Attitude of the yes campaign

marco_polo

rumour wrote: »

Indeed, shame on me for even contemplating that anything in Ireland could be manipulated or corrupted. Ten years of tribunals with not one criminal conviction must surely demonstrate that Charlie Haughey was well within his rights to walk into banks and demand money. So with no fear of prosecution and ten times more money awash in the country our politicians overnight became model citizens of integrity setting the example for the rest of us. Absolutely preposterous indeed that my twisted little mind would consider that a poll could be organised to suit the desired outcome.

For example if we accepted the result of the last referendum we would not be having this discussion however because a certain political group did not like the result we had a poll that guess what concluded that the people didn't vote on Lisbon at all. How convenient, but it simply arises entirely because you will not accept the result of the last referendum.

So you would have prefered no future negotiations on europe no matter what issues were raised?

What were the secret real reasons for the no vote?

rumour

marco_polo wrote: »

I posted a broken link. Fixed it now

If it is still crashing then just right click on the link and save it locally as it is a pdf.

Thanks

PopeBuckfastXVI

rumour wrote: »

Where did I make that allegation?

Here:

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

How do you fix a poll (as you are alleging) without corruption on behalf of the pollster?

Square that circle for me...

rumour wrote: »

Indeed, shame on me for even contemplating that anything in Ireland could be manipulated or corrupted. Ten years of tribunals with not one criminal conviction must surely demonstrate that Charlie Haughey was well within his rights to walk into banks and demand money. So with no fear of prosecution and ten times more money awash in the country our politicians overnight became model citizens of integrity setting the example for the rest of us. Absolutely preposterous indeed that my twisted little mind would consider that a poll could be organised to suit the desired outcome.

For example if we accepted the result of the last referendum we would not be having this discussion however because a certain political group did not like the result we had a poll that guess what concluded that the people didn't vote on Lisbon at all. How convenient, but it simply arises entirely because you will not accept the result of the last referendum.

You continually imply it, but don't have the balls to spit it out, that's just dastardly.

So let me ask you, yes or no

Did MB or Gallup change the Poll result to something their clients wanted?

marco_polo

rumour wrote: »

Where did I make that allegation?

"however because a certain political group did not like the result we had a poll that guess what concluded that the people didn't vote on Lisbon at all"

This suggests in a sneaky way that the conclusions were drawn up before the poll was conducted.

rumour

marco_polo wrote: »

So you would have prefered no future negotiations on europe no matter what issues were raised?

What were the secret real reasons for the no vote?

I can do this all day, there is now way around the fact that politicians have refused to accept the result of the last referendum. Thus making referendums a joke.

If the result is 'yes' can we have best two out of three?? And if not why not?

rumour

marco_polo wrote: »

"however because a certain political group did not like the result we had a poll that guess what concluded that the people didn't vote on Lisbon at all"

This suggests in a sneaky way that the conclusions were drawn up before the poll was conducted.

Where is the allegation?

PopeBuckfastXVI

rumour wrote: »

I can do this all day, there is now way around the fact that politicians have refused to accept the result of the last referendum. Thus making referendums a joke.

If the result is 'yes' can we have best two out of three?? And if not why not?

Yes it can, as soon as we elect a government on that platform.

marco_polo

rumour wrote: »

I can do this all day, there is now way around the fact that politicians have refused to accept the result of the last referendum. Thus making referendums a joke.

If the result is 'yes' can we have best two out of three?? And if not why not?

I know you can do it all day. So can Sinn Fein.

We can get a better deal.

What is it?

*Shrug*

rumour

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Here:




You continually imply it, but don't have the balls to spit it out, that's just dastardly.

So let me ask you, yes or no

Did MB or Gallup change the Poll result to something their clients wanted?

Where have I alleged something?

rumour

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Yes it can, as soon as we elect a government on that platform.

I'm not following you Did we elect the current government to re run referendums until they get the answer they want?

marco_polo

rumour wrote: »

Where have I alleged something?

Since you are backtracking furiously can I then take it that you accept that the poll is a valid reflection of the reasons of people for voting no?

Bearing in mind that a poll with a sample size of 1000 is statistically just as valid as a poll of 1,000,000 people?

PopeBuckfastXVI

rumour wrote: »

Where have I alleged something?

You continuously claim the polls don't reflect reality, and are somehow fixed.

I asked you how the poll could have been fixed without corruption.

All you could reply is that there is a history of corruption in this country, and that the poll may have been corrupted.

You can't fix a poll without corruption, and you are claiming the polls were fixed.

You're obviously just too spineless to say it directly.

So come on then spit it out, was the poll corrupt, in your opinion, yes or no?

PopeBuckfastXVI

rumour wrote: »

I'm not following you Did we elect the current government to re run referendums until they get the answer they want?

Under our constitution, that's a power we give the government we elect.

eightyfish

rumour wrote: »

Did we elect the current government to re run referendums until they get the answer they want?

Please stop! Please stop saying this over and over again. It's very simple what happened:

• We voted no.
• They surveyed the people to find out why.
• They now ask us to vote again, but with extra provisions to take account of the reasons people voted no last time, as well as a permanent commissioner.

It's not the same thing! It's simply not!!!!

rumour

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

One more time, with feeling.

IT'S. NONE. OF. YOUR. F*CKING. BUSINESS. HOW. OTHER. COUNTRIES. ARE. INTERNALLY. RUN. JUST. LIKE. IT'S. NONE. OF. F*CKING. THEIRS. HOW. IRELAND. IS. RUN.

You really must be out of ideas if you fall back on this tired old 'argument'...

Hope you've cooled down a bit. Looks like your losing it.....and by the way you have no idea what my business is which maybe you will consider in the future before completely loosing it.

rumour

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

You continuously claim the polls don't reflect reality, and are somehow fixed.

I asked you how the poll could have been fixed without corruption.

All you could reply is that there is a history of corruption in this country, and that the poll may have been corrupted.

You can't fix a poll without corruption, and you are claiming the polls were fixed.

You're obviously just too spineless to say it directly.

So come on then spit it out, was the poll corrupt, in your opinion, yes or no?

But you claim the referendum wasn't about Lisbon when I'm certain thats what I voted on last year.

ei.sdraob

rumour wrote: »

Hope you've cooled down a bit. Looks like your losing it.....and by the way you have no idea what my business is which maybe you will consider in the future before completely loosing it.

I dont blame him

they should make a poster with them words and hang it up on poles around the country

people have no understating how their country or the EU or other countries work and/or run

PopeBuckfastXVI

rumour wrote: »

But you claim the referendum wasn't about Lisbon when I'm certain thats what I voted on last year.

I did? Where?

Now answer the question.

In your opinion were the polls corrupt? Yes or No?

rumour

marco_polo wrote: »

Since you are backtracking furiously can I then take it that you accept that the poll is a valid reflection of the reasons of people for voting no?

Bearing in mind that a poll with a sample size of 1000 is statistically just as valid as a poll of 1,000,000 people?

You can assume what you like as you are free to do. Peoples reasons for voting no are irrelevant if you do not accept as a starting point that 'no' is an acceptable answer.

marco_polo

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

I did? Where?

Now answer the question.

In your opinion were the polls corrupt? Yes or No?

Polls were rigged (rock) <> rumour <> Polls accurately reflect concerns of voters (Hard Place)

*Gets popcorn

StealthRolex

rumour wrote: »

You can assume what you like as you are free to do. Peoples reasons for voting no are irrelevant if you do not accept as a starting point that 'no' is an acceptable answer.

I wonder if Cowen and Sarkozy are reading this thread?

marco_polo

rumour wrote: »

You can assume what you like as you are free to do. Peoples reasons for voting no are irrelevant if you do not accept as a starting point that 'no' is an acceptable answer.

No is not an acceptable answer.

a) No but we would like X,Y,Z addressed is a valid answer.

b) No, and there is nothing that can be done to address our concerns about this treaty, but thanks all the same. Is a valid answer.

It is not yet obvious if a or b is the answer of the Irish People. We are holding the second referendum in the hope that a is the answer. If it is b then we have alot of hard questions to address as to what it is we want out of Europe.

Sam Vimes

rumour wrote: »

And yet the majority of people in this country don't believe you, no matter what you say. This is democratic legitimacy in action. This has been covered earlier in this thread by some astute observers, but they were shouted down by the usual dictators.

So now you reap what you sow. The failure of the yes campaign is entirely down to the incompetence of the yes side. Stop looking for scape goats everywhere to hide you inabilities.

The failure of the yes campaign is down to a mistrust of Fianna Fail coupled with a dedicated campaign of lies from the no side. No one believes me because Fianna Fail is on my side. The only thing I can do short of going to people's houses and shoving the treaty down their throats is to present the facts in a well backed up manner and I have done that consistently for two years now. People just don't want to hear it because the facts don't match with their preconceived notions of the treaty as the harbinger of doom

For example, I say that the second vote is reasonable because the biggest reason for rejection was lack of understanding followed closely by a number of issues that weren't in the treaty, that this is the reason for the guarantees and why the treaty wasn't changed. To back up my position I pointed to two independent surveys and you said they were deliberately doctored by the government and avoided the question when I pointed out that they would have nothing to gain from a doctored survey. What exactly do you expect me to say? I have presented the facts and you have dismissed them. I can't provide more supporting evidence because you'll just dismiss that too. Am I supposed to beg you to accept the facts? Massage your ego maybe? Do you want me to suck your c*ck to make you accept that the surveys were fair?


Also, you said that your concerns with the treaty were not addressed by the guarantees and in response I asked you which parts of the treaty you objected to. At first you didn't answer, then you gave a concern that's not a part of the treaty (referendums in other countries) and now you have again not answered the question. Since you say that the parts of the treaty that you object to were not addressed, please tell me what those parts are

PopeBuckfastXVI

marco_polo wrote: »

Polls were rigged (rock) <> rumour <> Polls accurately reflect concerns of voters (Hard Place)

*Gets popcorn

I can respect someone who stands over their opinions, instead of using sneaky innuendo, and I can respect someone who reflects upon their opinions and realises and admits they are wrong.

I can't abide someone who faff's about in the middle and hopes no one will notice, but the stain will be left.

Rumour has ample room to get out of it, by either sh*tting or getting off the pot, so to speak.

ixtlan

rumour wrote: »

You can assume what you like as you are free to do. Peoples reasons for voting no are irrelevant if you do not accept as a starting point that 'no' is an acceptable answer.

??? A very strange comment???

I think your view is that acceptable=final?

If you think no should be a final answer, then that is what makes reasons for voting no irrelevant, since you are not going to bother working on the thing at issue (in this case Lisbon) anymore.

If people's reasons for voting no are to be relevant then you find out what they are and try to address them.

The starting point is that no means no to the current situation. How can we resolve peoples concerns so that the new situation would be acceptable.

Ix.

eightyfish

marco_polo wrote: »

Polls were rigged (rock) <> rumour <> Polls accurately reflect concerns of voters (Hard Place)

How could the polls not reflect the views of voters?

If this is the case:

• They selected a set of 2,000 (or whatever) people with the views they wanted and then asked them their views. Why would they do this? This would give them no information about why people actually voted no and no advantage to getting the thing passed second time around by addressing the concerns. It would be simply of no use to anybody.
• They made up the results. In which case these major polling companies have no credibility whatsoever and we can trust nothing they say, nor nothing anybody says, ever. Trust no-one. That will get us nowhere. (And this would still be of no use to anybody)

It is simply fantastical to be anywhere but your "hard place."

If they fiddled the polls, even only to some degree, I ask you why?

marco_polo

eightyfish wrote: »

How could the polls not reflect the views of voters?

If this is the case:

• They selected a set of 2,000 (or whatever) people with the views they wanted and then asked them their views. Why would they do this? This would give them no information about why people actually voted no and no advantage to getting the thing passed second time around by addressing the concerns. It would be simply of no use to anybody.
• They made up the results. In which case these major polling companies have no credibility whatsoever and we can trust nothing they say, nor nothing anybody says, ever. Trust no-one. That will get us nowhere.

It is simply fantastical to be anywhere but your "hard place."

If they fiddled the polls, even only to some degree, I ask you why?

I know. Read back a page or two from where you picked up the thread

rumour

ei.sdraob wrote: »

I dont blame him

they should make a poster with them words and hang it up on poles around the country

people have no understating how their country or the EU or other countries work and/or run

Vote yes for Jobs

What jobs is Lisbon providing for Ireland??

rumour

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

I can respect someone who stands over their opinions, instead of using sneaky innuendo, and I can respect someone who reflects upon their opinions and realises and admits they are wrong.

I can't abide someone who faff's about in the middle and hopes no one will notice, but the stain will be left.

Rumour has ample room to get out of it, by either sh*tting or getting off the pot, so to speak.

I don't think you really respect anyone other than someone you can bully into agreeing with you. Look at your post last night?

PopeBuckfastXVI

rumour wrote: »

I don't think you really respect anyone other than someone you can bully into agreeing with you. Look at your post last night?

I don't care if you agree with me, I just want you to admit what you actually think.

And I note that you can't.