dont want any Treaty. Some (like that eejit Kathy Sinnot) dont want any EU.

EDIT: I dont thinks thats actually answering your question.

dlofnep

ionix5891 wrote: »

way not to come up with anything constructive :mad:

and we did comeback with something another referendum

if you have any better suggestions im all ears

Let democracy take it's course and respect the original vote of the people? Just a suggestion.

is_that_so

And what is it you have won?
Why not humour the "whingeing" yes voters and explain what the next step for Europe is, bearing in mind that 45% of the vote was not No?

turgon

is_that_so wrote: »

And what is it you have won?

Some people had genuine concerns with some of the content of the treaty.

IRLConor

dresden8 wrote: »

Here's a suggestion, stop whingeing because you lost.

dresden8 wrote: »

Unfortunately it's likely you will get your way.

Here's a suggestion, stop whingeing at the possibility that a majority of your country(wo)men would vote yes in the future.

turgon

The Next Step: Find out why the NO voters voted so, maybe get in touch with the people of Europe find out what they went.

There wasnt much public discussion or input sought for the Lisbon Treaty.

is_that_so

turgon wrote: »

Some people had genuine concerns with some of the content of the treaty.

And some just want to rant about "democracy".
:rolleyes:
Fine but are you interested in fixing it or just rejecting it. Seeing that renegotiation is not an option how then can those concerns be addressed in your view?

dlofnep

IRLConor wrote: »

Here's a suggestion, stop whingeing at the possibility that a majority of your country(wo)men would vote yes in the future.

Pardon him for addressing the undemocratic nature of multiple referendums. :rolleyes:

is_that_so

turgon wrote: »

The Next Step: Find out why the NO voters voted so, maybe get in touch with the people of Europe find out what they went.

There wasnt much public discussion or input sought for the Lisbon Treaty.

Agree 100% on analysing reasons for No voter but as they say this is our problem and not theirs.

dresden8

IRLConor wrote: »

Here's a suggestion, stop whingeing at the possibility that a majority of your country(wo)men would vote yes in the future.

I'm not whingeing, I'm expressing a genuine concern that a democratically decided decision, as voted on by the people a very short time ago, as in just days, is going to be cast aside because it doesn't suit a political clique who obviously view voters as an inconvenience that just serves to get in the way of their grand design.

turgon

is_that_so wrote: »

Agree 100% on analysing reasons for No voter but as they say this is our problem and not theirs.

Well its everyones (I mean No voters and politicians) problem really, no ones to blame. Some No voters are not constuctive at all.

In fact a saw a sign today "Keep the Turks Out".

So you wont please everyone, but I suppose you only need 50% + 1.

dresden8

is_that_so wrote: »

And what is it you have won?

A vote. You know where the electorate get to express their wishes and expect to have the result honoured.

ionix5891

dresden8 wrote: »

You mean to say people lie?

Well holy God!

Still telling a lie is not as bad as pi$$ing all over a democratically reached decision.

what if this "democratically reached decision" is based on lies and misinformation of the population?

dresden8

ionix5891 wrote: »

what if this "democratically reached decision" is based on lies and misinformation of the population?

What the hell do you call a general election?

FFS!

IRLConor

turgon wrote: »

The Next Step: Find out why the NO voters voted so, maybe get in touch with the people of Europe find out what they went.

I agree, this is precisely what needs to happen. Once we find that out, we can make the relevant changes to the Lisbon Treaty (or if needed, write a new one) and present that to the people/governments (as applicable) for ratification.

dresden8

IRLConor wrote: »

I agree, this is precisely what needs to happen. Once we find that out, we can make the relevant changes to the Lisbon Treaty (or if needed, write a new one) and present that to the people/governments (as applicable) for ratification.

At last we agree.

IRLConor

dlofnep wrote: »

Pardon him for addressing the undemocratic nature of multiple referendums. :rolleyes:

There could be a 1000 referenda a day on the matter and it wouldn't make it undemocratic. Stupid yes, undemocratic no.

It would only be undemocratic if the government acted in the opposite direction to the vote. Asking again is not an attack on democracy, in fact it's the very cornerstone of democracy.

dresden8

IRLConor wrote: »

There could be a 1000 referenda a day on the matter and it wouldn't make it undemocratic. Stupid yes, undemocratic no.

It would only be undemocratic if the government acted in the opposite direction to the vote. Asking again is not an attack on democracy, in fact it's the very cornerstone of democracy.

Are you sure?