Support for the Lisbon Treaty increases to 54%

nesf

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0601/1224247818463.html?digest=1

Yes 54% (+2)
No 28% (-1)
D/K 18% (-1)

And the support for Lisbon hardens and gains a bit more ground. I can't see the No vote dropping beneath 25/26% though.

BlitzKrieg

the turn out will be morei important though. more of that 28% is likely to show up to vote then of the 54%.

ionix5891

a lot of negativity has befallen this country lately so i am not holding my breath (but i will lodge my vote) and the usual suspect of Libertas, SF and COIR will be out in full force again, flinging mud and lies, and then bringing the debate to new lows :rolleyes:

tough times usually mean nuts get listened to more, so i am really worried, and hope people think objectively before voting and maybe check sites like this where we have some insightful debates and comments.

the fact alone that Europe are still helping Ireland to the tune of a few hundred billion in these tough times, should make people realize that united we stand and divided we fall.

Mr.Nice Guy

ionix5891 wrote: »

a lot of negativity has befallen this country lately so i am not holding my breath (but i will lodge my vote) and the usual suspect of Libertas, SF and COIR will be out in full force again, flinging mud and lies, and then bringing the debate to new lows :rolleyes:

Yeah they're the bad guys. Not the ones who ignored the initial Lisbon Treaty result and refused to respect the democratic decision by the Irish people. No sir!

ionix wrote:

the fact alone that Europe are still helping Ireland to the tune of a few hundred billion in these tough times, should make people realize that united we stand and divided we fall.

The fact alone that Jose Manuel Barroso, before the Lisbon Treaty result had even been officially announced at Dublin Castle, was out announcing that the rejection didn't matter one iota, should make people realize that the European Union will ultimately spell the end for the admirable democratic principles that this state was founded on.

As far as I am concerned, any political party that supports the dismissal of the original Lisbon Treaty result is now, and forever shall be, removed from the democratic process.

I will be using the forthcoming elections to express my disgust at the present sorry shower who couldn't give a toss about the people's wishes and yet, at the same time, style themselves as the people's best hope for the future.

BlitzKrieg

I will be using the forthcoming elections to express my disgust at the present sorry shower who couldn't give a toss about the people's wishes and yet, at the same time, style themselves as the people's best hope for the future.

Caroline?

nesf

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Yeah they're the bad guys. Not the ones who ignored the initial Lisbon Treaty result and refused to respect the democratic decision by the Irish people. No sir!

Eh, in the last referendum a lot of people voted No because they either didn't understand the question (i.e. what the treaty was about) or they thought it'd bring in abortion or conscription etc which is false. Either of these would surely recommend that the question needs to be resubmitted to the people and the matter explained in more detail and the lies countered if the people are going to make an informed democratic decision on the issue.

lostexpectation

bogus poll we don't know the wording yet, and we don't know when it will be implemented , whether it will be along iwth a accession treaty in 2010

Iwasfrozen

Yeah they're the bad guys. Not the ones who ignored the initial Lisbon Treaty result and refused to respect the democratic decision by the Irish people. No sir!

Sigh, you people again, look a Government always has the right to rerun a referendom. The Irish people elected a pro-european Government.

nesf

lostexpectation wrote: »

bogus poll we don't know the wording yet, and we don't know when it will be implemented , whether it will be along iwth a accession treaty in 2010

The wording is in the article I linked to in the first post:

In the latest poll voters were asked how they would vote in the light of the commitment to allow Ireland to retain a European Union commissioner along with legal guarantees on other Irish concerns about neutrality, abortion and taxation.

They've been using this wording since the last referendum from what I remember.

Mr.Nice Guy

nesf wrote: »

Eh, in the last referendum a lot of people voted No because they either didn't understand the question (i.e. what the treaty was about) or they thought it'd bring in abortion or conscription etc which is false. Either of these would surely recommend that the question needs to be resubmitted to the people and the matter explained in more detail and the lies countered if the people are going to make an informed democratic decision on the issue.

Ah yes the 'They're all thickos' argument. You know I found myself thinking similarly when Fianna Fáil were re-elected at the last general election, but you know what, I accepted the vote because it's democracy in action.

For the record, a lot of people who voted Yes didn't understand it either. I recall an elderly woman explaining her main reason for voting Yes was because she didn't want to be negative.

I didn't realise the last time around I was participating in a nationwide opinion poll. I thought it was the actual referendum. Silly me!

Iwasfrozen wrote:

Sigh, you people again,

Yes it's us pesky democrats again. Hey ya!

Iwasfrozen wrote:

look a Government always has the right to rerun a referendom. The Irish people elected a pro-european Government.

A government indeed has the right to rerun a referendum but the dogs on the street know that it would have never happened had the original vote been Yes (regardless of the confusion involved as nesf well knows), and we all likewise know that if in such a situation there were calls to rerun the referendum from the No side following a close-run defeat, such calls would have been scornfully dismissed as a ridiculous notion by Yes voters.

It's blatant hypocrisy in action. You see you can't pick and choose when you're a democrat. In the words of a famous European Voltaire, "I may not agree with what you have to say but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

That's true democracy. Not accepting democratic results only when it suits your agenda as the European Union, this government and their supporters like to believe.

ionix5891

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Yeah they're the bad guys. Not the ones who ignored the initial Lisbon Treaty result and refused to respect the democratic decision by the Irish people. No sir!



The fact alone that Jose Manuel Barroso, before the Lisbon Treaty result had even been officially announced at Dublin Castle, was out announcing that the rejection didn't matter one iota, should make people realize that the European Union will ultimately spell the end for the admirable democratic principles that this state was founded on.

As far as I am concerned, any political party that supports the dismissal of the original Lisbon Treaty result is now, and forever shall be, removed from the democratic process.

I will be using the forthcoming elections to express my disgust at the present sorry shower who couldn't give a toss about the people's wishes and yet, at the same time, style themselves as the people's best hope for the future.

not again :eek:

come one all your rants where addressed in parallel threads

Mr.Nice Guy

ionix5891 wrote: »

not again :eek:

come one all your rants where addressed in parallel threads

Eh?

rugbyman

over the last few years i have met many people who have sheepishly admitted that they voted NO in the last lisbon referendum. i said to each of them ,friends or not ,that i had never yet heard one who had a valid reason for doing so.

the amount who voted no on ridiculous grounds, on the back of equally ridiculous rumours ,was staggering.

I feel that the party who advocated a No vote will not be so No ish next time.

regards, Rugbyman

nesf

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Ah yes the 'They're all thickos' argument.

Right, I'll warn you about this once, this isn't AH, deliberately misrepresenting someone's point like the above is neither allowed nor tolerated.

oscarBravo

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Ah yes the 'They're all thickos' argument. You know I found myself thinking similarly when Fianna Fáil were re-elected at the last general election, but you know what, I accepted the vote because it's democracy in action.

...and therefore will vehemently oppose any future general elections? After all, the people have spoken.

Steviemak

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Ah yes the 'They're all thickos' argument. You know I found myself thinking similarly when Fianna Fáil were re-elected at the last general election, but you know what, I accepted the vote because it's democracy in action.

Go and elect an anti EU govt and the referendums will not be redone. Thats democracy.

Zuiderzee

We already voted no to a specific treaty, and we are expected to do it again and again until the correct answer is given?

It has been rejected - thats democracy.


citizensimon.blogspot.com

Scofflaw

Zuiderzee wrote: »

We already voted no to a specific treaty, and we are expected to do it again and again until the correct answer is given?

It has been rejected - thats democracy.


citizensimon.blogspot.com

And it can be voted on again - that's also democracy. If your views haven't changed, you give the same answer again. It's not as if you're being asked to jump through burning hoops.

cordially,
Scofflaw

PHB

Zuiderzee wrote: »

We already voted no to a specific treaty, and we are expected to do it again and again until the correct answer is given?

It has been rejected - thats democracy.


citizensimon.blogspot.com

If you assume that the poll is accurate [which im not suggesting it is], what you're saying is that even though right now, 54% of the people want the Lisbon Treaty passed, they shouldnt be allowed to do it, because people in the past voted against it.

We are to be held to our past decisions, and are not allowed change them.
Where's the freedom in that?

Zuiderzee

Jaysus - How many times do you need to vote on the same issue?
There comes a point when a democratic decision must be accepted.

Is there not a regulation on time between referenda on the same issue?

I think it is undemocratic to force the same referendum until the answer the government wants is recieved.

Its a bit Mugabe-esque

This is something that will effect all of the EU is to be decided by less than 1% of the population of the Union.
Here in Holland Lisbon was rejected (I'm flying home for the Euro vote) - In France Lisbon was rejected and in Ireland Lisbon was rejected.

Now in fairness when it comes to polls, those are a sample.
Thanks for being clear about that PHB.
As you said 54% who are polled are in favour.
If we are to go on that, then why not poll people in a strong FG area if we should have a General Election?

Here on this forum occasionally there is the Sinn Fein/Libertas comment when I post about my concerns on Lisbon but for the main part in this debate on this forum most posters have their opinion, and express themselves in a civil and understandable way.

I seem to be one of the few posting here who is worried about Lisbon and despite assurances from the Government I am still unsure about it, with - in my opinion - very good grounds - Nice II / PfP

Last point, being one of the few who seem to be posting against - and this is not critical or personal - I just want to say, Scofflaw, you are well informed on Lisbon, and you have your obvious opinion, but you are also a moderator, so a little bit more impartiality would be welcome.

citizensimon.blogspot.com

Mr.Nice Guy

nesf wrote: »

Right, I'll warn you about this once, this isn't AH, deliberately misrepresenting someone's point like the above is neither allowed nor tolerated.

In what way did I deliberately misrepresent a point? You said the question should surely be resubmitted on the grounds that a lot of people 'didn't understand the question (i.e. what the treaty was about)'.

oscarbravo wrote:

...and therefore will vehemently oppose any future general elections? After all, the people have spoken.

No, the government merits its term in power and it would have been undemocratic to dismiss the will of the people no matter how unpalatable I found it. I must wait a few years to get my next opportunity to turf them out. I accept that.

Scofflaw wrote:

And it can be voted on again - that's also democracy. If your views haven't changed, you give the same answer again. It's not as if you're being asked to jump through burning hoops.

I doubt Yes voters would welcome another referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if it gets endorsed at this second attempt though, wouldn't you say?

Steviemak

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I doubt Yes voters would welcome another referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if it gets endorsed at this second attempt though, wouldn't you say?

Well why don't you elect a govt on that basis and they can put forward a referendum on this issue. Its that simple. Once it is enacted then the only referendum left is to remove us from the EU.

Scofflaw

Zuiderzee wrote: »

Last point, being one of the few who seem to be posting against - and this is not critical or personal - I just want to say, Scofflaw, you are well informed on Lisbon, and you have your obvious opinion, but you are also a moderator, so a little bit more impartiality would be welcome.

Two points - first, I'm not required to be neutral in discussion, I'm only required to be fair to posters as posters. Second, you don't post advice on moderation in the forum. If you wish to comment on moderation, you do it Help Desk - it's an infractable/banning offence within the forum.

Those are the rules - I'm here to enforce them.

moderately,
Scofflaw

BlitzKrieg

I doubt Yes voters would welcome another referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if it gets endorsed at this second attempt though, wouldn't you say?

I'd bitch and moan about it (probably because for this to happen we would have a libertas and/or Sinn Feinn government which is kinda scary) but I wouldnt try and take the unjustified high road and declare the referendum undemocratic.

No, the government merits its term in power and it would have been undemocratic to dismiss the will of the people no matter how unpalatable I found it. I must wait a few years to get my next opportunity to turf them out. I accept that.

then you must accept the powers you have given that same government. Which include referendums. On a side note, I find the lisbon referendum the most interesting of the two 2 attempts referendums because it came so soon after a general election and yet despite everyone knowing we will have to address Lisbon within a year it was never major issue at the general election, all the parties that oppossed it actually lost seats and that the public opinion of the EU was actually very high.

nesf

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

In what way did I deliberately misrepresent a point? You said the question should surely be resubmitted on the grounds that a lot of people 'didn't understand the question (i.e. what the treaty was about)'.

I was referring to polls taken directly after the referendum which stated that a worrying large percentage of No voters voted No because they didn't understand the treaty and/or didn't know what the treaty entailed. Which can be at least partially attributed to slogans like "If you don't know, Vote No!" and similar. These polls received such high levels of publicity in the media that it should have been clear what I was referring to.

Not understanding something is not being thick nor does it require people to be in any way unintelligent, it just requires them to either not be exposed to a concept, not have read it or have difficulty understanding it (in this case) due to it being written in technical language that the vast majority of people do not encounter in their normal life. Your skipping from my statement to me saying that they were "thickos" is creating a straw man not addressing the point, whether you realised what you were doing or not.

nesf

Zuiderzee wrote: »

Last point, being one of the few who seem to be posting against - and this is not critical or personal - I just want to say, Scofflaw, you are well informed on Lisbon, and you have your obvious opinion, but you are also a moderator, so a little bit more impartiality would be welcome.

We're not required to be neutral in our posts, just our moderating decisions. Actually you're better off with us revealing our biases in our posts because it'll make biased moderating decisions easier to spot (i.e. if I go around randomly banning people who support Labour it'll be pretty obvious from my posts that it isn't accidental ).

BlitzKrieg

if I go around randomly banning people who support Labour it'll be pretty obvious from my posts that it isn't accidental

I'd like to point out I havnt been banned yet

Scofflaw

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

In what way did I deliberately misrepresent a point? You said the question should surely be resubmitted on the grounds that a lot of people 'didn't understand the question (i.e. what the treaty was about)'.

Which you chose to characterise as being a statement that No voters were thick. It's possible you genuinely don't know the difference between being ignorant of the details of an issue and being thick, but the former means not having enough information, and the latter means incapable of using information.

The ignorance in question is largely the fault of the official campaigns, which absolutely failed to explain and illuminate the treaty and its implications. That doesn't involve any voters being "thick".

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

No, the government merits its term in power and it would have been undemocratic to dismiss the will of the people no matter how unpalatable I found it. I must wait a few years to get my next opportunity to turf them out. I accept that.

And by the same set of rules (Bunreacht), the government is entitled to ask a question at referendum as many times as it think it can politically get away with it. It's only likely to do it when it thinks there's a genuine chance that the electorate has changed its mind.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I doubt Yes voters would welcome another referendum on the Lisbon Treaty if it gets endorsed at this second attempt though, wouldn't you say?

Personally, I wouldn't have an issue with it. The tendency of the Yes side to roll over and go to sleep after a Yes (perhaps with a short interlude for a post-vote cigarette) is something that irritates me vastly. Knowing there would be a rematch might keep them on their toes - plus, of course, there would be the endearing spectacle of watching the No campaigns tying themselves in knots explaining how such a third referendum was legitimate while the second one wasn't really.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Zuiderzee

Scofflaw wrote: »

Two points - first, I'm not required to be neutral in discussion, I'm only required to be fair to posters as posters. Second, you don't post advice on moderation in the forum. If you wish to comment on moderation, you do it Help Desk - it's an infractable/banning offence within the forum.

Those are the rules - I'm here to enforce them.

moderately,
Scofflaw

I run a fairly popular sport forum so I do understand how tricky the job can be.

As I stated, it was not personal, critical or meant as advice - it was a request -

If you feel that is infractable/bannable then do what you feel is best.

In future I will if I'm not suspended or banned I will use the help desk.

One question - are any of the mods here against the Lisbon treaty?

nesf

Zuiderzee wrote: »

One question - are any of the mods here against the Lisbon treaty?

Guan Yin is an American living in America and she is neutral on the issue. If she spots any bias in our moderation I assure you she'll bring it to our attention. Other than that, I'm unsure where the Admins of the site are on this issue but it wouldn't surprise me if we had a No voter or two among them (and some are apolitical) and they overrule us and have final say in moderation matters.

Mr.Nice Guy

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

I'd bitch and moan about it (probably because for this to happen we would have a libertas and/or Sinn Feinn government which is kinda scary) but I wouldnt try and take the unjustified high road and declare the referendum undemocratic.

I'm declaring the dismissal of the first referendum undemocratic. Let's be honest mate if the shoe was on the other foot you and others would do exactly the same.

BlitzKrieg wrote:

then you must accept the powers you have given that same government. Which include referendums. On a side note, I find the lisbon referendum the most interesting of the two 2 attempts referendums because it came so soon after a general election and yet despite everyone knowing we will have to address Lisbon within a year it was never major issue at the general election, all the parties that oppossed it actually lost seats and that the public opinion of the EU was actually very high.

I do accept the right of the government to exercise its powers but I can't and won't accept that it is morally justifiable. I don't think I can be blamed for that. I believe it's an affront to democracy. If they wanted to return to the issue in a few years that's fair enough, but before the result was even officially announced it was evident they had no intention of respecting the result.

nesf wrote:

I was referring to polls taken directly after the referendum which stated that a worrying large percentage of No voters voted No because they didn't understand the treaty and/or didn't know what the treaty entailed. Which can be at least partially attributed to slogans like "If you don't know, Vote No!" and similar. These polls received such high levels of publicity in the media that it should have been clear what I was referring to.

Not understanding something is not being thick nor does it require people to be in any way unintelligent, it just requires them to either not be exposed to a concept, not have read it or have difficulty understanding it (in this case) due to it being written in technical language that the vast majority of people do not encounter in their normal life. Your skipping from my statement to me saying that they were "thickos" is creating a straw man not addressing the point, whether you realised what you were doing or not.

Well I wasn't trying to create a straw man argument. Just seems to me that there's a rather sweeping view about, largely media-driven perhaps, that at the first referendum most No voters didn't understand what they were voting for and that those who voted Yes did understand what they were voting for, and that therefore the original vote can be dismissed more easily.

It's as if we are considered to be not as enlightened as everybody else is.

Case in point when some chap on this thread commented 'you people again' after I made my views known. As if I'm some slack-jawed yokel whose views ought not to be taken seriously.