Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

March 8th - What’s your vote? **Mod Note In Post #677**

Options
1101113151646

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 461 ✭✭HerrKapitan


    Voting YES for both

    Public funds would be best spent on more important things. It will cost millions more for a re-run referendum so the responsible vote would be a YES - YES and have it over and done with.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,876 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Wow- 61% voting no to both on this thread poll so far.

    Id be in agreement with No x 2 also. The argument's to vote yes are weak and the unintended consequences of a yes vote are unknown at best - it’s a complete distraction from the serious issues of the state and the economy right now.

    My only concern is, will the No voters stay away out of apathy? I could see the final result being a lot closer than 60:40 and potentially at least one motion passed.



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,456 ✭✭✭This is it


    Voting NO for both

    I'm not advocating for either side but I'd say it's irresponsible to vote based on the costs to run the referendum.



  • Registered Users Posts: 394 ✭✭KevMayo88


    Voting NO for both

    The thing is that there's still many people who are confused or either completely uninterested in these referendums and who in turn are likely to just stay away- that could be a big problem for the no side.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,237 ✭✭✭crusd


    My understanding is the problem some people have with the wording of the Care referendum is that it gives the state an "out" in provide support to those in need of additional supports with the wishy washy "shall strive to support" wording. Thing is the current wording doesn't give any more and arguable less responsibility.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,876 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    I think it will be - there will be government “protest” votes which will likely be a smaller % than you might see expressed on a forum such as this (essentially they just won’t bother to turn up) - I don’t know how big the interest groups for a yes vote are but are probably not that significant.

    It will be very close (49/51 sort of close) for at least one of the questions - if the no voters turn up then no chance it will pass- the yes vote is just too small



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,744 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Voting YES for both

    But, if that’s the case, they already have an out in the current wording where they shall “endeavour”. Not much is changing there.

    The only thing that’s really changing is going from woman to family. It’s expanding who can care, instead of leaving it all on women.

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • Registered Users Posts: 419 ✭✭well24


    Voting NO for both

    Why? In the end doesnt everything always come down to money unfortunately..

    And what I think he means is that wouldnt it be a complete waste of money to have to hold the referendum again, money that could be better spent elsewhere.. waste of money first time around any way...

    I dont agree with just voting Yes to get it over with, its a definite no for me..



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,326 ✭✭✭Francis McM


    Most people do not know what the referendum means. Instead of closing some schools for yet another day, the government would be better off teaching people how to read. The OECD Adult Skills Survey shows that 17.9% or about 1 in 6, Irish adults are at or below level 1 on a five level literacy scale. At this level a person may be unable to understand basic written information. 25% or 1 in 4 Irish adults score at or below level 1 for numeracy..



  • Registered Users Posts: 394 ✭✭KevMayo88


    Voting NO for both

    Was listening to local radio today- caller after caller ringing in very passionate about voting no/no. Hopefully people are beginning to see these bogus referenda for what they are.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,318 ✭✭✭Potatoeman


    Voting NO for both

    “ There’s sod all appetite for these referendums as it is, only the religious, and misogynist, elements of No side seem to be getting angry, and animated, about them.”

    Which are you? You seem pretty animated yourself.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,407 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Voting NO for both

    my sense coming into the last few days is the No side have the momentum.

    The 2 messages about the state pushing care responsibility back onto families and zero clarity around so called durable relationships are really resonating with the public now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 561 ✭✭✭Hungry Burger


    Voting NO for both

    There’s a cohort who will vote yes on anything once it is deemed “progressive” no matter what legal ramifications there are or what cynical ploy the government are trying to play, the no side seem a lot more energised on voting but will need to capture the undecideds on the day.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,744 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Voting YES for both

    Oh, I’m on the Yes side, no anger nor animation. Cool as, if you will.

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,388 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Voting NO for both

    probably no for both, or maybe just abstain.

    because regardless in 10 or so years the political classes will re-run it if the desired result isn’t achieved….and spin it more favourably…to ensure it passes.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,035 ✭✭✭downtheroad


    Voting NO for both

    Let them re-run it in 10 years, with some clarity and definition included.

    For now it is so ambiguous and waffley it deserves a resounding no to both.



  • Registered Users Posts: 877 ✭✭✭Photobox




  • Registered Users Posts: 8,463 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    I am voting NO (family amendment)

    I'm not liking how vague "durable relationship" is

    And we have a court system that rewards lawyers for legal vagueness

    Did it have to be in the wording at all ?

    We have a legal state of marraige - thats the contract that signs you up for durability, it takes years to get out of , and there are consequences ..

    Anyway i should prob do a bit more reading..

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,747 ✭✭✭DeadHand


    Voting NO for both

    No-No.

    Everyone in my circle is voting the same way.

    Looking forward to Friday.



  • Registered Users Posts: 19,407 ✭✭✭✭road_high


    Voting NO for both

    I’m more looking forward to Saturday and the repercussions



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,811 ✭✭✭mrslancaster


    Like a lot of others I was undecided on the family amendment but after research and reading articles and opinions on both sides, i am now leaning towards a no. The yes campaign did not convince me that the change would have any real impact on the lives of citizens in non-marital families. In fact ROG and LV said it would not change any legislation about SW, taxes, inheritance etc. Neal Richmond confirmed that it would allow government make changes for immigration and reunification which hasn't been discussed in the media afaik. That issue along with the confusion around other durable relationships will be an important consideration for many voters. Discussion about both amendments this evening on Prime Time. Should be interesting.



  • Registered Users Posts: 394 ✭✭KevMayo88


    Voting NO for both

    Thats the main dumb argument from the government, i.e. "vote yes to be progessive and remove all this sexist stuff"- it's astonishing how empty and hollow their whole argument truly is.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,350 ✭✭✭AyeGer


    Michael McDowell is advocating No vote as he thinks it could cause havoc through the court in relation to inheritance, immigration and family matters.



  • Registered Users Posts: 10,744 ✭✭✭✭EmmetSpiceland


    Voting YES for both

    Wouldn’t be the first time he’s used hysterics to con the Irish electorate.

    Odd that people seem to think that lawyers will have a “field day” if there’s a Yes vote but a number of legal groups are arguing for a No.

    “It is not blood that makes you Irish but a willingness to be part of the Irish nation” - Thomas Davis



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,035 ✭✭✭downtheroad


    Voting NO for both

    Michael Martin getting rinsed on Prime Time. The more he speaks the more I'm voting no.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,373 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Voting NO for both

    Sarah McInerney doing her best to not let anyone to finish their point..



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    Voting NO for both

    After that prime time it's a definite No No Michael Martin was a shambles tonight that barrister destroyed him.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,373 ✭✭✭✭lawred2


    Voting NO for both

    Slick Mick ignoring the elephant in the room where changes in the constitution can immediately render existing legislation unconstitutional



  • Registered Users Posts: 198 ✭✭twiddleypop


    Agreed, I was trying go keep an open mind. Doing my best to read all the views but leaning towards a no/no. The point about the cost of referendum being used to build a respite centre was well-made. He also had her mixed up with someone else at the end-embarrassing.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 41,062 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



Advertisement