Maybe we won't be voting on Lisbon

conchubhar1

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

It's barely worth news reports in most European countries, including Britain really, because people don't have to be asked about it, they don't care.

We're the only ones with our knickers in a twist about a completely standard, and not even slightly unusual EU treaty.

i dont care what other countries find newsworthy

it is important to me and many others - in a democracy people get a vote (not always - but this is changing the complexion of the eu)

PopeBuckfastXVI

conchubhar1 wrote: »

i dont care what other countries find newsworthy

it is important to me and many others - in a democracy people get a vote (not always - but this is changing the complexion of the eu)

Do you live in Ireland? Have you been denied a vote?

ShooterSF

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Yes but we are very selfish, and we don't tend to vote for things without enough 'sweeteners', I had hoped we had grown up a bit since the 70's with all our 'wealth' and such, but apperently not...

True. I don't think you can take selfishness out of the human equation. I never thing we'll evolve past it. When you have a nationalistic view it's even tougher to ignore when discussing European matters.

Don't get me wrong I don't like the general public's opinion anymore than the next guy and can see the benefits of a restrictive system. Unless of course I disagree with the elected representitive's views :pac: but I don't agree with pretending it's as democratic.

PopeBuckfastXVI

ShooterSF wrote: »

True. I don't think you can take selfishness out of the human equation. I never thing we'll evolve past it. When you have a nationalistic view it's even tougher to ignore when discussing European matters.

Don't get me wrong I don't like the general public's opinion anymore than the next guy and can see the benefits of a restrictive system. Unless of course I disagree with the elected representitive's views :pac: but I don't agree with pretending it's as democratic.

It's a nice thought, democracy, but you're right, by necessity constitutional representative democracy, is not as democractic, where by democratic we mean everyone has a say on every issue.

It's also not as anarchic as direct democracy, but you don't often see proponents of direct democracy make that argument.

conchubhar1

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Do you live in Ireland? Have you been denied a vote?

i am european also - i am democratic

i want the eu to be democratic



also, i am being asked to vote again on something that was ligitamly rejected

conchubhar1

ShooterSF wrote: »

When you have a nationalistic view it's even tougher to ignore when discussing European matters.

not for me and many others i know.

Don't get me wrong I don't like the general public's opinion anymore than the next guy and can see the benefits of a restrictive system.

because they disagree with you?

?

PopeBuckfastXVI

conchubhar1 wrote: »

i am european also - i am democratic

i want the eu to be democratic



also, i am being asked to vote again on something that was ligitamly rejected

The internal democratic mechanisms of the member states of the EU are not the EU itself, you've confused the two.

So vote again, more votes = more democracy n'est pas?

conchubhar1

the heads of the eu states, play a very important role in the eu

and influenced the having a second vote here and not having a vote in other countries


the issue is closed - all irish people had the chance to voice their opinion on the issue. end of - no need for a second vote

only to pass it through like they did with nice

PopeBuckfastXVI

conchubhar1 wrote: »

the heads of the eu states, play a very important role in the eu

and influenced the having a second vote here and not having a vote in other countries


the issue is closed - all irish people had the chance to voice their opinion on the issue. end of - no need for a second vote

only to pass it through like they did with nice

I do wish you would stop passing off your opinions as facts.

conchubhar1

which point to you find an error in

where did i state fact? beside the second vote here - to state there is no need for it is fact

CiaranC

Is there no way they cant restructure the EU Constitution/Lisbon Treaty again like they did to get past the obstacle of the French and Dutch rejecting it?

They should take all the pages and make a paper-mache chair out of it and call it the EU Chair. There nothing in our constitution about requiring a referendum on new chairs! Viola, a perfect EU solution.

PopeBuckfastXVI

conchubhar1 wrote: »

which point to you find an error in

where did i state fact? beside the second vote here - to state there is no need for it is fact

No, it's your opinion, and you're passing it off as fact again.

conchubhar1

where did i say fact? again

repeating your view doesnt make it fact either, but as an opinion back it up with where i said fact

ShooterSF

conchubhar1 wrote: »

?

Not 100% sure Im answering the right question here. I do feel sometimes the general public can vote on things other than the issue. Selfish personal issues can come into larger more obscure issues. This means that sometimes a vote can mean one thing but have another reason. And yes I have a view of how I'd like to see our country run and when the general public don't agree with me I don't appreciate it. That too is selfish.
It's the nature of the beast

conchubhar1

a vote is a vote - reason is important but the outcome matters.....

ShooterSF

conchubhar1 wrote: »

a vote is a vote - reason is important but the outcome matters.....

I'm not arguing it's not. I'm arguing that I can be unhappy about it.
Watch me is Lisbon 2 passes :pac:

PopeBuckfastXVI

conchubhar1 wrote:

where did i state fact? beside the second vote here - to state there is no need for it is fact

conchubhar1 wrote: »

where did i say fact? again

repeating your view doesnt make it fact either, but as an opinion back it up with where i said fact

Are you for real?

conchubhar1

be unhappy

but the irish people spoke - to ask again is not right

dress it up as you see fit

conchubhar1

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Are you for real?

i did say beside the second vote............. :mad::mad::mad::mad:


that is a fact - the vote was a no.

no means no.....

ShooterSF

conchubhar1 wrote: »

be unhappy

but the irish people spoke - to ask again is not right

dress it up as you see fit

Eh if that's to me I actually agree with you on that point. Until the text of the treaty is edited to provide the "provisions" the govt. sought I won't be happy voting on the treaty.
Anywho I'm going way off track and feel another Lisbon argument coming from outside of the discussion so I'll stop there.

PopeBuckfastXVI

conchubhar1 wrote: »

i did say beside the second vote............. :mad::mad::mad::mad:


that is a fact - the vote was a no.

no means no.....

It is your opinion that there is no need for a second vote, and you are repeatedly passing it off as fact.

conchubhar1

do you not agree that when people vote no - they mean no

is that not a fact?

if yes, why a second vote?

PopeBuckfastXVI

conchubhar1 wrote: »

do you not agree that when people vote no - they mean no

is that not a fact?

if yes, why a second vote?

I believe people are entitled to change their minds.

ionix5891

conchubhar1 wrote: »

do you not agree that when people vote no - they mean no

is that not a fact?

if yes, why a second vote?

does the constitution of this county not give us a right to vote as often as we want on a major subject?

is that not a fact?

if yes then why not a second vote?

conchubhar1

if they vote no again

you would advocate a never ending vote, would ya?

conchubhar1

yes

but no means no - forcing another vote in the hard times we are in will most likely lead to a yes. only by scaremongering

ShooterSF

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

I believe people are entitled to change their minds.

Hmm what if changing their mind forced a more difficult change like say supporting Lisbon, passing it and then changing their mind? Also is it asking much for people to think about an issue enough to make a decision on it they are happy with? I accept people change their mind but can we cater to the fickle who change every couple of months? Is it asking too much to develop an opinion that they are sure of?

conchubhar1

what if i change my mind to a yes after lisbon 2 but then back again

can i be just misinformed by the bad anti eu men and can we have another referendum vote?

ionix5891

conchubhar1 wrote: »

what if i change my mind to a yes after lisbon 2 but then back again

can i be just misinformed by the bad anti eu men and can we have another referendum vote?

if enough people feel bad about a decision they can tell their representatives to raise the issue again and/or instead go and start own party and campaign on said issue (UKIP party in UK is an example of people wanting separation from EU and exercising their democratic right)

that's how democracy works but yet again you seem to be not aware :rolleyes:

molloyjh

ShooterSF wrote: »

Hmm what if changing their mind forced a more difficult change like say supporting Lisbon, passing it and then changing their mind? Also is it asking much for people to think about an issue enough to make a decision on it they are happy with? I accept people change their mind but can we cater to the fickle who change every couple of months? Is it asking too much to develop an opinion that they are sure of?

Well this issue is one borne from a couple of different ones. Education being one (I'm going to be harping on about this for a while again I think!:o). That was a huge issue generally, not just with the No voters, last year. As long as the levels of ignorance remains high you're likely to have a lot more flip-flopping. If people know it they'll usually form a stable opinion on it.

However there are people who will naturally flip-flop anyway, be it because they are on the fence or easily influenced by other peoples opinions. There is little you can do in these cases really.

I do understand your point and am, and always have been, far more in favour of an educated No than an ignorant Yes. If No truly is the will of the people then that's fine. For as long as these levels of ignorance remain we can't be sure about the referenda results either way.