United Ireland Poll - please vote

Hqrry113

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

I'm not having a go but there is a science to polling. It doesn't consist of whacking a few responses into an excel sheet and creating a pie chart

The Irish Independent poll was carried out by Kantar, who similar to Red C etc are a professional polling company. They have a professional reputation to uphold. There are methods to polling, including ensuring the population is randomly sampled. Believe it or not, if you truly randomly sample a population i.e. your sample is normally distributed across age/socio economic/regional cohorts etc, 1000 responses can be more than enough to get an accurate reflection of the overall population, within a margin of error (which is usually published along with the study). This can all be proven statistically, which is what these polling companies are paid to do to ensure the results are accurate without having to ask 3 million people their opinion.

Not sure about the Joe.ie poll but it was probably just a click of a button on their website. This means the results reflect their website visitors and whoever shared it the most - completely open to abuse and in no way a statistically accurate reflection of anything.

What he was saying was that polls are constantly unaccurate and differ with each poll, other posters were using the poll as some sort of factual evidence that these are the opinions of the people and that's that.

He meant there were probably numerous polls on this but the independent decided to report on this one because maybe they felt it better suited their agenda more than the other ones as the independent is widely knows for being anti republican.

jh79

Hqrry113 wrote: »

What he was saying was that polls are constantly unaccurate and differ with each poll, other posters were using the poll as some sort of factual evidence that these are the opinions of the people and that's that.

He meant there were probably numerous polls on this but the independent decided to report on this one because maybe they felt it better suited their agenda more than the other ones as the independent is widely knows for being anti republican.

The Independent commissioned the poll for the centenary, that's why they reported it. The sampling was done to be reflective of the population so the agenda of the independent is irrelevant.

The previous poll showed a drop in support for a UI from when a hard brexit was a possiblity. This poll showed that trend is continuing as Brexit settles down.

Both of the last two polls show little support for paying for a UI in the Republic.

Two different polling companies for two different newspapers both showing a drop in support for a UI in the North and a only a small minority in the Republic willing to pay for it.

Hqrry113

jh79 wrote: »

The Independent commissioned the poll for the centenary, that's why they reported it. The sampling was done to be reflective of the population so the agenda of the independent is irrelevant.

The previous poll showed a drop in support for a UI from when a hard brexit was a possiblity. This poll showed that trend is continuing as Brexit settles down.

Both of the last two polls show little support for paying for a UI in the Republic.

Two different polling companies for two different newspapers both showing a drop in support for a UI in the North and a only a small minority in the Republic willing to pay for it.

Either way polls are usually flawed and most of the time miss certain segments of the population there have been numerous polls on Irish Unity in the last few months showing far higher support for a United Ireland where far more people were surveyed.

Another recent poll for a United Ireland in Northern Ireland by LucidTalks for the times showed 45% of people in support of a United Ireland and only 48% against it and it surveyed a far higher number of people than the Kantar poll.

I don't find it surprising the independent poll was one of the least attractive for a United Ireland it doesn't matter to me who conducted the poll they constantly try subliminal tactics in their articles against a United Ireland.

jh79

Hqrry113 wrote: »

Either way polls are usually flawed and most of the time miss certain segments of the population there have been numerous polls on Irish Unity in the last few months showing far higher support for a United Ireland where far more people were surveyed.

Another recent poll for a United Ireland in Northern Ireland by LucidTalks for the times showed 45% of people in support of a United Ireland and only 48% against it and it surveyed a far higher number of people than the Kantar poll.

I don't find it surprising the independent poll was one of the least attractive for a United Ireland it doesn't matter to me who conducted the poll they constantly try subliminal tactics in their articles against a United Ireland.

Higher numbers don't mean more accurate after a certain population size. Both were above the required numbers for the population.

The Lucid talk poll reported a lower number than the Aschcroft poll . It just looks like support has dropped with the risk of a hard brexit. Reasonable assumption as in one poll they found the majority in NI would vote for a UI if there was a Hard Brexit.

The don't understand the last bit. The people in the poll were selected randomly so whatever influence the Indo has would be reflective of the general population.

Shebean

If you ask people would they support saving baby puppies if it meant higher taxes, they'd probably say no.

Hqrry113

Shebean wrote: »

If you ask people would they support saving baby puppies if it meant higher taxes, they'd probably say no.

If you asked people would they support ending child starvation in Africa if it meant higher taxes they'd say no.

blanch152

Marco23d wrote: »

Well why doesn't blanch the polling expert of boards elaborate?

A self-selecting poll on a website has no value at all.

That is why we have polling companies, so that the sampling, the confidence intervals and the numbers can be relied on.

A website that anyone can vote on is completely unreliable. Half the votes may have been Irish people living in America for all we know.

blanch152

Hqrry113 wrote: »

Either way polls are usually flawed and most of the time miss certain segments of the population there have been numerous polls on Irish Unity in the last few months showing far higher support for a United Ireland where far more people were surveyed.

Another recent poll for a United Ireland in Northern Ireland by LucidTalks for the times showed 45% of people in support of a United Ireland and only 48% against it and it surveyed a far higher number of people than the Kantar poll.

I don't find it surprising the independent poll was one of the least attractive for a United Ireland it doesn't matter to me who conducted the poll they constantly try subliminal tactics in their articles against a United Ireland.

https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/northern-ireland-polling-firm-lucidtalk-has-wrongly-claimed-it-member-uk-professional-research-body-3127161

Leave aside some of the nonsense in this article and you find a key reason why LucidTalk show stronger support for a united Ireland - they recruit people online only. That will mean that their vote won't include older and rural people in Northern Ireland to the correct levels. As young urban people are more likely to support a united Ireland (as all polls show), the Lucid Talk polls are skewed.

Hqrry113

blanch152 wrote: »

https://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/politics/northern-ireland-polling-firm-lucidtalk-has-wrongly-claimed-it-member-uk-professional-research-body-3127161

Leave aside some of the nonsense in this article and you find a key reason why LucidTalk show stronger support for a united Ireland - they recruit people online only. That will mean that their vote won't include older and rural people in Northern Ireland to the correct levels. As young urban people are more likely to support a united Ireland (as all polls show), the Lucid Talk polls are skewed.

And the Kantar poll was taken perfectly with no problems at all because it suits your partionist agenda?

FileNotFound

Do we in the Republic get a vote on this ever happening?

Or is it like when Germany unified?

Hqrry113

FileNotFound wrote: »

Do we in the Republic get a vote on this ever happening?

Or is it like when Germany unified?

Yes we do.

As part of the constitution prior to the late 80s it was already claimed as part of the Republic of Ireland.

BonnieSituation

FileNotFound wrote: »

Do we in the Republic get a vote on this ever happening?

Or is it like when Germany unified?

There will be a vote.

Though it could be argued that the constitutional aspiration and the signing and subsequent approval of the GFA in 1998 by the citizens of this State remove the need for a referendum.

FileNotFound

Hqrry113 wrote: »

Yes we do.

As part of the constitution prior to the late 80s it was already claimed as part of the Republic of Ireland.

So a unification vote up north would be followed by a vote down here.

Hqrry113

FileNotFound wrote: »

So a unification vote up north would be followed by a vote down here.

Likely like that but I don't know exactly how it would work either way there will be a vote in the Republic as well.

BonnieSituation

FileNotFound wrote: »

So a unification vote up north would be followed by a vote down here.

They'll likely be held at the same time.

Junkyard Tom

BonnieSituation wrote: »

There will be a vote.

Though it could be argued that the constitutional aspiration and the signing and subsequent approval of the GFA in 1998 by the citizens of this State remove the need for a referendum.

Unlike for the north the GFA is not specific about a referendum in the south but does say that

the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions

is required.

BonnieSituation

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Unlike for the north the GFA is not specific about a referendum in the south but does say that

the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions

is required.

Exactly. It could be argued that we did that already in 1998.

StupidLikeAFox

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Unlike for the north the GFA is not specific about a referendum in the south but does say that

the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions

is required.

So for example, could sinn fein make a UI a core part of a general election campaign, pitch it as a de facto referendum on Irish unity ( like sturgeon in scotland), and if they got into power then say that it was the "democratic will of the people". Hypothetically speaking of course, I don't think they would do that in reality

Barry904

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Like I said I'm against it & I'm neither old (late 30's) or conservative ,


The idea is great I just can't see how it works without causing absolute hell for the people who find life tough enough already in the south ,It'll be a finical disaster for us as a country even more so just coming out of the pandemic ,


Sounds great but it won't work on so many levels,

Just out of curiosity, what is the main newspaper that you read?

I kind of know already.

Junkyard Tom

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

So for example, could sinn fein make a UI a core part of a general election campaign, pitch it as a de facto referendum on Irish unity ( like sturgeon in scotland), and if they got into power then say that it was the "democratic will of the people". Hypothetically speaking of course, I don't think they would do that in reality

Or any government in charge at the time of a United Ireland winning poll in the north.

FileNotFound

Barry904 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, what is the main newspaper that you read?

I kind of know already.

I agree with the other poster.

It's a lovely thought, really tugs at the old heart strings but reality wise it will have a lot of negative impacts.

The changes to our social, economic & political landscape are huge.

Most people I know who support UI do so for the old romantic we want our 6 counties back sh1te.

jh79

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

So for example, could sinn fein make a UI a core part of a general election campaign, pitch it as a de facto referendum on Irish unity ( like sturgeon in scotland), and if they got into power then say that it was the "democratic will of the people". Hypothetically speaking of course, I don't think they would do that in reality

The Arins project have a paper out on this. They believe under Irish law a referendum is required.

The Agreement emphasises that this right must be achieved and exercised with and subject to the agreement and consent of ‘a majority of the people of Northern Ireland’. This provision is amplified in Section 1 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, using language mandated by the Agreement: the consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland is to be expressed ‘in a poll held for the purposes of this section in accordance with Schedule 1.’ It is our view that a referendum would also be legally required in the south, as certain amendments would need to be made to the Irish Constitution in order to allow the newly unified state to meet continuing obligations under the Agreement.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/10.3318/isia.2021.32b.18.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A57168994d912cac366927617eaa7cf0a

BonnieSituation

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

So for example, could sinn fein make a UI a core part of a general election campaign, pitch it as a de facto referendum on Irish unity ( like sturgeon in scotland), and if they got into power then say that it was the "democratic will of the people". Hypothetically speaking of course, I don't think they would do that in reality

Any party could do that. It would be very dangerous though. So they wouldn't.

As I've stated before, there is an argument to be made that we made our decision on reunification in 1998.

Kermit.de.frog

Will the North's new leader make a difference in this debate?

Looks like Jeffrey Donaldson will be chosen.

FrancieBrady

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Any party could do that. It would be very dangerous though. So they wouldn't.

As I've stated before, there is an argument to be made that we made our decision on reunification in 1998.

Constitutionally we have said we want a UI. That is the without argument. We had the wording put clearly in front of us and we accepted it by a large majority.

BonnieSituation

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Constitutionally we have said we want a UI. That is the without argument. We had the wording put clearly in front of us and we accepted it by a large majority.

Well there is an argument to be had. The ruling assumption is that we require a referendum.

partyguinness

We can't have a united Ireland. Sure what will we bitch and moan about then?

FrancieBrady

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Well there is an argument to be had. The ruling assumption is that we require a referendum.

I wouldn't be surprised if someone challenged he need for a referendum come the time.

A referendum here is a sop to the partitionists really.

I personally think it's a good idea to have one, if only to silence the begrudgers.

FileNotFound

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if someone challenged he need for a referendum come the time.

A referendum here is a sop to the partitionists really.

I personally think it's a good idea to have one, if only to silence the begrudgers.

A referendum is a fair way to go, 1998 is a long time ago. Opinions have changed.

When it's not in the near the heart strings get pulled at the idea of a UI.

If we have a debate on the economic impacts etc would so many rush to support? Even the entire political landscape would change.

Lots for people to chew on. I'd see those that don't want UI in the south as Republicans who want the republics to remain as is. And the UI voters as unionists who want a union with the North.

FrancieBrady

FileNotFound wrote: »

A referendum is a fair way to go, 1998 is a long time ago. Opinions have changed.

When it's not in the near the heart strings get pulled at the idea of a UI.

If we have a debate on the economic impacts etc would so many rush to support? Even the entire political landscape would change.

Lots for people to chew on. I'd see those that don't want UI in the south as Republicans who want the republics to remain as is. And the UI voters as unionists who want a union with the North.

As a country we want a UI. That is the position.
Just like it is safe to say that as a country we think same sex couples should marry.

If those of you think the majority has changed it's opinion on wanting a UI, then begin the process of testing that - constitutionally.

Until then - we want a UI, if the north voted for it, we could accept without breaking any law or the constitution.