why are we voting again

ionix5891

conchubhar1 wrote: »

no

a parliment and a referendum are different


this is not a politics 101 class - and i know you know the difference



the tds are elected every 5 years - a referendum is not a recurring item. especially not a year after the first one

so you admit that theres a difference between representative and direct democracy?! great stuff were coming along great now

what do you call the second Nice referendum?

tds dont have to be elected every 5 years, if a government is unpopular enough they are forced to call an election

we might see this happen in Ireland and/or UK soon

see democracy at work

.

Rb

dvpower wrote: »

The most recent opinion polls suggest the people may have now changed their minds.

Why do you think this is?

It's not because they've read the text since the last referendum, so therefore not really a valid reason to vote for the treaty.

Or is it suddenly acceptable seeing as it's a "Yes"?

ionix5891

Rb wrote: »

Why do you think this is?

It's not because they've read the text since the last referendum, so therefore not really a valid reason to vote for the treaty.

Or is it suddenly acceptable seeing as it's a "Yes"?

how do you know that they;
* didnt read the literature
* visited sites like boards
* read the numerous discussion or read/listened to the constant media discussions on the subject
* talked about the subject in the pubs

if anything the events of the last year should have reinforced the notion that we need europe and europe needs us, and that our "richness" was illusionary

we even have an example now of countries not in EU or euro who follow same path as us and are now bankrupt or nearly bankrupt

molloyjh

dvpower wrote: »

The most recent opinion polls suggest the people may have now changed their minds.

We're not allowed to change our minds apparently. Or at least we are, but its not allowed to count.

conchubhar1

why would people suddenly go wait a minute

lisbon was a good thing, i was blind but now i see


that didnt happen, they are scared about the economy that is the reason for the change in opinions

molloyjh

conchubhar1 wrote: »

why would people suddenly go wait a minute

lisbon was a good thing, i was blind but now i see


that didnt happen, they are scared about the economy that is the reason for the change in opinions

Oh sorry, so insome cases changing your mind does count and in others it doesn't. How very democratic of you.

dvpower

Rb wrote: »

Why do you think this is?

It's not because they've read the text since the last referendum, so therefore not really a valid reason to vote for the treaty.

Or is it suddenly acceptable seeing as it's a "Yes"?

I say in large part due to the economic collapse; priorities have changed, people just don't want the uncertanty that rejecting Lisbon brings.

Its a bit much to expect people in general to read the and try to understand the implications of the treaty. I just don't see significant numbers ever reading the treaty. That's why we need RTE and the like to analyse and report on it and politicians, unions and the like to advise on it.

conchubhar1

ionix5891 wrote: »

if anything the events of the last year should have reinforced the notion that we need europe and europe needs us, and that our "richness" was illusionary

we even have an example now of countries not in EU or euro who follow same path as us and are now bankrupt or nearly bankrupt

we still need europe - its still there and we are still in the eu
uk doesnt have the euro....

iceland crashed like we did, not because they werent in the eu

ionix5891

conchubhar1 wrote: »

why would people suddenly go wait a minute

lisbon was a good thing, i was blind but now i see


that didnt happen, they are scared about the economy that is the reason for the change in opinions

erm because there was so many lies being spread by Libertas, SF and COIR?

as for the economic conditions that only highlights that we need europe and its markets and money in order not to revert to the good olde days

beside few outbursts the whole EU has been very constructive in addressing the concerns brought up last year (however misplaced some of them like abortion and conscription where)

conchubhar1 wrote: »

we still need europe - its still there and we are still in the eu
uk doesnt have the euro....

iceland crashed like we did, not because they werent in the eu

Iceland not only crashed, they are completely bankrupt and lost a lot of saving for people in other countries, Hungary is practically bankrupt, both are relying on other EEA states to rescue them

we are still in a EU, but one that doesnt work as well as it can for the people because 1% of the population got lied to by people with shady connections

democracy eh??

.

Rb

ionix5891 wrote: »

how do you know that they;
* didnt read the literature
* visited sites like boards
* read the numerous discussion or read/listened to the constant media discussions on the subject
* talked about the subject in the pubs

I doubt it, tbh. If they didn't before voting last time, I doubt they've suddenly went out and done so now. It's not like there was a lack of information available at the time.

ionix5891 wrote:

if anything the events of the last year should have reinforced the notion that we need europe and europe needs us, and that our "richness" was illusionary

we even have an example now of countries not in EU or euro who follow same path as us and are now bankrupt or nearly bankrupt

What does this have to do with the text though? Nothing, it's quite the same as voting No to spite FF really or more accurately, voting no because you think they'll put micro-chips in our kids if it is ratified. Being afraid of the consequences shouldn't be a reason to vote in favour of (or against) the text, as the text doesn't outline consequences.

The consequences of a general election and the way you vote are relevant and fair imo, but in a referendum on a text they shouldn't be a consideration.

This, again, applies to both sides.

conchubhar1

molloyjh wrote: »

Oh sorry, so insome cases changing your mind does count and in others it doesn't. How very democratic of you.

you are taking up my point wrong


people can change their mind - but the irish people voted now

the economic recession with scaremongering shouldnt be used to make more people change their mind for an upcoming referendum on an issue that should not be an issue for a while

it is only a year since the last vote - not saying there can never be another referendum on it

like abortion or divorce etc...

conchubhar1

cowen said he didnt read it

how is that any better than libertas lies?

dvpower

conchubhar1 wrote: »

why would people suddenly go wait a minute

lisbon was a good thing, i was blind but now i see


that didnt happen, they are scared about the economy that is the reason for the change in opinions

Agreed.
But they have changed their minds. Now lets get on with the new referendum so the people's voice can be heard.

Rb

dvpower wrote: »

I say in large part due to the economic collapse; priorities have changed, people just don't want the uncertanty that rejecting Lisbon brings.

Its a bit much to expect people in general to read the and try to understand the implications of the treaty. I just don't see significant numbers ever reading the treaty. That's why we need RTE and the like to analyse and report on it and politicians, unions and the like to advise on it.

The recent elections have shown that apart from FF and their supporters, our country is crying out for a general election. This in itself brings uncertainty.

Yet people are now in favour of a treaty they know nothing about to avoid uncertainty...some people just can't make their minds up I suppose!

If it's a bit much to expect people to read and try to understand the treaty, then it's a bit much to be asking them to vote on it...which probably brings us back to the argument from another thread on voting licences!

ionix5891

Rb wrote: »

I doubt it, tbh. If they didn't before voting last time, I doubt they've suddenly went out and done so now. It's not like there was a lack of information available at the time.



What does this have to do with the text though? Nothing, it's quite the same as voting No to spite FF really or more accurately, voting no because you think they'll put micro-chips in our kids if it is ratified. Being afraid of the consequences shouldn't be a reason to vote in favour of (or against) the text, as the text doesn't outline consequences.

The consequences of a general election and the way you vote are relevant and fair imo, but in a referendum on a text they shouldn't be a consideration.

This, again, applies to both sides.

one can list alot of stupid reasons why people voted NO last year

you be hard pressed to find stupid reasons why people voted YES

the consequences are something to consider, what if Ireland didn't join the EU back in '72 and people listened to SF back then? :cool:

molloyjh

conchubhar1 wrote: »

cowen said he didnt read it

how is that any better than libertas lies?

Because Cowen has people on his staff to read it for him and present their findings. If you think our politicians have the time to wade through multiple treaties then you obviously don't appreciate what they do fully.

Either way I don't care whether Cowen read ot or not, or whether he thought it was the best thing since sliced bread or total crap. I made my decision based on all the information I was able to glean of the Treaty from multiple non-political sources.

To answer the question direclty though Cowen not reading the document was not in itself a deliberate act of dishonesty. Libertas lying was. Hence Libertas are worse.

ionix5891

Cowen is a joke, everyone knows that and people want him out it seems

but at least he was being honest (and dumb)

more than can be said of Libertas and SF

conchubhar1

well yes libertas lied in certain areas - not suprising really

but you cant say that sinn féin lied outright

also, i have stated before on this forum we got a referendum and the only way to base your vote was to read up on it on your own

i didnt vote no because sinn féin were voting no.. thats not to say that other didnt

but others voted out of ignorance also but it was a yes vote...

Rb

ionix5891 wrote: »

one can list alot of stupid reasons why people voted NO last year

you be hard pressed to find stupid reasons why people voted YES

the consequences are something to consider, what if Ireland didn't join the EU back in '72 and people listened to SF back then? :cool:

"I voted yes to a treaty I know nothing about, or its implications for our country and its people, because my ma/my local fianna failer/ told me to" is a more stupid reason than anything I've heard from the No side tbh.

As I said, voter ignorance was an immense problem on both sides, but if there is more support for a Yes now I would hazard a guess that the level of ignorance on the side of Yes has multiplied, rather than the level of ignorance on the No side decreasing as a result of "education" and switching opinions.

It's something that is very hard to back up as a lot won't even admit to it but if as Yes gets through next time, it will be a result of scare mongering and voter ignorance, not newly well educated voters on that side.

The Yes side may deny this all they like, as it will suit them and their cause, but anyone with half a brain and a relatively open mind will know it holds true.

I would say the immediate implications are something to consider, such as what effect could possibly have on our corporation tax rates or how the EU will behave should it go through (as we've seen they don't really respect our opinion on this, what else will they scoff at?) but thoughts of being kicked out of the Union, or being micro-chipped, are so unreasonable that they shouldn't even be considered when going to the polls.

dvpower

Rb wrote: »

The recent elections have shown that apart from FF and their supporters, our country is crying out for a general election. This in itself brings uncertainty.

Yet people are now in favour of a treaty they know nothing about to avoid uncertainty...some people just can't make their minds up I suppose!

If it's a bit much to expect people to read and try to understand the treaty, then it's a bit much to be asking them to vote on it...which probably brings us back to the argument from another thread on voting licences!

The treaty is a complex document. Worse still, its not a standalone document; to try and fully understand its implications, you need to understand the workings of the EU institutions and the previous treaties that it replaces.

If we were to restrict voting on EU treaty referenda to only those who could demonstrate a good grasp of the subject, we would be left with a very small electorate - I wouldn't advocate that (I probably wouldn't get a vote:() . I do think these kinds of complex issues whould be decided by the Dail.

Rb

conchubhar1 wrote: »

i didnt vote no because sinn féin were voting no.. thats not to say that other didnt

but others voted out of ignorance also but it was a yes vote...

Indeed, and one hell of a lot of people voted Yes because Sinn Fein were voting No, or Liberatas were "No".

Likewise, lots voted No because FF were in favour of the treaty.

Voter stupidity is a more accurate description really and is prevalent on both sides of the argument.

molloyjh

conchubhar1 wrote: »

but you cant say that sinn féin lied outright

No they just encouraged and preyed on ignorance. That's much better that is.

conchubhar1

ionix5891 wrote: »

one can list alot of stupid reasons why people voted NO last year

you be hard pressed to find stupid reasons why people voted YES

the consequences are something to consider, what if Ireland didn't join the EU back in '72 and people listened to SF back then? :cool:

yes

no, many stupid reasons - party politics mainly and the campaign of lies of

vote no for this, is a no for europe - that was the biggest lie of them all

sinn féin, while i support some of their views. that is not one, we are better in the eu, as we are now and will be if we vote no again.

conchubhar1

molloyjh wrote: »

No they just encouraged and preyed on ignorance. That's much better that is.

same with the yes side


a vote no for this is a no for europe - that was there main argument
that is a pure lie

polishpaddy

conchubhar1 wrote: »

i question anyone to give one proper democratic reason why we are being asked to vote on a done issue.

really, the irish people voted no.
that should be the end of it.

Because were are f***ing idiots thats why,

conchubhar1

Rb wrote: »

Voter stupidity is a more accurate description really and is prevalent on both sides of the argument.

ye that sums up what i have said below your post

it was on both sides - but the outcome was a no...

conchubhar1

polishpaddy wrote: »

Because were are f***ing idiots thats why,

we are being asked, because we are idiots.


ok - that makes no sense.

ionix5891

Rb wrote: »

"I voted yes to a treaty I know nothing about, or its implications for our country and its people, because my ma/my local fianna failer/ told me to" is a more stupid reason than anything I've heard from the No side tbh.

As I said, voter ignorance was an immense problem on both sides, but if there is more support for a Yes now I would hazard a guess that the level of support on the side of Yes has multiplied, rather than the level of ignorance on the No side decreasing as a result of "education" and switching opinions.

It's something that is very hard to back up as a lot won't even admit to it but if as Yes gets through next time, it will be a result of scare mongering and voter ignorance, not newly well educated voters on that side.

The Yes side may deny this all they like, as it will suit them and their cause, but anyone with half a brain and a relatively open mind will know it holds true.

I would say the immediate implications are something to consider, such as what effect could possibly have on our corporation tax rates or how the EU will behave should it go through (as we've seen they don't really respect our opinion on this, what else will they scoff at?) but thoughts of being kicked out of the Union, or being micro-chipped, are so unreasonable that they shouldn't even be considered when going to the polls.

well firstly thanks for bringing some level of normalcy into the debate, it really starting to descend into a kindergarten shouting match

yes there were alot of stupid reasons to vote on each side, but we did hear alot of stupid (Really stupid ones) on the NO side such as:

* my son will be conscripted
* i dont want to be aborted
* our commissioner will be lost
* turkish muslims will convert us to islam

and so on

finally the FF argument you mentioned would be decreased now as show in their recent beating in the elections (hallelujah!)

as for corporation tax, as someone who had to handover 10k in blood money few months ago to the revenue :mad: the issue is very important to me

but as have been discussed and debunked on this forum it is not an issue and EU have no say and will not have a say in this

polishpaddy

conchubhar1 wrote: »

we are being asked, because we are idiots.


ok - that makes no sense.

We already voted. See the logic?

conchubhar1

that did not represent the majority of peoples views on the no side^