Attitude of the yes campaign

Bob_Harris · 03-09-2009 3:12pm

W1ct0ry wrote: »

This treaty is going through, with or without Ireland. Its not like we contribute anything to the EU. All we do is take its money.

We have an external debt of $1,841,000,000,000,000 The highest amount per person of any country in the world(bar monaco for some reason). I dont think the EU will cry when they kick us out.

We are complaining that this treaty will reduce our vote in Europe, it should, we are a tiny country with no economic or military power.

A country cannot be expelled from the EU. End of story.

skelliser · 03-09-2009 3:14pm

yes they are angry. imaginre if the yes side won and the no's demanding another ref. with changes etc and where granted a second referendum.

I after voting yes would be pretty angry and crying foul!!

marco_polo · 03-09-2009 3:15pm

skelliser wrote: »

are you saying that patrickthomas and other no voters are stupid and ignorant?
you are comparing adults to children now, thats fairly ignorant to me

Posts like this suggest to me like you started this thread with an agenda to prove your point.

You have yet to show that Yes voter share any such opinion of all no voters as claimed in the OP.

Also is it not fair to say that there are a some reasons for voting are less deserving of respect that others?

patrickthomas · 03-09-2009 3:18pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

as i said if someone cant read

there are plenty of debates, tv shows, radio and internet media to learn about the issues and we had close to 2 years of media debate now

this is not ancient greece where democracy was invented/first practices despite the great majority of people being illiterate

being illiterate is not an excuse not to vote, neither does being illiterate stop people from signing contracts or mortgage agreements

Oh for gods sake will you go and read the article, it is called functional literacy, the ability to understand words with more than 3 syllables, the ability to understand concepts that can only be explained with words.

Why on earth do you keep defending a system that has failed the majority of Irish people in this country?

And more to the point why do you quote misinformation and then try to fudge over it?

skelliser · 03-09-2009 3:18pm

marco_polo wrote: »

Posts like this suggest to me like you started this thread with an agenda to prove your point.

i was only replying to a post that was imo ignorant.

marco_polo · 03-09-2009 3:18pm

skelliser wrote: »

yes they are angry. imaginre if the yes side won and the no's demanding another ref. with changes etc and where granted a second referendum.

I after voting yes would be pretty angry and crying foul!!

I think you would find very few who would have any objections to any referendum. And even less who would try to claim it is somehow underhanded or undemocratic.

ei.sdraob · 03-09-2009 3:18pm

skelliser wrote: »

yes they are angry. imaginre if the yes side won and the no's demanding another ref. with changes etc and where granted a second referendum.

I after voting yes would be pretty angry and crying foul!!

none of the parties on the NO side are in government or form any strong opposition for that matter because they are barely elected by the people

and the people voted in MEPs that are mostly from the same main parties or independents (almost all Pro Lisbon) while the likes of SF lost their MEP and Libertas got humiliated in a fair vote

this is democracy at work, there is nothing wrong with calling a referendum as its required by our constitution

if you don't like it then start a democratic campaign/party/movement to remove the clause in our constitution that forces us to hold referenda

ironically that would require a referendum too (and more than likely will fail, id vote NO to that!)

oscarBravo · 03-09-2009 3:20pm

Everyone: put down the handbags. Take a deep breath. Read the OP, and make sure any further contributions are on-topic.

skelliser · 03-09-2009 3:20pm

marco_polo wrote: »

You have yet to show that Yes voter share any such opinion of all no voters as claimed in the OP.

i dont understand this

patrickthomas · 03-09-2009 3:22pm

skelliser wrote: »

yes they are angry. imaginre if the yes side won and the no's demanding another ref. with changes etc and where granted a second referendum.

I after voting yes would be pretty angry and crying foul!!

There is no way whatsoever that if there had been a yes vote returned last time that we would be voting this time, you know that and i know that and so does every thinking person in this country.

At least you understand the frustration that a lot of no voters feel when having their level of education aka intelligence (which is not the same) when they ask what are the advantages of the yes vote.

The usual pattern of answers do not work.

patrickthomas · 03-09-2009 3:23pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Everyone: put down the handbags. Take a deep breath. Read the OP, and make sure any further contributions are on-topic.

How did you know I had a handbag?:D

Sam Vimes · 03-09-2009 3:24pm

skelliser wrote: »

im glad you said this, i think they are making the same mistakes again albeit being more patronising ie celebrities

You won't hear me praising the government's campaign but there are other sources of information. This idea that you should vote no because Fianna Fail aren't spoon feeding you the information is another example of a stance that I would call ignorant. Yes they should be doing more but that's a reason to vote FF out of office, not to reject the Lisbon treaty

skelliser · 03-09-2009 3:25pm

im goin to have to take a break from this thread, imo its gone completly of topic and heading towards a debate on the merits on of another referendum.

This thread was about the attitude and imo arrogance that is prevailing in the yes campaign as stated in my points.

AND ONCE AGAIN I VOTED YES. Seems to me that if you speak out against the yes campaign you are immedialty labelled a no voter as i have been labelled many times already.

If that isnt ignorant then i dunno what is.

I think wheeling out celebrities and remarks like o learys are patronising and arrogant. This is not the way to win people over.
If anything its the lazy way to win the agrument.

ei.sdraob · 03-09-2009 3:26pm

skelliser wrote: »

i dont understand this

skelliser wrote: »

Yes campaigners have been painting an image that all no voters are crazy, stupid and ignorant.

you are painting everyone on the YES side with same brush (keyword: all)

in a thread complaining about the YES side painting everyone on the no side with same brush

thats what he means

patrickthomas · 03-09-2009 3:27pm

skelliser wrote: »

im goin to have to take a break from this thread, imo its gone completly of topic and heading towards a debate on the merits on of another referendum.

This thread was about the attitude and imo arrogance that is prevailing in the yes campaign as stated in my points.

AND ONCE AGAIN I VOTED YES. Seems to me that if you speak out against the yes campaign you are immedialty labelled a no voter as i have been labelled many times already.

If that isnt ignorant then i dunno what is.

Yeah I am out of here as well, the yes campaign is reflective of the government we have running this country.

oscarBravo · 03-09-2009 3:27pm

skelliser wrote: »

no obviously i cant, im talking about attitudes, not specific statements that may have been made.

Ah, here. You said:

skelliser wrote: »

Yes campaigners have been painting an image that all no voters are crazy, stupid and ignorant.

Now you're backing away from that, and claiming that there's an attitude, not that anyone has actually said anything.

If you can't even back up the statement you opened the thread with, how is anyone supposed to discuss it in a meaningful way?

Zuiderzee wrote: »

Try to stop being such a pedant man, if you want a sweeping statement from the Yes side, just search for O Leary and Lisbon

I've read O'Leary's statement. He used a sweeping generalisation to describe those who are leading the "no" campaign.

This thread is about the alleged attitude of "yes" campaigners (which "yes" campaigners? All of them? If not, which specific campaigners?) to all "no" voters.

Now, call me a pedant for discussing the topic that was raised, if that makes you feel better. If you think a more constructive discussion can be had by vague and sweeping statements than by an actual focussed discussion, fair enough - but that would be a deeply ironic position to hold in this of all threads.

ei.sdraob · 03-09-2009 3:29pm

skelliser wrote: »

im goin to have to take a break from this thread, imo its gone completly of topic and heading towards a debate on the merits on of another referendum.

This thread was about the attitude and imo arrogance that is prevailing in the yes campaign as stated in my points.

we started talking about ignorance of basic democratic principles by some no voters

as demonstrated by the posts i linked to

which is right on topic and per your opening post

Scofflaw · 03-09-2009 3:30pm

Zuiderzee wrote: »

Very true, and I'm rapidly being bunged in with them. And as one goes to the centre the differences dissappear.
Labour I can get, but the difference between FF and FG, dont get it.

Absolutley, they should not involve themselves in our politics, and neither should German ambassadors or French Presidents, current or former.
The last English people we ever listened to were St. Patrick and Jack Charlton.

Point taken. More than half the people who bothered their ass' and got out and voted, rejected the Lisbon Treaty.
But apathy is to the Governments advantage, thats why we never see them doing anything to improve participation.

The government have lost, and unlike Ganley, they refuse to take No for an answer

Zuiderzee, stop linking your blog. If you want advertising, you pay for it like anyone else. This is an official warning.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Sam Vimes · 03-09-2009 3:31pm

patrickthomas wrote: »

At least you understand the frustration that a lot of no voters feel when having their level of education aka intelligence (which is not the same) when they ask what are the advantages of the yes vote.

That's not what's happening. People who honestly ask what are the advantages of a yes vote will be patiently and politely told. It's people who say "I'm voting no because" and then proceed to list off a catalogue of irrelevant BS and lies who have their intelligence questioned because people are sick of correcting the same tired old BS over and over again.

It reminds me of arguing with religious people, the way they talk about people respecting their beliefs as if beliefs have an automatic right to respect. My response is always "say something worth respecting and I'll respect it".

The way I see it, people who can argue their case coherently do so and people who can't complain that their views aren't being respected

Sam Vimes · 03-09-2009 3:34pm

skelliser wrote: »

I think wheeling out celebrities and remarks like o learys are patronising and arrogant. This is not the way to win people over.
If anything its the lazy way to win the agrument.

So what exactly do you suggest we say to and about people who keep repeating the same irrelevant BS and lies? How do we win them over without pointing out that what they're saying is irrelevant BS and lies?

edit: for example, how would you respond in this situation:

no voter: "I'm voting no because I hate Fianna Fail"

me: "Fianna Fail have nothing to do with the treaty. It's a European treaty that 26 other nations have expressed their desire for, it is an abuse of the privilege of voting to use it as a stick to beat the Irish government with and it will do more damage to the country than it will FF. It's not the rest of the EU's fault that our government are idiots".

no voter: "I don't care, I'm still voting no because I hate Fianna Fail"

me: <fill in what you would say at this point>

ei.sdraob · 03-09-2009 3:37pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

That's not what's happening. People who honestly ask what are the advantages of a yes vote will be patiently and politely told. It's people who say "I'm voting no because" and then proceed to list off a catalogue of irrelevant BS and lies who have their intelligence questioned because people are sick of correcting the same tired old BS over and over again.

It reminds me of arguing with religious people, the way they talk about people respecting their beliefs as if beliefs have an automatic right to respect. My response is always "say something worth respecting and I'll respect it".

The way I see it, people who can argue their case coherently do so and people who can't complain that their views aren't being respected

spot on

some of the posters on here on the NO side raise some very interesting issues and are capable of forming a paragraph and backing up their claims

and these lead to interesting debates

but as i remarked earlier theres a definite trend of some new posters coming on board straight here making a 1-liner and leaving not engaging in debate

thats downright obnoxious

skelliser · 03-09-2009 3:45pm

its hard, i know, both sides are fairly entrenched in there views.

maybe i should have phrased my first point better. I think the other points i made are valid tho.

meglome · 03-09-2009 3:57pm

patrickthomas wrote: »

Now there's a point, and what if it is true? and the majority of no voters are less educated? What sort of a reflection is that on the people that have the education and influence? The people in power that do not care for the people less well off than themselves, less educated than themselves, a bit late to educate 50% of the voters to.......

I think the Yes campaigns have been fairly rubbish in general but not specifically targeted at any group. Now I don't think Fianna Fail should be allowed to run a children's party, as I think they'd **** it up. I think the No campaigners have targeted people who they believe can be lied to more easily. People who are in general less likely to read a boring legal document and who have faired less well from the so called 'celtic tiger'.

patrickthomas wrote: »

What level do you consider a person should be educated to on order to understand the treaty enough to see that it would be advantageous?

Well I don't assume anything. Anyone can probably read it of they have the patience. I would imagine the condensed version would be readable. It's a dull treaty like most treaty's.

P. Breathnach · 03-09-2009 3:58pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

... but as i remarked earlier theres a definite trend of some new posters coming on board straight here making a 1-liner and leaving not engaging in debate

thats downright obnoxious

Not nearly as annoying as people who crash in here making big sweeping statements of great length, decline to back up their arguments or cite supporting material, and go on and on beating their tin drums. We have had a few like that recently.

P. Breathnach · 03-09-2009 4:02pm

meglome wrote: »

I think the Yes campaigns have been fairly rubbish in general ...

It's quite difficult for them to be otherwise. Lisbon is essentially a housekeeping operation, and it's not easy to make housekeeping exciting.

Trashing a room or two, on the other hand, while not a good thing, can get the adrenalin flowing.

meglome · 03-09-2009 4:04pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

but as i remarked earlier theres a definite trend of some new posters coming on board straight here making a 1-liner and leaving not engaging in debate

thats downright obnoxious

There seems to be an interestingly large number of people who pop in and out, saying the same things that have been debated over and over and often debunked over and over. I want to call shenanigans.

meglome · 03-09-2009 4:08pm

skelliser wrote: »

AND ONCE AGAIN I VOTED YES. Seems to me that if you speak out against the yes campaign you are immedialty labelled a no voter as i have been labelled many times already.

Sorry but you say you voted Yes and I have no reason not to believe you. However you seem to be fully campaigning for a No vote so I do wonder.

Wheely · 03-09-2009 4:10pm

skelliser wrote: »

its hard, i know, both sides are fairly entrenched in there views.

maybe i should have phrased my first point better. I think the other points i made are valid tho.

Sorry skelliser yuo don't like the arrogance of the yes campaigners, all or some of them ok.

How do you think you're going to vote in the upcoming referendum if you don't mind me asking?

skelliser · 03-09-2009 4:19pm

hmm i notice a sudden change in tone in this thread.
If people have something to say then say it

Sam Vimes · 03-09-2009 4:25pm

skelliser wrote: »

If people have something to say then say it

PICKLES!

*phew* that's a relief :pac:

Attitude of the yes campaign

Comments