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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

No lead in latest poll

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    sink
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭sink


    theozster wrote: »
    30% say they don't know what they're voting for? What pig ignorance! Maybe at first they could have said that, but not after all the information out there has been organised. I've received 4 booklets in the post, two of them not taking a side, just explaining it, and the treaty is readily available on the internet.

    There is no longer any excuse. People claiming this ignorance are either wilfully so or are lying to cover ulterior motives.

    I especially find it frustrating that I have gone to the trouble of doing lots of research reading material from both side of the argument and the treaty itself in order to form a well informed opinion. Yet my vote will be cancelled out by a no voter who hasn't bothered to read one bit of information and is only going on sound bites. That said I'm sure there is people on the yes side like that too, but I would imagine they would be far rarer.


  • Options
    #33
    The_Minister
    Registered Users Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    gurramok wrote: »
    This BS and scaremongering about threatening jobs and economy is whats driving the NO vote also.
    With comments like this: (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/crisis-for-cowen-as-no-vote-surges-1399565.html)
    "It's a wake-up call and the people of Ireland will have to realise if this doesn't go through there will be emigration again. Jobs, jobs, it's all about jobs and about working to get jobs in the future."

    There is not one shred of proof to the above. It's Nice tactics all over again.
    I wouldn't write off that point of view altogether. I think that a No vote could be crushing for Ireland, a view that I originally disagreed with.


  • Options
    #34
    sink
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭sink


    gurramok wrote: »
    Denmark has consistently voted no to integration for years and they are doing well. (likewise Norway)

    Both those countries have large domestically owned businesses which export a lot. Most of our exports are from external investment especially from American multinationals. Our economy is far more reliant on investors
    gurramok wrote: »
    France and Netherlands didn't have any economic consequences of their No votes to the EU constitution way back, they are still going ok!

    The French economy has been in the gutter for years now, the no vote certainly didn't help and they are no better off now than before. We in comparison have a relatively strong economy reliant on international investors and have a lot more to loose. I'm not familiar enough with the Dutch economy to comment.
    gurramok wrote: »
    All these countries are politically stable and strengthened, Italy has a domestic mafia issue, thats why investors would be wary, nothing to do with the EU!!

    The Dutch government has collapsed something like 6 times in the last decade France has suffered violent riots in it's poor suburbs and constant strikes. That does not sound like stability to me. It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about.


  • Options
    #35
    brianthebard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,165 ✭✭✭✭brianthebard


    The_Minister wrote: »
    I wouldn't write off that point of view altogether. I think that a No vote could be crushing for Ireland, a view that I originally disagreed with.

    For what reasons?


  • Options
    #36
    colly10
    Registered Users Posts: 3,002 ✭✭✭colly10


    sink wrote: »
    That said I'm sure there is people on the yes side like that too, but I would imagine they would be far rarer.

    I would personally think the exact opposite (eg. im voting yes because the government said to, or im voting yes because you can't trust Sinn Fein etc..)

    But in saying that im biased and so are you, don't assume that just because someone is voting no means that they havn't done any research, just as I don't assume I don't assume that about the general yes voter.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    sink wrote: »
    Both those countries have large domestically owned businesses which export a lot. Most of our exports are from external investment especially from American multinationals. Our economy is far more reliant on investors

    I'd agree here, so the tax issue is more important than ever then. Where are the home grown Irish industries?
    sink wrote: »
    The French economy has been in the gutter for years now, the no vote certainly didn't help and they are no better off now than before. We in comparison have a relatively strong economy reliant on international investors and have a lot more to loose. I'm not familiar enough with the Dutch economy to comment.
    The French economy has structural problems(public sector reform) for years, it's totally nothing to do with the previous EU vote(it was in 2005).
    sink wrote: »
    The Dutch government has collapsed something like 6 times in the last decade France has suffered violent riots in it's poor suburbs and constant strikes. That does not sound like stability to me. It sounds like you don't know what you're talking about.
    The Dutch govt has collapsed maybe 6 times in a decade, the EU vote only happened in 2005, its now 2008.
    Here is a nice index on stability: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article3617160.ece

    It has Netherlands one place above Ireland in 9th place and Denmark in 12th. Shocking :D

    The French riots were due to racial issues in employment opportunities and social reasons built up over a generation, nothing to do with the 2005 vote.

    It sounds like you do not know what you are talking about.


  • Options
    #38
    Daftendirekt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,312 ✭✭✭Daftendirekt


    colly10 wrote: »
    I would personally think the exact opposite (eg. im voting yes because the government said to, or im voting yes because you can't trust Sinn Fein etc..)

    I haven't come across any yes voters who claim to be voting yes because the government told them to, and Sinn Féin seem to be just generally anti-European anyway. Although it is telling that they're the only party opposed to it, it still isn't a good thing to base your vote on.

    On the other hand, I really wish the government would just shut the hell up about Lisbon at this stage... the scarmongering is only hurting the Yes side. If they'd just try and sell the treaty on it's merits, it'd take a lot of credence away from the no side.

    Although I still think it's daft for people to say they're voting no because of the lack of information on the treaty.


  • Options
    #39
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    colly10 wrote: »
    ...don't assume that just because someone is voting no means that they havn't done any research...
    It's very easy to make that assumption based on some of the slogans being bandied about by different groups on the 'No' side; take Cóir for example:
    C&#243 wrote: »
    People died for your freedom, don't throw it away
    ...
    No 2 Foreign Rule
    ...
    Under the Lisbon Treaty we’ll be made subject to the EU Court and the EU’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, which can force us to change our laws on issues as important as:
    • legalization of abortion and euthanasia
    • legalization of prostitution and hard drugs
    It can be difficult to realise that not everyone on the 'No' side buys into this crap. Put it this way; I've seen few (if any) convincing reasons to vote 'No' on this forum.


  • Options
    #40
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    Daftendirekt wrote: »
    On the other hand, I really wish the government would just shut the hell up about Lisbon at this stage... the scarmongering is only hurting the Yes side. If they'd just try and sell the treaty on it's merits, it'd take a lot of credence away from the no side.
    I think it's a case of the government being dragged down to the level of certain elements of the 'No' side; I'm not sure they expected to be dismissing claims about abortion, euthanasia, tax, neutrality, etc.


  • Options
    #41
    redspider
    Registered Users Posts: 2,544 ✭✭✭redspider


    sink wrote: »
    1. I especially find it frustrating that I have gone to the trouble of doing lots of research reading material from both side of the argument and the treaty itself in order to form a well informed opinion. Yet my vote will be cancelled out by a no voter who hasn't bothered to read one bit of information and is only going on sound bites.

    2. That said I'm sure there is people on the yes side like that too, but I would imagine they would be far rarer.

    In terms of 1, welcome to democracy! A vote by someone with an IQ of 150 on any matter counts the same as someone who barely understands anything. Knowledge does not come into it, alas. I also wis it were otherwise.

    As for 2, with 96% of TD's supporting the Yes side, there is likely to be many more who dont know the details to be voting Yes (ie: following party lines and 'authority'), and those that dont know who may vote No may not just vote at all. Its hard to say though without a definitive exit poll, and even then people are likely to lie on how mich they really know. The only way would be to conduct a brief 10 question quiz on the exit poll to confirm knowledge or otherwise. Over to you Red C.

    > I think that a No vote could be crushing for Ireland

    This is the line that is being pushed by many, such as the ever-smiling Sutherland. It wont be crushing for Ireland, there will be no affect at all, as the Lisbon Treaty fails for ALL countries if Ireland votes No. That's what a veto is all about. If there is an official cost of using a veto, then the EU system breaks down. Ireland should be treated the same as all other counries whether we vote Yes or No. No doubt politicians in the EU will try and use that against us.

    Redspider


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Put it this way; I've seen few (if any) convincing reasons to vote 'No' on this forum.

    The problem for the yes side is that one can say the same about thier campaign - they simply have not sold it. Because they didn't belive they had too I suspect.

    Mike.


  • Options
    #43
    colly10
    Registered Users Posts: 3,002 ✭✭✭colly10


    djpbarry wrote: »
    It's very easy to make that assumption based on some of the slogans being bandied about by different groups on the 'No' side; take Cóir for example:
    It can be difficult to realise that not everyone on the 'No' side buys into this crap. Put it this way; I've seen few (if any) convincing reasons to vote 'No' on this forum.

    Well im voting no and I think those slogans are pretty much total ****, based on nothing


  • Options
    #44
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    mike65 wrote: »
    The problem for the yes side is that one can say the same about thier campaign - they simply have not sold it. Because they didn't belive they had too I suspect.
    Possibly, but I suspect it is because it is a difficult treaty to sell! There's nothing in there that the government can really point to and say "vote 'Yes' to Lisbon and then <insert favourable outcome here> will happen". As one commentator put it (I can't remember who); "Lisbon is a necessary, but unremarkable treaty".


  • Options
    #45
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    colly10 wrote: »
    Well im voting no and I think those slogans are pretty much total ****, based on nothing
    Well I'm glad we can agree on that.


  • Options
    #46
    sink
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭sink


    gurramok wrote: »
    I'd agree here, so the tax issue is more important than ever then. Where are the home grown Irish industries?

    I also agree that the tax issue is more important but I am also convinced that the Lisbon treaty would have no effect. The multinationals that would be most worried about such a move have come out in support of the treaty.
    gurramok wrote: »
    The French economy has structural problems(public sector reform) for years, it's totally nothing to do with the previous EU vote(it was in 2005).

    I will concede on this point. But I still believe that our economy is fundamentally different to the French or Dutch and a no vote will effect us differently.

    gurramok wrote: »
    The Dutch govt has collapsed maybe 6 times in a decade, the EU vote only happened in 2005, its now 2008.
    Here is a nice index on stability: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article3617160.ece

    It has Netherlands one place above Ireland in 9th place and Denmark in 12th. Shocking :D

    That index does not reflect purely on political stability. It looks at economic stability e.g. financial markets and prosperity. Switzerland would be no.1 on a ranking of purely political stability. The last Dutch government collapsed in 2006 one year after the rejection of the constitution
    gurramok wrote: »
    The French riots were due to racial issues in employment opportunities and social reasons built up over a generation, nothing to do with the 2005 vote.

    It could be argued that the political unrest in France had a causal effect on the rejection of the constitution, and then the rejection itself had compounding effect upon the instability as it severely weakened the government.
    gurramok wrote: »
    It sounds like you do not know what you are talking about.

    I apologise I regret writing that comment it was rash and ill judged. You obviously do have a well reasoned argument and I can see it has merit. Although I'm not entirely convinced by it.


  • Options
    #47
    menoscemo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,915 ✭✭✭✭menoscemo


    ateam wrote: »
    Are people voting No because they don't like Eastern Europeans coming into the country? Sorry if that's not politically correct, but that's the impression I'm getting from Dubliners anyway. They actually don't know about the treaty but are voting against it because of the amount of Eastern Europeans that are here "taking our jobs".

    As quoted from the Irish times poll,
    Reasons give by No voters for voting No:
    "To preven too Much Immigration into Ireland" 8% (-2)

    Considering the no-voters were able to give mulitple reasons, this figure is very low and suggests there is not as much Ignorance as the Yes side seem to (or would like to) think.

    The fact is the yes arguments are weak because they seem to concentrate on telling us that things will not change (tax, abortion etc), but surely to vote for a change (which the Yes vote would do) there would have to be positive benefits for Ireland. I have not heard one yes argument on how things will be better for ireland because of the treaty- just 'it won't change anything'. The fact is voting No won't change anything either.

    When faced with a choice of
    A) Vote yes because we probably won't lose anything,
    and
    B)vote no and we definately won't lose anything; obviously people will choose the latter.


  • Options
    #48
    brianthebard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,165 ✭✭✭✭brianthebard


    Daftendirekt wrote: »
    I haven't come across any yes voters who claim to be voting yes because the government told them to, and Sinn Féin seem to be just generally anti-European anyway. Although it is telling that they're the only party opposed to it, it still isn't a good thing to base your vote on.

    A large number of FF supporters will be voting yes because Cowan said so.


  • Options
    #49
    brianthebard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,165 ✭✭✭✭brianthebard


    gurramok wrote: »
    I'd agree here, so the tax issue is more important than ever then. Where are the home grown Irish industries?

    What, agribusiness counts for nothing now? The brewing and alcohol industry? I'm sure if you actually tried you could come up with some other examples.


  • Options
    #50
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    menoscemo wrote: »
    The fact is the yes arguments are weak because they seem to concentrate on telling us that things will not change (tax, abortion etc), but surely to vote for a change (which the Yes vote would do) there would have to be positive benefits for Ireland. I have not heard one yes argument on how things will be better for ireland because of the treaty- just 'it won't change anything'.
    It’s already been pointed out that it is quite difficult to point to specific benefits that would result from voting ‘Yes’; unfortunately it’s just not that black-and-white.
    menoscemo wrote: »
    The fact is voting No won't change anything either.
    It seems one of the biggest reasons people are voting 'No' is because they don't know what they are voting for - so why the **** are they going to vote at all?!?
    Irish Times, 05/06/2008 wrote:
    The reason most often cited by No voters is that they don’t know what they are voting for or they don’t understand the Treaty, with 30 per cent of No voters listing this as the main reason for their decision.
    Frankly, I find this incredible considering the wealth of information that is available at this stage; "I'm too lazy to inform myself properly so I'll just vote 'No' to save me the hassle". Isn't democracy grand?
    brianthebard wrote: »
    A large number of FF supporters will be voting yes because Cowan said so.
    I'd imagine a large number of Sinn Fein supporters will vote 'No' for similar reasons.


  • Options
    #51
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    sink wrote: »
    I also agree that the tax issue is more important but I am also convinced that the Lisbon treaty would have no effect. The multinationals that would be most worried about such a move have come out in support of the treaty.

    Mnc's have stated they support it?..I'm intrigued, can you provide a link?

    Regarding the countres that rejected the EU Cons. vote, we could argue till the cows come home, my point is that scaremongering about investment/jobs if a No vote materialised didn't work before(Nice), is ill judged, invalid and is backfiring.
    (the CIF joined in this type of scaremongering today, unreal)
    sink wrote: »
    You obviously do have a well reasoned argument and I can see it has merit. Although I'm not entirely convinced by it.

    I'd probably be a euro-sceptic but i'm not even sure which way I vote.

    What gets me is politicians lecturing us to vote yes when they have not even read the treaty in the first place and scaremongering about jobs, i'd expect more from our top political elite than to stoop to the likes of fringe groups with laughable 'no to foreign rule' slogans.

    Then this part i recently found in AH of all places. "The EU parliament rejected to respect the outcome of the referendum in Ireland" , Amendment 32.
    About 2min in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Jg-qzJ-L_A&feature=related

    How can the yes side defend this?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    menoscemo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,915 ✭✭✭✭menoscemo


    djpbarry wrote: »
    Frankly, I find this incredible considering the wealth of information that is available at this stage; "I'm too lazy to inform myself properly so I'll just vote 'No' to save me the hassle". Isn't democracy grand?

    I said voting No won't change anything- you assume that this means people don't know what it is about? How do you make this incredible jump of logic? Maybe people understand the treaty and vote no anyway-preciselty because they don't want to change anything.
    They want to tell the EU 'we are happy the way you are, I don't see anything positive from this new treaty for us, so just leave well alone please'
    That is a perfectly reasonable attitude to take.


  • Options
    #53
    sink
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭sink


    gurramok wrote: »
    Mnc's have stated they support it?..I'm intrigued, can you provide a link?

    http://www.amcham.ie/index.cfm

    Intel, Google and Dell are all members of it.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Regarding the countres that rejected the EU Cons. vote, we could argue till the cows come home, my point is that scaremongering about investment/jobs if a No vote materialised didn't work before(Nice), is ill judged, invalid and is backfiring.
    (the CIF joined in this type of scaremongering today, unreal)

    I wouldn't go so far as the scaremongers and say it will be a catastrophe/disaster or anything like that. I do believe it will be damaging to our short term interests and will make economic conditions more difficult. But it is nothing we can't recover from in several years.
    gurramok wrote: »
    What gets me is politicians lecturing us to vote yes when they have not even read the treaty in the first place and scaremongering about jobs, i'd expect more from our top political elite than to stoop to the likes of fringe groups with laughable 'no to foreign rule' slogans.

    I don't buy that argument at all. If I'm drawing up a business contract my solicitor drafts it and explains the clauses to me, I don't need to read the whole thing myself to know what it contains.
    gurramok wrote: »
    Then this part i recently found in AH of all places. "The EU parliament rejected to respect the outcome of the referendum in Ireland" , Amendment 32.
    About 2min in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Jg-qzJ-L_A&feature=related

    How can the yes side defend this?

    The Corbett - De Vigo report report contained an amendment which asked that the parliament to "undertake to respect the outcome of the referendum in Ireland". This report was voted down but not because of this amendment.

    Reports are not legislation and are not legally binding, they are tools of official communication.

    The report itself was a discussion on how superior the failed constitution was in comparison to the reform treaty. If they had voted for it, it would have become part of official parliamentary communications to it's citizens, at a time when the reform treaty was being debated in national parliaments. This would have been completely unhelpful as the constitution was dead and the reform treaty is what we had to go with, plus it was completely pointless as it served no one and wasted money.


  • Options
    #54
    democrates
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,046 ✭✭✭democrates


    LostinBlanch wrote: »
    Well a week is a long time in politics :rolleyes: The Yes camp are going to try and lure the No camp into a false sense of security.
    It was citizens who voted in the poll though, that's not Yes camp subterfuge, like "Oh yes, this is part of our strategy". It's egg on the face, simple as.


  • Options
    #55
    menoscemo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,915 ✭✭✭✭menoscemo


    djpbarry wrote: »
    It’s already been pointed out that it is quite difficult to point to specific benefits that would result from voting ‘Yes’;.

    You've convinced me then.


  • Options
    #56
    estebancambias
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭estebancambias


    I have everyone voting no. I was so for the yes side, until I came on Boards and seen the reason some of the stupid reasons people are saying yes(sinn fein says no so it must be bad)


    Yippy...I am so happy.


  • Options
    #57
    menoscemo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,915 ✭✭✭✭menoscemo


    estebancambias wrote: »
    I have everyone voting no. I was so for the yes side, until I came on Boards and seen the reason some of the stupid reasons people are saying yes(sinn fein says no so it must be bad)


    Yippy...I am so happy.

    As per irish times poll:
    'Why did you decide to vote yes to the lisbon treaty':
    Not to embarass Ireland: 36%
    Eu has been good to Ireland/Payback: 21%
    The right thing to do: 18%
    Politicians/other leaders say it is a good idea: 14%
    Don't like the no campaigners: 4%

    From the reasons quoted above it is blatantly obvious that the Yes voters have read and understood the treaty much more than the No side. Also they appear to be less ignorant/generally smarter ;)


  • Options
    #58
    Hitman Actual
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,362 ✭✭✭Hitman Actual


    estebancambias wrote: »
    I have everyone voting no. I was so for the yes side, until I came on Boards and seen the reason some of the stupid reasons people are saying yes(sinn fein says no so it must be bad)

    Great way to make up your mind. Also, for every "Yes" voter with a stupid reason, there are many more "No" voters with the most uninformed reasons possible.


  • Options
    #59
    estebancambias
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,103 ✭✭✭estebancambias


    When I heard Sinn Fein say that they should change certain terms of the treaty and hold a vote on it again, I knew their No campaign was the way to go.

    They want and know what is best for Ireland and its people.


  • Options
    #60
    democrates
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,046 ✭✭✭democrates


    menoscemo wrote: »
    As per irish times poll:
    'Why did you decide to vote yes to the lisbon treaty':
    Not to embarass Ireland: 36%
    Eu has been good to Ireland/Payback: 21%
    The right thing to do: 18%
    Politicians/other leaders say it is a good idea: 14%
    Don't like the no campaigners: 4%

    From the reasons quoted above it is blatantly obvious that the Yes voters have read and understood the treaty much more than the No side. Also they appear to be less ignorant/generally smarter ;)
    Are the other 7% undecided on why they are voting yes?:D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    ateam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 986 ✭✭✭ateam


    estebancambias wrote: »
    When I heard Sinn Fein say that they should change certain terms of the treaty and hold a vote on it again, I knew their No campaign was the way to go.

    They want and know what is best for Ireland and its people.


    Is that sarcasm?


Advertisement