Did you pause before casting your vote today ?

robindch

seamus wrote: »

Libertas appeared out of nowhere with a very strong voice and US-style tactics of lying, misleading and misdirecting, which we hadn't really dealt with in this country before [...]

"Swiftboat" is the term you're looking for. Karl Rove would have been proud of the campaign they ran last year.

At the time, whenever I saw one of our own politicos -- whatever one thinks of them -- go up against Ganley, it was difficult not to think of that Connery line from The Untouchables about some guy showing up with a knife to a gunfight.

dogbert27

killeoin wrote: »

Jesus...For some reason I had it in my mind that the Yes side was going to win easily enough this time. I wasn't even going to bother voting! However having read this i'm just gonna run over to the polling station quickly and cast my yes vote!

That was my attitude and the attitude of co-workers the first time around. 8 of us sat around the table saying we were going to vote yes. Weekend after election only 2 of the 8 voted.

Today I made sure I was at the polling station at 7!

SV

No hesitation before voting NO.
Happy days.

Futurism

No hesistation in voting YES. I'm glad I turned 18 in time.

eightyfish

robindch wrote: »

Well, I can't speak for anybody else, but I've yet to see a No-side ad that is legal, decent, honest and truthful.

Has anybody else seen one? There must be at least one...!

I saw one that just said "Vote No."

That's the only non-misleading one I could find.

Jumpy

xardoxify wrote: »

I won't be pausing when voting YES.:)

Waaaaaait.

A poster with under 10 posts advocating a yes vote?


*takes xardoxify aside*

Dude, they paid you that money to say you voted NO

Fighting Irish

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I'm curious: why did you want to vote for abortion?

Unless it's forced abortion, what's the problem?

P. Breathnach

eightyfish wrote: »

I saw one that just said "Vote No."

That's the only non-misleading one I could find.

Some might think it 100% misleading.

Neddyusa

brianthebard wrote: »

I believe that a large portion of the population simply do not want closer EU integration.

You're right there, most No voters I've spoken to have expressed the general feeling that there is little to gain through further EU integration relative to the cost to the EU taxpayers.

That and the notion that this Treaty concentrated so much on political issues and contained very little in terms of specific benefits to the daily lives of ordinary people.

Misty Chaos

I didn't really pay much attention to either sides during the campaign, instead, I did some research myself on the treaty on the internet, I was more likely to get something more unbiased than the, to be frank, propaganda that BOTH sides have being spewing out.

What I found out about the Lisbon treaty was quite frankly, it was hard to understand as even the summary used a lot of jargon that was barely understandable to me and would be completely lost to a typical person.

Its for that reason and that reason ALONE that today I voted NO. From experience, saying Yes to something you don't really understand usually doesn't end well.

And I have to agree, some of the NO campaign posters were definitely very questionable at the very least ( and perhaps some of the Yes posters were too. )

If your going to vote on something like this, IGNORE the scaremongers and propaganda that populate the yes and no sides and do some research on the issue yourself. That way, you'll come to a clearer decision.

Sam Vimes

Misty Choas wrote: »

I didn't really pay much attention to either sides during the campaign, instead, I did some research myself on the treaty on the internet, I was more likely to get something more unbiased than the, to be frank, propaganda that BOTH sides have being spewing out.

What I found out about the Lisbon treaty was quite frankly, it was hard to understand as even the summary used a lot of jargon that was barely understandable to me and would be completely lost to a typical person.

Its for that reason and that reason ALONE that today I voted NO. From experience, saying Yes to something you don't really understand usually doesn't end well.

I find that very disappointing. The treaty has to be that complicated, if they make it any simpler it'll be full of loop holes. I'd see that as a sign that this should never have been put to a referendum because people don't have the time, inclination or expertise to try to understand it. It should have been decided by legal experts and elected representatives as it was in every other country. Dozens of people from 27 countries put years of their lives into this treaty and every other country in Europe has accepted it (or soon will accept it) so it can't be that bad. Change is not necessarily a bad thing.

If you don't know don't vote imo

prinz

Misty Choas wrote: »

Its for that reason and that reason ALONE that today I voted NO. From experience, saying Yes to something you don't really understand usually doesn't end well.

Misty Choas wrote: »

If your going to vote on something like this, IGNORE the scaremongers and propaganda that populate the yes and no sides and do some research on the issue yourself. That way, you'll come to a clearer decision.

It's a pity you didn't take your own advice. Truly soul destroying.

robindch

Misty Choas wrote: »

Its for that reason and that reason ALONE that today I voted NO. From experience, saying Yes to something you don't really understand usually doesn't end well.

I'm sorry to hear that you take an unhappy and cynical view of an agreement which has taken eight or ten years for twenty-seven countries to negotiate.

At a very basic level, you are also failing to understand what a referendum is for.

Here's how it works:

If you vote yes, it means you support the amendment. If you vote no, it means you do not support the amendment. If you don't understand what you are being asked to vote upon, you should abstain. If you reject the basis upon which the referendum is taking place, then you should spoil your vote.

That's how you can vote according to what your views are.

You are ignoring your views when you choose to vote for a side that you do not support, and more importantly, you are undermining the delicate balancing act that is the democratic system that we run in this country.

eightyfish

Misty Choas wrote: »

I didn't really pay much attention to either sides during the campaign, instead, I did some research myself on the treaty on the internet, I was more likely to get something more unbiased than the, to be frank, propaganda that BOTH sides have being spewing out.

Have to agree with Sam here. Why should a pan-European political treaty be written so that Joe Bloggs can understand it? Without training, you wouldn't understand most legal documents, and this is for the very reason that layperson's language just won't do to address complex issues that arise in law. If there was a world that simple, it wouldn't be one occupied by humans.

So; because most people (me) won't be able to read it, we (I) must divert to a qualified authority. I don't understand all the scientific research and evidence behind global warming, but I am convinced it exists because the majority of climate scientists say it does. It's the same with the treaty.

Every member of our government and our opposition are telling me to vote yes, aside from Sinn Fein. I believe that these people have the best interests of our country at heart. SF themselves represent an olde-Ireland mentality that stands in the way of progress and does not represent the Ireland I would like to see in the future. They're also flat-out Eurosceptics who've campaigned for a no in every previous treaty. So that's their opinion nullified.

Every business body is telling me to vote yes, leading me to conclude that the people in charge of business think it will be good for business. The unions are telling me to vote yes, leading me to conclude that the people in charge are convinced that it will be good for jobs.

I'm looking around now for a qualified authority from the other side. Aside from SF, what do I get? Extreme-catholic groups like Cóir and nationalist groups like éirígí, who again represent an Ireland I'm happy to let die.

Then there's Declan Ganley. He was born in the UK, and identified himself as British in years previous. He worked and earned a fortune in Russia, a country that would really love to see the EU collapse. He now lives here but came out of nowhere for the sole reason of opposing the treaty, and he is being bankrolled by British hedge fund. With no track record, no real interest in the country, and all of the above, this leads me not to trust him.

So here I am, with not a single qualified authority that doesn't, to me, look shady and backwards, telling me to vote no. The people in charge of government, opposition to government, business, unions, and many other bodies, are telling me to vote yes.

I vote yes.

It's just a bonus that reading the summaries of the treaty itself would lead me to the same decision.

PS - if you believe the internet to be unbiased, you need to get on-line more.

molloyjh

I paused before my Yes, but that was because the pencil broke. Hope that's not a sign!

tonycascarino

Just voted No & didn't even bat an eyelid. At least 12 other family/extended family members plan on voting No too.:D

Sam Vimes

tonycascarino wrote: »

Just voted No & didn't even bat an eyelid. At least 12 other family/extended family members plan on voting No too.:D

I hope the same is true of almost half the voters in the country

professore

Max Power1 wrote: »

Its funny, I disregard PR BS from Coir/libertas as its rubbish (ie the 1.84 min wage) and also the PR BS from the FF/FG bandwagon (Yes to jobs????)

This info, however is taken from the source from where I get the accurate info used to forge my decision, (europa.eu)


I am not in support of this.


This is not what I want


This is the main reason i will be voting no.

All quotes taken from the official EU website,

I voted yes, but I respect you for voting no on the actual treaty rather than scaremongering issues.

tonycascarino

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I hope the same is true of almost half the voters in the country

I'm actually being honest.

seamus

eightyfish wrote: »

Then there's Declan Ganley. He was born in the UK, and identified himself as British in years previous. He worked and earned a fortune in Russia, a country that would really love to see the EU collapse. He now lives here but came out of nowhere for the sole reason of opposing the treaty, and he is being bankrolled by British hedge fund. With no track record, no real interest in the country, and all of the above, this leads me not to trust him.

Let's not forget that when he conceded the election to Europe over the Summer, Declan Ganley quit political life and gave up leadership of Libertas saying that the party could do what it wanted.
Then miraculously he reappeared a month ago in a political context, leading Libertas's No campaign, and not a single mention of his resignation. How a man without a backbone and party clearly without principles (who'll allow back a leader who resigned in a huff) can be relied upon for an honest campaign is beyond me.

Rb

tonycascarino wrote: »

I'm actually being honest.

Whoooossshhhh

Sam Vimes

tonycascarino wrote: »

I'm actually being honest.

As Rb said:

Rb wrote: »

Whoooossshhhh

It was a joke :P

PopeBuckfastXVI

seamus wrote: »

Let's not forget that when he conceded the election to Europe over the Summer, Declan Ganley quit political life and gave up leadership of Libertas saying that the party could do what it wanted.
Then miraculously he reappeared a month ago in a political context, leading Libertas's No campaign, and not a single mention of his resignation. How a man without a backbone and party clearly without principles (who'll allow back a leader who resigned in a huff) can be relied upon for an honest campaign is beyond me.

He didn't even have the pretence of having anyone else actually 'in' Libertas this time. Everyone knew it was a vanity project. Last time you saw the posters and asked, who is this Libertas? This time you saw them and saw that smirking snake-oil salesman...

Sam Vimes

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

He didn't even have the pretence of having anyone else actually 'in' Libertas this time. Everyone knew it was a vanity project. Last time you saw the posters and asked, who is this Libertas? This time you saw them and saw that smirking snake-oil salesman...

I texted in a radio show the other day and they called me asking me to go on just after they had Ganley on peddling the usual lies. There was a girl on just before me talking about the usual "no referendums" and neutrality nonsense and I explained that they were all lies. The presenter asked me why are they against this treaty and I gave a paraphrasing of a previous post of mine you've probably seen in ei.sdraob's sig:

When you look at the no campaign you see that it consists almost entirely of the far left, the far right and the far out, the liars, the losers and the lunatics. They're the communists, the fascists, the terrorists, the religious fundamentalists and the guy with the US military contracts. They're the people who've been opposed to the EU since we joined and would love nothing more than to see Ireland pull out to satisfy their various vested interests and some of them want the end of the EU (UKIP).

It's very satisfying to call Ganley "the guy with the US military contracts" on the airwaves. He's probably coming for me now

PopeBuckfastXVI

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I texted in a radio show the other day and they called me asking me to go on just after they had Ganley on peddling the usual lies. There was a girl on just before me talking about the usual "no referendums" and neutrality nonsense and I explained that they were all lies. The presenter asked me why are they against this treaty and I gave a paraphrasing of a previous post of mine you've probably seen in ei.sdraob's sig:


It's very satisfying to call Ganley "the guy with the US military contracts" on the airwaves. He's probably coming for me now

Indeed, you might find you have a military 'contract' out on you!

Sam Vimes

I, Sam Vimes, entirely of my own free will have changed my opinion on this treaty. I now firmly believe that it is not in the interests of the country and you should all vote no. Heil Ganley

PopeBuckfastXVI

Expect this to appear in a new post soon with the title 'Sam Vimes, Yes Campaginer Has Change of Heart, Calls for NO'

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I, Sam Vimes, entirely of my own free will have changed my opinion on this treaty. I now firmly believe that it is not in the interests of the country and you should all vote no.

Followed by

NO EMANS NO!

Sam Vimes

PopeBuckfastXVI wrote: »

Expect this to appear in a new post soon with the title 'Sam Vimes, Yes Campaginer Has Change of Heart, Calls for NO'



Followed by

NO EMANS NO!

Aw fcuk, you're probably right :facepalm:

WoollyRedHat

humanji wrote: »

His opinion is that many people are voting for reasons that are nothing to to with treaty. Does that not bother you? If the majority of people were voting Yes because they thought it would stop George Lucas making a fifth Indiana Jones movie, would that not make you wish people would make a little more of an effort in something that is claimed to be so important?

It works both ways though. The yes side have also lied, including the political parties that represent us. They have told us yes to jobs, yes to recovery,( basically yes to ending the recession) yet it has nothing to do with this. It is also quite dishonest to take advantage and manipulate peoples fears by saying the treaty will fix everything again. It is taken advantage of those affected by the recession. They promise the moon and the stars if the treaty is passed. The populace is in for a big disappointment however when they find that those promises where just to sway the public to vote for Lisbon This is a mighty lie as well, and it has formed the basis of the Yes campaign. Two sides to every story

ei.sdraob

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I, Sam Vimes, entirely of my own free will have changed my opinion on this treaty. I now firmly believe that it is not in the interests of the country and you should all vote no. Heil Ganley

Welcome to the dark side of the force