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

For anyone who was confused, the very use of this “durable relationships” should have been a very clear red flag as to the absolute fooking nonsense being proposed

What do you mean at all? I'd say most people posting here are far better informed than the average on the matters raised.

We understood perfectly well why we should vote No. Not an ounce of confusion.

As for Labour, we can look forward to Bacik eating humble pie - she was prominent in calling for Yes votes and clearly way out of touch with her former Labour voters.

The proponents of yes, yes just don't seem to get it. Despite the obfuscation from Roderic O'Gorman, Helen McEntee, Leo Varadkar and the sneering Michael Martin et al, government are now trying to play the misinformation card when they can't even define what a durable relationship is. Ivana Bacik did a poor job of throwing the government under the bus on RTE but I don't think the electorate will be quick to forget Labour, SF and Soc Dems role in this referendum either.

Gombeens of the highest order.

I was on the fence about the marriage one before I heard varadkar open his mouth then I went a big fat NO on both.

From the Indo:

"Green Party leader Eamon Ryan accept both referendums are unlikely to pass. Mr Ryan said the Government has to accept the will of the people and it will be for another administration to re-run the referendums."

Hmmm, that's an idea, we should have re-runs of all referendums after a few years. I voted to keep the Seanad and I regret that now.

So we have all the party's who are not in government who advocated a yes vote bar Aontu saying the wording was terrible and it's the governments fault.

Why in the name of jaysus did they not advocate a no vote so. Absolute nonsense. And then Joe O'Brien saying they failed with the online/social media side of things.

Absolute nonsense.

That's one thing bacik won't do is eat humble pie.

Someone’s sore this morning. Great to see the ideological lunatics get a kicking.

Referendums are won and lost by the undecided and swing voters

Lisbon 2 had a number of changes specifically relating to those things most voters had a problem with for Lisbon 1. No **** most of it didn't come to pass after Lisbon 2

Your stance here reeks of the same arrogance and disrespect being displayed by those who proposed these changes. This vote was rejected by people, and trying to label the result as being due to uneducated people stinks

edit. Poster did not label any no voters as uneducated. Aplogies, Akrasia

At the time the Seanad members themselves were falling over themselves to tell us how they'd reform the institution if it was kept. I believed them. Yeah, I regret it now. I'd prefer a reformed Seanad to no Seanad at all, but it doesn't look like we'll ever get that choice.

And here we have a single person speaking as though they are the divinely appointed spokesperson for every No voter on this thread.

I have eyes. I can see loads of reasons why people voted no, some of them contradict each other

I just think it's a pity that carers seem to have been denied the chance to sue for better resourcing under the new framing of the constitution.

To be honest the strength of the No-no vote indicates that there was not only a problem with the wording of the amendments, but the proponents too.

The scale of some of the no vote boxes indicates that some communities are completely lost to the mainstream.