Democracy my B0lllox!!!

K-9

demakinz wrote: »

when elected how long does The Taoiseach of ireland hold office?

I don't know. Going on Haughey or Reynolds, there is no definite term. There maybe a term specified but obviously, history has shown that it is not sacrosanct.

Reynolds out, Bruton In, with NO Election?

I find that objectionable, but it was apparently constitutional.

K-9

ButcherBoiz wrote: »

Final point on this. I watched it. With my own eyes. I'm convinced. The footage is not on youtube of the RTE site. If something is not on the internet, well tough. The kind of internet-based research you do (and it's commendable in terms of effort) is very inadequate. Often, critical sources or information are not available to the lay 'researcher' on the internet.

This is a casual forum. For chatting, in a straightforward way. There is merit in doing just that... or at least achieving a happy medium.

Good luck!

Over and out.

This is certainly not a casual forum which maybe the underlying problem with your posts.

BlitzKrieg

Final point on this. I watched it. With my own eyes. I'm convinced. The footage is not on youtube of the RTE site.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0709/primetime_av.html?2577387,null,230

6 minutes in he answers a question on lisbon.

took me twenty minutes to find and install the right codec for it (real alternative) and five minutes to find the piece itself.

RTE keeps all its political interviews in archive online.

And its exactly the same quote I gave you from the RTE website from earlier.

Often, critical sources or information are not available to the lay 'researcher' on the internet.

And if you cannot provide a critical source or piece of information then it is fully acceptable that people might and will call you up on the authencity of that claim.

ButcherBoiz

So if it's not casual then you are indicating it is formal? In what way? The forum logo says --now ye're talkin'--. I really thought we were here to have a chat, and not have formal talks!

Scofflaw

K-9 wrote: »

I don't know. Going on Haughey or Reynolds, there is no definite term. There maybe a term specified but obviously, history has shown that it is not sacrosanct.

Reynolds out, Bruton In, with NO Election?

I find that objectionable, but it was apparently constitutional.

Sure - the Constitution only sets a maximum term for a government (5 years). There's no minimum term at all. Likewise, there's no requirement for the government to hold a majority of seats, although minority governments are pretty badly handicapped, and still require a majority to actually pass legislation.

Irish governments now tend to last the whole term, but that hasn't always been the case. The terms of the last 10 Dáils are:

GE date|Dáil|Days
28/02/73|20th Dáil|1569
16/06/77|21st Dáil|1456
1979||
11/06/81|22nd Dáil|252
18/02/82|23th Dáil|279
24/11/82|24th Dáil|1546
17/02/87|25th Dáil|849
15/06/89|26th Dáil|1259
1992||
25/11/92|27th Dáil|1654
1994||
06/06/97|28th Dáil|1806
17 May 2002|29th Dáil|1788
24 May 2007|30th Dáil|779


On average, 3.3 years. Those are just the gaps between general elections, though. The 27th Dáil, as K-9 says, saw a change of government with no general election, because Labour held the balance of seats. By walking out of coalition with FF and into the Rainbow Coalition, Labour changed the government. Objectionable or not, it produced a far better government.

It's not an open and shut binary sort of business, democracy.

cordially,
Scofflaw

demakinz

K-9 wrote: »

I don't know. Going on Haughey or Reynolds, there is no definite term. There maybe a term specified but obviously, history has shown that it is not sacrosanct.

Reynolds out, Bruton In, with NO Election?

I find that objectionable, but it was apparently constitutional.

if not then why not cowen out now? because there is a set time of office! cowens rating is well below average!
how many people support cowen at this moment in time?
why not give lisbon another year or two for the public to try get to understand it a bit better=because Europe wants to force in before we do get to understand it more.
mark my words the lisbon treaty will make more problems than it will solve.in years to come our children and there children will wonder how stupid we were to allow this to happen.
there the one who will be fighting for change!

Scofflaw

demakinz wrote: »

if not then why not cowen out now? because there is a set time of office! cowens rating is well below average!

No, there's only a set maximum. There's no set minimum. If Fine Gael's confidence votes had worked, the government would have fallen already. If the Greens walk out, and the by-elections go against FF, the government will fall.

demakinz wrote: »

how many people support cowen at this moment in time?

We don't know - the only way is to have an election.

demakinz wrote: »

why not give lisbon another year or two for the public to try get to understand it a bit better=because Europe wants to force in before we do get to understand it more.

Come October, we'll have had nearly 2 years. If people haven't bothered finding out by then, they're not going to bother to find out.

demakinz wrote: »

mark my words the lisbon treaty will make more problems than it will solve.in years to come our children and there children will wonder how stupid we were to allow this to happen.
there the one who will be fighting for change!

Then it will be up to the Irish government of that time to negotiate a better deal. If Lisbon is as bad as you say, the public pressure to change it - across Europe - will make it impossible not to change it.

cordially,
Scofflaw

ButcherBoiz

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0709/primetime_av.html?2577387,null,230

6 minutes in he answers a question on lisbon.

took me twenty minutes to find and install the right codec for it (real alternative) and five minutes to find the piece itself.

RTE keeps all its political interviews in archive online.

And its exactly the same quote I gave you from the RTE website from earlier.



And if you cannot provide a critical source or piece of information then it is fully acceptable that people might and will call you up on the authencity of that claim.

I saw it on TV. He speaks directly to the camera. He, in my opinion, influences the irish electorate by speaking in very positive terms about a yes vote. I think the protracted breakdown/analysis you have set out in the various posts is moot --I made a simple, clear point and expressed an opinion. You have been somewhat circular, but the host of points and references you undertook to present are, again, in my opinion, moot and overly analytical. If you disagree fine. We agree to disagree.

Good luck!

Over and out.

K-9

demakinz wrote: »

if not then why not cowen out now? because there is a set time of office! cowens rating is well below average!
how many people support cowen at this moment in time?
why not give lisbon another year or two for the public to try get to understand it a bit better=because Europe wants to force in before we do get to understand it more.
mark my words the lisbon treaty will make more problems than it will solve.in years to come our children and there children will wonder how stupid we were to allow this to happen.
there the one who will be fighting for change!

Cowen can call an election tomorrow if he sees fit. I'm not wasting my time debating this point anymore. I've shown the facts and Scofflaw has clarified it.

Your point is Bullsh*t, to be frank.

You know obviously your point has been debunked and now you move onto a rant. I wish you'd just say, well lads, my point was incorrect there, let's move on! I'd respect you more!

demakinz

ok Scofflaw can you please tell me in laymans terms what advantages i have for voting YES as a normal person who nos nothing about all politics mumbo jumbo?

what difference will it make to me from the way we are now?

BlitzKrieg

but the host of points and references you undertook to present are, again, in my opinion, moot and overly analytical.

So.

Instead of answering my points or explaining why they are moot, you are simply going to ignore them.

You never actually answered my comments on Sarkozy, you told me you would after I answered about the UN general secretary. I have done as such.

You also still havnt told me why you accused me twice of being evasive or using evasive tactics.

And regardless of whether you saw it or not, if you cannot prove that he said it, then you should (not cant) but should not use it in a discussion, especially when you are accusing someone of saying something they may have not said. As I already said RTE saves all its political interviews, I went and found the only one he gave during his visit. I have checked the irishtimes, rte and breakingnews websites, none of them report him acting as you have said he has. Considering how much of a crucial point it is, not only in our little minor conversation but also politically, you think someone in one of the many news media outlets of europe would have written it down.

demakinz

K-9 wrote: »

Cowen can call an election tomorrow if he sees fit. I'm not wasting my time debating this point anymore. I've shown the facts and Scofflaw has clarified it.

Your point is Bullsh*t, to be frank.

You know obviously your point has been debunked and now you move onto a rant. I wish you'd just say, well lads, my point was incorrect there, let's move on! I'd respect you more!

i have not been convinced as a voter to vote yes along with alot of the voting public.it seems to me you need a degree in politics to understand half of what the YES side is saying.im just giving my opinions on this.
nobody has said anything to convince me to vote yes in the last two years.if you can convince me other wise il be the first one two put my hands up and admit im wrong in voting no
iv asked how ireland will be better off in voting yes when we have done so well in the last 10 years before the ression!
how will voting yes make ireland better off?

ButcherBoiz

demakinz wrote: »

if not then why not cowen out now? because there is a set time of office! cowens rating is well below average!
how many people support cowen at this moment in time?
why not give lisbon another year or two for the public to try get to understand it a bit better=because Europe wants to force in before we do get to understand it more.
mark my words the lisbon treaty will make more problems than it will solve.in years to come our children and there children will wonder how stupid we were to allow this to happen.
there the one who will be fighting for change!

Your point about the second vote being scheduled so soon after the first is valid. This also reflects the sentiment of the general public.

A lot of people are saying they do not understand the treaty, still. This is a reason for delaying the vote, from a no perspective.

Also, Fianna Fail are held in poor regard by the people. So, a delay that would allow for a restoration of confidence, if that could happen, would serve the interests of a yes vote.

Either way, tthe proposed date for a second vote is a less than ideal scenario. Can people at least agree on that???

K-9

ButcherBoiz wrote: »

So if it's not casual then you are indicating it is formal? In what way? The forum logo says --now ye're talkin'--. I really thought we were here to have a chat, and not have formal talks!

Hmmm, you should read the forum charter here. When you go to the European Union page, it's at the top. Sorry it isn't simple. A half Page, 5 point, one size fits all box would be far clearer!

Scofflaw wrote: »

Sure - the Constitution only sets a maximum term for a government (5 years). There's no minimum term at all. Likewise, there's no requirement for the government to hold a majority of seats, although minority governments are pretty badly handicapped, and still require a majority to actually pass legislation.

Irish governments now tend to last the whole term, but that hasn't always been the case. The terms of the last 10 Dáils are:

GE date|Dáil|Days
28/02/73|20th Dáil|1569
16/06/77|21st Dáil|1456
1979||
11/06/81|22nd Dáil|252
18/02/82|23th Dáil|279
24/11/82|24th Dáil|1546
17/02/87|25th Dáil|849
15/06/89|26th Dáil|1259
1992||
25/11/92|27th Dáil|1654
1994||
06/06/97|28th Dáil|1806
17 May 2002|29th Dáil|1788
24 May 2007|30th Dáil|779

On average, 3.3 years. Those are just the gaps between general elections, though. The 27th Dáil, as K-9 says, saw a change of government with no general election, because Labour held the balance of seats. By walking out of coalition with FF and into the Rainbow Coalition, Labour changed the government. Objectionable or not, it produced a far better government.

It's not an open and shut binary sort of business, democracy.

cordially,
Scofflaw

LOL, Not sure if it brought better Govt., though it's an interesting point. Longer and more stable Govts., over the last 10/15 years have not necessarily meant better Govt.

ButcherBoiz wrote: »

I saw it on TV. He speaks directly to the camera. He, in my opinion, influences the irish electorate by speaking in very positive terms about a yes vote. I think the protracted breakdown/analysis you have set out in the various posts is moot --I made a simple, clear point and expressed an opinion. You have been somewhat circular, but the host of points and references you undertook to present are, again, in my opinion, moot and overly analytical. If you disagree fine. We agree to disagree.

Good luck!

Over and out.

So, the Czech president coming here was influencing the Irish electorate?

I am making a simple, clear point here.

An Capall Dubh

People are complaining about how it's not democratic that we should have to vote again after having voted no first time round.

Surely these same people could not deny that if a yes vote was passed in a second vote then democracy wins regardless!!

And if we have another vote after that again, and it's a yes vote, then what do ya know, democracy wins again!!!

So what does it matter how many times we have a vote as long as the majority of the population believe yes or no!!!!

ButcherBoiz

demakinz wrote: »

i have not been convinced as a voter to vote yes along with alot of the voting public.it seems to me you need a degree in politics to understand half of what the YES side is saying.im just giving my opinions on this.
nobody has said anything to convince me to vote yes in the last two years.if you can convince me other wise il be the first one two put my hands up and admit im wrong in voting no
iv asked how ireland will be better off in voting yes when we have done so well in the last 10 years before the ression!
how will voting yes make ireland better off?

Totally agree with you on this also. I maintain that we are all here for a casual discussion. I was just told that this is a forum for formal discussions. Can you believe that?

Maybe some people in here have a degree in politics. I happen to have just started into my PhD, but not in politics, thank God. But I'm not going to deliver convoluted points founded on 'internet-based research'. As the saying goes: with all these educated people, there will not be enough uneducated people left to employ the educated people!

ButcherBoiz

An Capall Dubh wrote: »

People are complaining about how it's not democratic that we should have to vote again after having voted no first time round.

Surely these same people could not deny that if a yes vote was passed in a second vote then democracy wins regardless!!

And if we have another vote after that again, and it's a yes vote, then what do ya know, democracy wins again!!!

So what does it matter how many times we have a vote as long as the majority of the population believe yes or no!!!!

Simple question. If we had voted yes last year, would we have the option of a second vote?

The situation is unfair, but we're stuck with it. Unfair situations tend to annoy voters...

demakinz

An Capall Dubh wrote: »

People are complaining about how it's not democratic that we should have to vote again after having voted no first time round.

Surely these same people could not deny that if a yes vote was passed in a second vote then democracy wins regardless!!

And if we have another vote after that again, and it's a yes vote, then what do ya know, democracy wins again!!!

So what does it matter how many times we have a vote as long as the majority of the population believe yes or no!!!!

did the majority not win the first time around?
if it was yes the first time we would not be arguing because we wouldnt have to vote again regardless

K-9

demakinz wrote: »

ok Scofflaw can you please tell me in laymans terms what advantages i have for voting YES as a normal person who nos nothing about all politics mumbo jumbo?

what difference will it make to me from the way we are now?

There is a thread or 2 already on this. I like the common energy and foreign policy parts myself.

What are the disadvantages in laymans terms?

demakinz wrote: »

i have not been convinced as a voter to vote yes along with alot of the voting public.it seems to me you need a degree in politics to understand half of what the YES side is saying.im just giving my opinions on this.
nobody has said anything to convince me to vote yes in the last two years.if you can convince me other wise il be the first one two put my hands up and admit im wrong in voting no
iv asked how ireland will be better off in voting yes when we have done so well in the last 10 years before the ression!
how will voting yes make ireland better off?

But you need a degree in politics to see the no sides points. It's the same treaty! We haven't done well in the 10 years!

ButcherBoiz wrote: »

Your point about the second vote being scheduled so soon after the first is valid. This also reflects the sentiment of the general public.

A lot of people are saying they do not understand the treaty, still. This is a reason for delaying the vote, from a no perspective.

Also, Fianna Fail are held in poor regard by the people. So, a delay that would allow for a restoration of confidence, if that could happen, would serve the interests of a yes vote.

Either way, tthe proposed date for a second vote is a less than ideal scenario. Can people at least agree on that???

How long do the general public need? A Serious point here?

ButcherBoiz

demakinz!

Snap!!!

This is getting silly.

demakinz

ButcherBoiz wrote: »

Totally agree with you on this also. I maintain that we are all here for a casual discussion. I was just told that this is a forum for formal discussions. Can you believe that?

Maybe some people in here have a degree in politics. I happen to have just started into my PhD, but not in politics, thank God. But I'm not going to deliver convoluted points founded on 'internet-based research'. As the saying goes: with all these educated people, there will not be enough uneducated people left to employ the educated people!

99% of the voting public havnt got a clue about politics(me included).im just looking for a few points that i can understand why i should vote YES.why vote something in that you dont understand! the yas camp could have another 5 years and still not explain why we should vote yes.
this was there problem the first time around and nothing has changed yet!

BlitzKrieg

did the majority not win the first time around?

And lisbon was not ratified.

But the current elected government has the right to put forward another referendum.

It can be a no vote again.

Its not undemocratic.

if it was yes the first time we would not be arguing because we wouldnt have to vote again regardless

Because prior to the referendum (just a year) we elected a government that had ratifying lisbon as part of its policy.

K-9

ButcherBoiz wrote: »

demakinz!

Snap!!!

This is getting silly.

Nope, it is isn't getting silly, it was silly a good few posts ago.

K-9

demakinz wrote: »

99% of the voting public havnt got a clue about politics(me included).im just looking for a few points that i can understand why i should vote YES.why vote something in that you dont understand! the yas camp could have another 5 years and still not explain why we should vote yes.
this was there problem the first time around and nothing has changed yet!

Look, read the front page of the forum. There is no billions of Euros or that many updates of our stupid outdated laws.

People have to think for themselves on this one.

There are no sexy points for Lisbon that can be put in a Youtube video to ctach the eye of an 18 year old. It's boring. There is plenty of hyperbole that can be put in a youtube video though.

ButcherBoiz

K-9 wrote: »

Look, read the front page of the forum. There is no billions of Euros or that many updates of our stupid outdated laws.

People have to think for themselves on this one.

There are no sexy points for Lisbon that can be put in a Youtube video to ctach the eye of an 18 year old. It's boring. There is plenty of hyperbole that can be put in a youtube video though.

so your point is the people who voted no last year voted on the basis of youtube videos that targeted 18yr olds?

Like you said, this is silly, both sides. I'm off to bed.

btw,
911=inside job

demakinz

K-9 wrote: »

Look, read the front page of the forum. There is no billions of Euros or that many updates of our stupid outdated laws.

People have to think for themselves on this one.

There are no sexy points for Lisbon that can be put in a Youtube video to ctach the eye of an 18 year old. It's boring. There is plenty of hyperbole that can be put in a youtube video though.

are the government not at a loss then trying to get people to vote yes when they cant really explain why they should vote yes.im going to vote no unless im giving some reasons why i should vote YES.And i hope the general public do the same.why vote it in if you dont understand why?

Munsterforever

You guys seem to insist on answering the original question with more questions which is indeed arbitrary, and does not do much to help answer the original question.

I think its probably habitual in our style of writing as I almost did the same thing myself at the start of this post.

demakinz

Munsterforever wrote: »

You guys seem to insist on answering the original question with more questions which is indeed arbitrary, and does not do much to help answer the original question.

I think its probably habitual in our style of writing as I almost did the same thing myself at the start of this post.

is that not how politicians answer questions?

ButcherBoiz

It's 3.53 in the morning and I just ran out of whiskey. It's been funny.



___________________
911=inside job

BlitzKrieg

demakinz wrote: »

are the government not at a loss then trying to get people to vote yes when they cant really explain why they should vote yes.im going to vote no unless im giving some reasons why i should vote YES.And i hope the general public do the same.why vote it in if you dont understand why?

I dont understand this. In the run up last year, a website was provided by the referendum commission that outlined what Lisbon was doing. What is so hard about this website? What do you not understand or need explaining?

http://www.lisbontreaty2008.ie/