United Ireland Poll - please vote

Shebean

FrancieBrady wrote: »

We're back to arbitrary 'cut off' points to suit an agenda. Ho hum.

How is partition going from your 'modern perspective'?

We don't need a trip around the world blanch, just give us your perspective on what is happening here and now?

What's backward is socially and scientifically ignorant members of unionist parties wanting to hold on to the glory days of a defunct empire when they ruled other communities as they liked. It's kind of sad.
It's about holding on to power and privilege. Nothing more. It should be ended.

FrancieBrady

Trend is only heading one way.

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/northern-ireland-five-years-on/

eire4

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Trend is only heading one way.

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/northern-ireland-five-years-on/

I think as the pandemic fades away hopefully by the end of the year then the real negative effects economically of brexit will not be able to be hidden any more as we get into 2022 and as they really sink in will only likely hasten this trend IMHO.

jh79

Read the research a few times in case I was missing something. What trend are both of ye referring to in it?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Read the research a few times in case I was missing something. What trend are both of ye referring to in it?

The one mentioned in the research you claim to have read a few times?

There was a steep and steady growth each year in the proportion of Irish nationalists believing that Brexit made Irish unification more likely. The trend was less dramatic among ‘neithers’, but it was in the same direction.

2020 changed everything for unionists, a plurality of whom now believe a united Ireland to be more likely as a consequence of Brexit.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The one mentioned in the research you claim to have read a few times?

Sorry should of worded it better. Why do you think this trend is significant given that support for a UI is trending downwards?

Maybe if the trend downwards is reversed in the next LucidTalk poll this paper will be more relevant.

"What has happened in the past five years has not so far had the effect of creating such a majority in Northern Ireland. However it has given rise to a situation which is seen by the plurality of people there as making a united Ireland more likely (Fig.1)."

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Sorry should of worded it better. Why do you think this trend is significant given that support for a UI is trending downwards?

Maybe if the trend downwards is reversed in the next LucidTalk poll this paper will be more relevant.

"What has happened in the past five years has not so far had the effect of creating such a majority in Northern Ireland. However it has given rise to a situation which is seen by the plurality of people there as making a united Ireland more likely (Fig.1)."

If s vote were to happen tomorrow it is trending down. And we also have no proposal on the table yet.
I would expect polling numbers would change once that point is reached as they did in Scotland.

People who are expecting a UI or who think it is inevitable will be much easier convinced when a plan is produced.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If s vote were to happen tomorrow it is trending down. And we also have no proposal on the table yet.
I would expect polling numbers would change once that point is reached as they did in Scotland.

People who are expecting a UI or who think it is inevitable will be much easier convinced when a plan is produced.

The author disagrees with you anyways.

"Unionists being less in favour of Irish unification doesn’t make it less likely to happen, any more than nationalists being more in favour of it makes it more likely."

Asking someone how they think others will vote isn't going to tell you as much as asking how they would vote.

jh79

Without an upwards trend for unification only option is a manufactured "victory" for the DUP where the protocol is just rebranded. Hard Brexit was Republicans only hope.

drdidlittle

Question... Why is Scotland independence always mentioned in this UI thread.... Surely an independent Scotland equates more to an independent NI than a UI.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

The author disagrees with you anyways.

"Unionists being less in favour of Irish unification doesn’t make it less likely to happen, any more than nationalists being more in favour of it makes it more likely."

Asking someone how they think others will vote isn't going to tell you as much as asking how they would vote.

Again, asking people how they would vote when there is NO plan or proposal is dodgy polling.

Nobody is going to be voting in the absence of a plan or proposal and opinion will change once a plan and proposal is presented.

You are clinging to dodgy data.

What we know for certain s the amount who want a UI on both sides and the numbers who now think it is inevitable. That is a year on year growing number (trend) across all demographics/creeds/ and political affiliations.

FrancieBrady

drdidlittle wrote: »

Question... Why is Scotland independence always mentioned in this UI thread.... Surely an independent Scotland equates more to an independent NI than a UI.

I only mention it in the context of how opinion shifted from before a referendum was called up to the vote itself. From 32% in favour to damn near winning it.

Partitionists and Unionists know this only too well and I believe it is the primary reason they will not call for a BP they are adamant they will win.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again, asking people how they would vote when there is NO plan or proposal is dodgy polling.

Nobody is going to be voting in the absence of a plan or proposal and opinion will change once a plan and proposal is presented.

You are clinging to dodgy data.

What we know for certain s the amount who want a UI on both sides and the numbers who now think it is inevitable. That is a year on year growing number (trend) across all demographics/creeds/ and political affiliations.

It's a real Catch_22 situation though. UI is on a downward trend and it's a valid claim that a plan could change that but the likelihood of a plan decreases with this trend.

I'd love to see a plan. I suspect SF are running scared from it due to the inevitable unpopular tax increases and the rest want more of a buy in from unionists before considering one.

mehico

One of the interesting trends emerging in the report linked to above is the attitude of the middle ground.

It suggests that 42% of those self-identifying as being non-aligned saying that Brexit has made them more in favour of Irish unification.

jh79

mehico wrote: »

One of the interesting trends emerging in the report linked to above is the attitude of the middle ground.

It suggests that 42% of those self-identifying as being non-aligned saying that Brexit has made them more in favour of Irish unification.

Previous polls showed similar. Explains why Mary Lou looked so miserable when the deal on the protocol was made!

Once the DUP get a "revised" version of the protocol so they can claim a victory a UI will be on the back burner again.

mehico

jh79 wrote: »

Previous polls showed similar. Explains why Mary Lou looked so miserable when the deal on the protocol was made!
Is
Once the DUP get a "revised" version of the protocol so they can claim a victory a UI will be on the back burner again.

That is one way of interpreting it.

I believe the protocol will be revised but don't think the DUP will be able to claim this as a victory because as far as I understand it, they want the Protocol removed in its entirety and anything less than this could be viewed as a failure.

jh79

mehico wrote: »

That is one way of interpreting it.

I believe the protocol will be revised but don't think the DUP will be able to claim this as a victory because as far as I understand it, they want the Protocol removed in its entirety and anything less than this could be viewed as a failure.

Maybe so but given the regulars on here were mocking the lack of support for the anti protocol demonstrations it's probably fair to say the DUP are not representative of the wider unionist community.

Any sort of protocol and you can forget about a UI.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Previous polls showed similar. Explains why Mary Lou looked so miserable when the deal on the protocol was made!

Once the DUP get a "revised" version of the protocol so they can claim a victory a UI will be on the back burner again.

What???


You have decided her position on the Protocol based on how she was looking?

Heard it all now. In the realm of wishful thinking that takes some beating.

'eee she were glum'.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

What???


You have decided her position on the Protocol based on how she was looking?

Heard it all now. In the realm of wishful thinking that takes some beating.

'eee she were glum'.

Jaysus it was a joke. (Was gonna say should of put an exclamation mark but i already had!)

I suspect SF were hoping for a hard Brexit. Whether they were or not is irrelevant anyways. The majority in NI only wanted unfication if there was a hard brexit. As long as there is a protocol in place there will be no UI irrespective of SF or the DUP stance

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Jaysus it was a joke. (Was gonna say should of put an exclamation mark but i already had!)

I suspect SF were hoping for a hard Brexit. Whether they were or not is irrelevant anyways. The majority in NI only wanted unfication if there was a hard brexit. As long as there is a protocol in place there will be no UI irrespective of SF or the DUP stance

Is you suspicion a joke as well? Do you have anything to back this stuff up?

The 'trend' shows that more and more people year on year since Brexit believe a UI is inevitable. The polls show that people are not yet ready to vote for it...why...because some are reticent about it without a proposal from the Irish government as to what a UI will look like.

I see nothing on the horizon that will stop what is causing people to believe a UI is inevitable. In fact I see the UK trying to diverge further away and Scotland coming into play.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is you suspicion a joke as well? Do you have anything to back this stuff up?

The 'trend' shows that more and more people year on year since Brexit believe a UI is inevitable. The polls show that people are not yet ready to vote for it...why...because some are reticent about it without a proposal from the Irish government as to what a UI will look like.

I see nothing on the horizon that will stop what is causing people to believe a UI is inevitable. In fact I see the UK trying to diverge further away and Scotland coming into play.

Unification was more likely in the event of a hard brexit so am assuming given the politics of SF that this was there preferred outcome. Seems logical to me.

Unionist fatalism doesn't mean they'll vote for it. They'll vote no and get a pleasant surprise.

Doesn't seem to be a plan forthcoming from any party. You see the "power swap" parties as somewhat partitionist but that begs the question why you give SF's inaction such a soft touch?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Unification was more likely in the event if a hard brexit so am assuming given the politics of SF that this was there preferred outcome. Seems logical to me.

Unionist fatalism doesn't mean they'll vote for it. They'll vote no and get a pleasant surprise.

Doesn't seem to be a plan forthcoming from any party. You see the "power swap" parties as somewhat partitionist but that begs the question why you give SF's inaction such a soft touch?

??

It is the Irish government's job to come up with a plan/proposal not SF's who are not in government.

I 'suspect' it will be their price for going into any future government though and failing that I expect FF and FG to start moving towards that. Leo has shown that he sees a UI decision coming.

My 'suspicion' is that they have been given a nod through back channels that the UK will call one soon.
A UI is more and more in their interests as it is in ours and the rest of the EU.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

??

It is the Irish government's job to come up with a plan/proposal not SF's who are not in government.

I 'suspect' it will be their price for going into any future government though and failing that I expect FF and FG to start moving towards that. Leo has shown that he sees a UI decision coming.

My 'suspicion' is that they have been given a nod through back channels that the UK will call one soon.
A UI is more and more in their interests as it is in ours and the rest of the EU.

They don't have to wait to be in government in the Republic to produce a plan. It's not gonna change once in government anyways.

The polls are not in their favour, a plan might change that so why not do it now?

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

They don't have to wait to be in government in the Republic to produce a plan. It's not gonna change once in government anyways.

The polls are not in their favour, a plan might change that so why not do it now?

Bizarre,

Have you given any thought to this at all?

A plan/proposal can only be put forward after negotiations with the British as to what an Irish government is proposing. For instance pensions...no plan can say what will happen with them until it is negotiated. There would also have to be a whole gamut of rights agreed before a plan/proposal can be made.

SF have spoken about their specific vision for a UI but that is all it is or can be.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Bizarre,

Have you given any thought to this at all?

A plan/proposal can only be put forward after negotiations with the British as to what an Irish government is proposing. For instance pensions...no plan can say what will happen with them until it is negotiated. There would also have to be a whole gamut of rights agreed before a plan/proposal can be made.

SF have spoken about their specific vision for a UI but that is all it is or can be.

That only applies to the subvention which we all know isn't the true cost of unification.

What grace period will you give the SF government on a plan for the full cost?

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Bizarre,

Have you given any thought to this at all?

A plan/proposal can only be put forward after negotiations with the British as to what an Irish government is proposing. For instance pensions...no plan can say what will happen with them until it is negotiated. There would also have to be a whole gamut of rights agreed before a plan/proposal can be made.

SF have spoken about their specific vision for a UI but that is all it is or can be.

Not relevant to the cost of a UI but a colleague of Prof Doyle pointed out that Scottish independence might mean that the British might not be as amenable to paying all the cost of pensions and debt given the huge cost for both. Doyle has promised a reposte.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

That only applies to the subvention which we all know isn't the true cost of unification.

What grace period will you give the SF government on a plan for the full cost?

??

jh79 wrote: »

Not relevant to the cost of a UI but a colleague of Prof Doyle pointed out that Scottish independence might mean that the British might not be as amenable to paying all the cost of pensions and debt given the huge cost for both. Doyle has promised a reposte.

There are many things that can be speculated about. I am sure we will negotiate the best deal we can.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

??




There are many things that can be speculated about. I am sure we will negotiate the best deal we can.

Francie, predictions on the cost of a "New Ireland" or annexation whatever you prefer, are all based on readily available information. There is no secret info or data on the cost.

SF or any of the rest could tomorrow produce a report with scenarios such as the British paying x, y and z. There is no excuse.

FrancieBrady

jh79 wrote: »

Francie, predictions on the cost of a "New Ireland" or annexation whatever you prefer, are all based on readily available information. There is no secret info or data on the cost.

SF or any of the rest could tomorrow produce a report with scenarios such as the British paying x, y and z. There is no excuse.

To what end if there is no agreement?

Why would they waste their time?

You are being ridiculous. I wouldn't expect any political party to produce a full plan/proposal. That is the work of a government.

jh79

FrancieBrady wrote: »

To what end if there is no agreement?

Why would they waste their time?

You are being ridiculous. I wouldn't expect any political party to produce a full plan/proposal. That is the work of a government.

Disagree, no different than the alternative budgets each party does.

Once SF are in government, what timeframe do you expect to see the plan?