The Ineptitude of the Yes Campaign

Handsome Bob

Firstly may I state that first and foremost that I plan to vote Yes, but that is in spite of the Yes campaign's lacklustre....well....campaign. I thought I had seen everything until I was greeted this morning with a poster that had the slogan "Yes In The City", which was accompanied by a picture of four glamourous looking women (to those who don't get it, it's a play on Sex In The City). Do the campaigners honestly believe that this cringeworthy poster is going to win over votes? It's embarassing and the latest in a long line of pathetic campaigning.

So what I want to know is, for those of you who are voting yes, are you happy with how the campaign is being run?

Sam Vimes

No they're retards. I think posters should be banned from this campaign because the yes campaign's are pathetic and the no campaign's are lies. This treaty is too complicated to condense into a poster

OldJay

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Firstly may I state that first and foremost that I plan to vote Yes, but that is in spite of the Yes campaign's lacklustre....well....campaign. I thought I had seen everything until I was greeted this morning with a poster that had the slogan "Yes In The City", which was accompanied by a picture of four glamourous looking women (to those who don't get it, it's a play on Sex In The City). Do the campaigners honestly believe that this cringeworthy poster is going to win over votes? It's embarassing and the latest in a long line of pathetic campaigning.

So what I want to know is, for those of you who are voting yes, are you happy with how the campaign is being run?

On the other hand, you can have outright deceptions aimed at scaring you into voting 'NO' without even investigating why such as '€1.84 Minimum Wage?' (note question mark - its not even a fact but a deception about future accession states. NOT Ireland), inflated and still irrelevant to Ireland unemployment figures, outright lies about an EU defence policy and neutrality, outright lies on abortion and then incredibly some emotional blackmail about Israel & Palestine!
Fruity indeed but even more embarrassing than a notice stating a party's stance on the Lisbon Treaty. A poster won't explain the treaty. A headline won't explain it. If anyone had the actual will to investigate these bogus claims by the likes of Cóir then they'd see the same.

The sad thing is that if the first hurdle is actually tackled (getting said voter off their jacksy to vote in the first place) then I can't begin to imagine the amount of people who would vote 'no' simply based on what they saw on a poster whilst driving down the quays, for example.

The 'Yes' campaign has delivered all the apt information needed even to our doors. I've read through all the literature I can. Have done same with the other side of the coin and will certainly be voting 'yes' on October 2nd.

ei.sdraob

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Firstly may I state that first and foremost that I plan to vote Yes, but that is in spite of the Yes campaign's lacklustre....well....campaign. I thought I had seen everything until I was greeted this morning with a poster that had the slogan "Yes In The City", which was accompanied by a picture of four glamourous looking women (to those who don't get it, it's a play on Sex In The City). Do the campaigners honestly believe that this cringeworthy poster is going to win over votes? It's embarassing and the latest in a long line of pathetic campaigning.

So what I want to know is, for those of you who are voting yes, are you happy with how the campaign is being run?

The thing is its easier to be negative and tell a lie than rise to the task of informing people

the same people who mostly have no clue (due to it being boring or just having better things to do like getting on with lives) how EU operates and are asked to vote on reform of said EU

Handsome Bob

Justind wrote: »

On the other hand, you can have outright deceptions aimed at scaring you into voting 'NO' without even investigating why such as '€1.84 Minimum Wage?' (note question mark - its not even a fact but a deception about future accession states. NOT Ireland), inflated and still irrelevant to Ireland unemployment figures, outright lies about an EU defence policy and neutrality, outright lies on abortion and then incredibly some emotional blackmail about Israel & Palestine!
Fruity indeed but even more embarrassing than a notice stating a party's stance on the Lisbon Treaty. A poster won't explain the treaty. A headline won't explain it. If anyone had the actual will to investigate these bogus claims by the likes of Cóir then they'd see the same.

The sad thing is that if the first hurdle is actually tackled (getting said voter off their jacksy to vote in the first place) then I can't begin to imagine the amount of people who would vote 'no' simply based on what they saw on a poster whilst driving down the quays, for example.

The 'Yes' campaign has delivered all the apt information needed even to our doors. I've read through all the literature I can. Have done same with the other side of the coin and will certainly be voting 'yes' on October 2nd.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

The thing is its easier to be negative and tell a lie than rise to the task of informing people

the same people who mostly have no clue (due to it being boring or just having better things to do like getting on with lives) how EU operates and are asked to vote on reform of said EU

But that is just it lads, indeed the No campaign's posters are for the most part based on lies, however they are undeniably clever tactics. You are both right the posters are based on spreading fear, but this is the kind of thing that will turn the head of your average fickle voter. They were the same tactics used for the first treaty and the Yes campaign failed to effectively respond, I am afraid history is repeating itself. Nevermind by responding with posters, what's the stopping the Government from releasing a statement saying "the No Campaign's are based on misinformation and here's why..."?

is_that_so

I'd disagree on the perceived ineptitude unless you are going to base it solely on posters. Regrettably some people will base their votes on that anyway irrespective of how accurate they are. Traditionally referenda, no more than elections, have been based on snappy slogans and are not representative of a campaign as a whole. A poster is of limited size. I am impressed with Coir being able to get that whole €1.84 fabrication in place.

What is far more important is the campaign behind the posters, which is a vast improvement on the really inept campaign in Lisbon 1. The real difference this time out is parties are actively attempting to spread the message. Even with FF there is a greater determination to avoid gaffes and engage with voters on Lisbon. Furthermore there are a lot more "third party" organisations pushing for a Yes vote.

There is also far less tolerance of some of the ideas that No campaigners are attempting to propagate, and they are being challenged much more robustly, something that did not really happen in Lisbon 1. We also have three weeks to go , the period where you would expect much more activity.

ei.sdraob

LZ5by5 wrote: »

what's the stopping the Government from releasing a statement saying "the No Campaign's are based on misinformation and here's why..."?

The government wouldn't say anything because the lack of love for FF and Greens would only play into the NO hands


a better question is why isnt the Referendum commission coming out and saying that these are clear lies


now that would make headline news


the only tactic the YES side can do successfully is

* to get as many people to vote
* make sure people know about the subject
* canvass


all them posters are a waste of time, since majority of people dont even know how the EU is structured


im myself doing everything and spending alot of time here in order to highlight the advantages and counter the clear lies being put out by certain members (such as the recent threads regarding EDA and were safer in Europe poster)

this whole disinformation craic from the NO side is not funny anymore since there wont be another Lisbon

/

OldJay

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Nevermind by responding with posters, what's the stopping the Government from releasing a statement saying "the No Campaign's are based on misinformation and here's why..."?

Spending an entire campaign focussed on the lies of your opposition will get nothing done. Educating people about the Treaty will yield much more rewards.
The No campaign is getting incredibly desperate right now with lies such as those discussed, diversionary messages (eg. the Middle East), misleading half-stories (Norway's economic strength - ignoring its Oljefonden being the backbone of its economy).

P. Breathnach

It is very difficult to convey a clear message on a poster, so there is a long-established traditition of using slogans on posters -- in ordinary as well as in political advertising. Remember "Guinness is good for you"?

It is easier to communicate a snappy message if you ignore truth and balance, and that gives organisations that operate like Cóir (and Libertas, last time around) an opening. Just write a slogan based on a lie or distortion -- say by taking only part of the voting procedure and representing it as the whole story.

If the yes side issued a poster with "Protect our Minimum Wage: Vote Yes", it would be attacked as not being directly based on the treaty. By people on the no side who will not come out and say directly that Cóir are liars.

Scofflaw

is_that_so wrote: »

I'd disagree on the perceived ineptitude unless you are going to base it solely on posters. Regrettably some people will base their votes on that anyway irrespective of how accurate they are. Traditionally referenda, no more than elections, have been based on snappy slogans and are not representative of a campaign as a whole. A poster is of limited size. I am impressed with Coir being able to get that whole €1.84 fabrication in place.

What is far more important is the campaign behind the posters, which is a vast improvement on the really inept campaign in Lisbon 1. The real difference this time out is parties are actively attempting to spread the message. Even with FF there is a greater determination to avoid gaffes and engage with voters on Lisbon. Furthermore there are a lot more "third party" organisations pushing for a Yes vote.

There is also far less tolerance of some of the ideas that No campaigners are attempting to propagate, and they are being challenged much more robustly, something that did not really happen in Lisbon 1. We also have three weeks to go , the period where you would expect much more activity.

Yes, I think that's all true. The campaign will largely be won or lost on the ground, canvassing, and there the campaign seems to be a huge improvement over Lisbon I by the Yes campaigns. There's also been a massive effort to make information about the Treaty available, and to ensure that public representatives understand it better.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Martin 2

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Firstly may I state that first and foremost that I plan to vote Yes, but that is in spite of the Yes campaign's lacklustre....well....campaign. I thought I had seen everything until I was greeted this morning with a poster that had the slogan "Yes In The City", which was accompanied by a picture of four glamourous looking women (to those who don't get it, it's a play on Sex In The City)...

As you say that particular poster is cringeworthy and I wouldn't have got the connection with SITC if you hadn't mention it, however I've changed my mind about a lot of the yes posters especially from the political parties:

Yes for the Economy
The assertion here is that a yes is more likely to help the economy and a no more likely to damage it... not unreasonable I think most would agree, I've presented this case before wrt to the contents of the treaty and the consequences of a particular vote.

Yes to Jobs
The assertion here is that a yes is more likely to create jobs than a no, again not unreasonable and with unemployment at 12.5% now and rising as opposed to 6.2% at the last referendum this will be much more of a consideration.

Yes to Recovery
Anything which is more likely to benefit the economy and create jobs is also more likely to aid recovery

Yes to Europe
Given that 26 out of the 27 countries of the EU have already approved ratification and that a Yes implies greater EU integration and cooperation, the assertion here is that a Yes is more pro-European (pro-EU). I know a lot of people on the No side think this contains an implicit threat that if we vote No we will be kicked out of the EU or be actively marginalised however they should believe EU and yes side assurances that this cannot happen.

As an exercise replace the Yes with a No in all the above slogans and see what people get.

There seems to be coordination between the main parties (FG, LAB & FF) on the above messages and in the case of Dublin, anyone who travels into the city centre along the main arterial routes (MI, M3, M4 M7 & M11) will arrive with a strong yes message.

My main problem with the Yes poster campaign is that there are not enough Yes posters in key locations away from the main thoroughfares, whereas there are very few no posters overall, they use them very wisely. The difference here is that the yes groups employ external poster erectors whereas the No campaign due to limited resources use local members. In Leixlip for example there are vote-No posters at the gates to Intel and HP outside schools, churches and at the entrance to the train stations (definitely LB and prob Confey); there are no vote -Yes posters in these locations (at the moment).

All this is not to say I don't want to more informative yes posters such as Yes to keep our Commissioner or Yes for a Greener Europe (Article 4 & 194, TFEU), I think that last one might be good for the Greens:)

Martin 2

Another problem with the yes camp and probably the No campaign also is that they started their campaigns far too late for on the ground canvassing. It was found last year that those areas canvassed for a yes vote returned a yes vote but obviously too few areas were canvassed. This year the campaigns more or less started at the beginning of September so given the time available, the numbers on the electoral register and the number of canvassers it is virtually impossible to cover everybody (esp. door to door at 30-50 per hour) however it's much better than last time on the yes side; the big difference this time is that there are a lot of civic groups canvassing for a yes.

Stark

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Nevermind by responding with posters, what's the stopping the Government from releasing a statement saying "the No Campaign's are based on misinformation and here's why..."?

They started doing that this time round but then people started complaining about Yes campaigners accusing No campaigners of being liars (even though it was true). There's no winning sometimes.

evercloserunion

LZ5by5 wrote: »

Firstly may I state that first and foremost that I plan to vote Yes, but that is in spite of the Yes campaign's lacklustre....well....campaign. I thought I had seen everything until I was greeted this morning with a poster that had the slogan "Yes In The City", which was accompanied by a picture of four glamourous looking women (to those who don't get it, it's a play on Sex In The City). Do the campaigners honestly believe that this cringeworthy poster is going to win over votes? It's embarassing and the latest in a long line of pathetic campaigning.

So what I want to know is, for those of you who are voting yes, are you happy with how the campaign is being run?

You have 17 days to run an effective and honest Yes campaign.

Make us proud.

Chardee MacDennis

so whats the law against taking down posters in public areas?

Handsome Bob

Scofflaw wrote: »

Yes, I think that's all true. The campaign will largely be won or lost on the ground, canvassing, and there the campaign seems to be a huge improvement over Lisbon I by the Yes campaigns. There's also been a massive effort to make information about the Treaty available, and to ensure that public representatives understand it better.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The problem there is that you are assuming that the average joe and jane will read the pamphlets that come through their letterbox, and if they did read it that they would fully understand what is being said.

Thus, to borrow a word from a previous poster on here it could well be the "snappy" campaign posters that influence these people.

Stark wrote: »

They started doing that this time round but then people started complaining about Yes campaigners accusing No campaigners of being liars (even though it was true). There's no winning sometimes.

It is a tough situation I will admit that. I did muse for a while over the possibility that the Yes campaign could respond with their posters stating an embellishment of the truth. In other words fighting underhanded spin with underhanded spin.

I realised that it couldn't work though and this is what makes the No campaign so clever because they can afford to lie. They are looking for a No vote, and if they get it, then the case will be closed and people will remain ignorant of the lies that they have been told. They'll just be happy that there will be no "abortion", "consription" and "no minimum wage less than €2." However if the Yes campaign is victorious people will eventually begin to realise that they were lied to. They will begin to ask "what happened to this promise and that promise from your campaign?" It's a tough situation.

You have 17 days to run an effective and honest Yes campaign.

Make us proud.

Get me the financial backing and I'll get your Yes vote for you.

Martin 2

evercloserunion wrote: »

You have 17 days to run an effective and honest Yes campaign.

Make us proud.

It's still not too late to join one of the campaigning groups, avoid signing up via the internet or you'll end up in some far away galaxy of cyberspace, just phone the head office and ask for the number of your district/county coordinator and phone him/her and you're in. Even if you're just standing on a street corner with a yes/no teeshirt handing out leaflets or accompanying someone on a canvass you're making a difference.

evercloserunion

Martin 2 wrote: »

It's still not too late to join one of the campaigning groups, avoid signing up via the internet or you'll end up in some far away galaxy of cyberspace, just phone the head office and ask for the number of your district/county coordinator and phone him/her and you're in. Even if you're just standing on a street corner with a yes/no teeshirt handing out leaflets or accompanying someone on a canvass you're making a difference.

Be warned though. If you do join a campaign group and work your ass off trying to persuade people to vote yes, and then people vote no and some random guy who never bothered to get off his arse comes on the internet and starts calling you inept and lazy, your head may just explode.

Handsome Bob

evercloserunion wrote: »

Be warned though. If you do join a campaign group and work your ass off trying to persuade people to vote yes, and then people vote no and some random guy who never bothered to get off his arse comes on the internet and starts calling you inept and lazy, your head may just explode.

So I take it that you are involved in the campaign posters? Look I have no issue with people giving up their free time in order to raise awareness. Fair play to them, really. However if you are getting payed to market the whole campaign, then I would very much demand a certain level of quality.

evercloserunion

LZ5by5 wrote: »

So I take it that you are involved in the campaign posters? Look I have no issue with people giving up their free time in order to raise awareness. Fair play to them, really. However if you are getting payed to market the whole campaign, then I would very much demand a certain level of quality.

I'm not involved this year. I have work commitments unfortunately. I was involved last year and got to enjoy all the same name-calling and linking in with Fianna Fáil and the rest of the "official" Yes campaign.

Of course it's all well and good to criticize Yes posters. But to label the entire campaign as inept is wrong. People really have to have more respect for campaigners on both sides of the debate. They work very hard and make a contribution to public life that many never will.

SlimJ

evercloserunion wrote: »

Of course it's all well and good to criticize Yes posters.

Don't mind if I do!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmdIs5rAHno

edit: Whoops, just saw Pope Buckfast's post in another thread saying

It's against the forum charter to post a video without comment

so, uh, this is a quick gag from a recent gig of mine humorously contrasting the differences in tone between the Yes posters and the No posters.

ShooterSF

P. Breathnach wrote: »

If the yes side issued a poster with "Protect our Minimum Wage: Vote Yes", it would be attacked as not being directly based on the treaty. By people on the no side who will not come out and say directly that Cóir are liars.

Cóir are liars. Cóir are liars. Cóir are liars. I hope that helps ya sleep
Oh and the yes sides posters are scaremongering and stupid statements that have as much to do with the lisbon vote as what you think of the Portuguese.

PopeBuckfastXVI

Hi SFS,

Just want to raise one point on your signature, apologies if it's out of order, but where it says '2% vote and a veto' is logically impossible. If anyone has a 'veto' then no-one has a vote.

ShooterSF

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Hi SFS,

Just want to raise one point on your signature, apologies if it's out of order, but where it says '2% vote and a veto' is logically impossible. If anyone has a 'veto' then no-one has a vote.

That's a fair point it's worded poorly. Hopefully by the time you reread this post the issue will be fixed!

---

> On my way.

thebman

SlimJ wrote: »

Don't mind if I do!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmdIs5rAHno

edit: Whoops, just saw Pope Buckfast's post in another thread saying (speal about charter)
so, uh, this is a quick gag from a recent gig of mine humorously contrasting the differences in tone between the Yes posters and the No posters.

Phew I was worried someone actually read the charter there for a second :P

*sorry had to say it

Oh and the yes campaign does suck but its easy to find out the info on your own at this stage. Its all available online so you don't even have to leave your house or stop watching tv if using a laptop :P

Sam Vimes

ShooterSF wrote: »

That's a fair point it's worded poorly. Hopefully by the time you reread this post the issue will be fixed!

---

> On my way.

While we're at it, "if passed, a treaty can not be repealed however if rejected you will have longer to make up your mind and then we can have another referendum!" is nonsense. You and I both know there won't be another referendum on Lisbon

ShooterSF

Sam Vimes wrote: »

While we're at it, "if passed, a treaty can not be repealed however if rejected you will have longer to make up your mind and then we can have another referendum!" is nonsense. You and I both know there won't be another referendum on Lisbon

Getting way OT but i disagree, nothing undemocratic about running another referendum... (I did have a thread on the issue I don't want to derail the OP's)