[Wendero]

Why did the Yes side win?

I attended several of the No campaign's meetings, visited their websites, read their booklets etc.

Based on my personal experience, I think what went wrong could be summarized in one sentence: If you want to win a referendum, you have to appeal to a majority of the voters. That is, you have to be able to appeal not only to the pot-smoking leftists (most of whom I imagine still live in their parents basements and claim to have been abducted by aliens).

The No campaign was directed entirely at the left-winged voters, ie those who were already against the treaty. If you want to win a referendum, you need to step out of your comfort zone and pursue the voters who doesn't think like you. If you're a right-winger trying to win a referendum, you have to find arguments that appeal to the left as well.

Instead, the No campaign wasn't so much a campaign against the treaty, as a campaign against capitalism itself. And, surprise, most Irish people even today don't support a planned economy.

I read a booklet published by the No campaign, where instead of pointing out the loss of independence that comes with the treaty, the author went to great lengths in criticizing Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman - both of whom are dead today, and neither of whom supported the EU project in the first place. Talk about a waste of time! And even if Hayek and Friedman had been alive (and had supported the treaty), what's the point in talking about them?

The No side deserved to lose. They could have talked about the loss of independence, the unnecessarity in bringing government debt down to a level as low as 60 % of GDP (many countries -including Germany - have higher debt and are doing just fine), the fact that the bailout fund that Ireland is going to have access to may not become a reality (or may not be as big as is claimed)... there were so many arguments, why only use the arguments that only appeal to hippies?

Libertas was a breath of fresh air, but it came too late.

What do you think was the reason the No side lost?

[matthew8]

For ULA/SF the no vote went against their own interests. A no vote would've reduced their popularity whereas the yes vote did wonders for them in the polls. This referendum was not about winning for them.

[christmas2012]

spin and lies,putting down other political parties that advocated a no saying they dont have the 'economic experience' blah blah blah,and the yes to jobs spin,of vote yes vote yes for jobs,didnt they say that with the lisbon treaty?the liars..

If no came through you can bet your ass that we would have been forced to vote again..

[MagicMarker]

Because Yes was the logical option.

[christmas2012]

I agree yes was ,but how did we get there we allowed for the lisbon treaty,being forced a yes,we allowed the banks to get their way in 2008,when we should have done what iceland did and let them burn..

[Kurz]

Fear of being left with no money, not even bailout money is what won the referendum. Though it was fairly close, it's amazing that 40% of all people in the country are pot smokers who've been abducted by aliens.

[DeVore]

Just because "Yes" was a bad choice, doesnt make "No" the right one... they didnt cop that.

There was, imho, a certain amount of the entryism we've seen in the last 2 decades coming home to roost. I'm sorry, but even as an ardent left winger I simply dont trust SF/ULA/SWP/WP/PBP/whatever-other-names-the-same-people-have-had. They would support anything populist to get "in" with people. Its....creepy.

I felt like they were selling more than a simple "no" when the literature and posters had workers-solidarity symbols all over them... dishonesty turns people off and makes them distrust the whole message.

Its a pity because good voices like GTCost and others were lost in the "all stand together, citizens" style propaganda.

I've said it before, the most off-putting thing about the left wing movement in Ireland is the left wing movement in Ireland.

[Augmerson]

People voted yes because they were afraid.

This is why Lisbon II got passed.

Fear.

[The Waltzing Consumer]

A few reasons I could think of

1) Hypocrisy and language of No groups (Posters, interviews, debates contained the bigger scare mongering language and this alienated voters as the Yes camp kept it simple, clear and positive)
2) Majority of debates and interviews left one giant gap...where do we get the money to fund the state? (Did any No person actually answer this honestly?) The No posters might not agree on this, but they have to admit, this was a consistent failure of their campaigners to address in a decent public way.
3) Declan Ganley's ego
4) Nearly all businesses minus Ganleys, large and small, foreign and domestic, encouraged a Yes vote
5) The biggest "victory" of the No side was that Enda would not appear on a private broadcaster's debate, if that is the biggest, no wonder they lost
6) The last minute court stunt to garner publicity for SF

But as a poster rightly put it in an earlier post, this was all about SF and getting publicity and putting party over country. They lost the referendum, but they won what they wanted.

[The Waltzing Consumer]

Originally Posted by Augmerson

People voted yes because they were afraid.

This is why Lisbon II got passed.

Fear.

Vote Yes for stability
Vote No "Don't give them another stick to beat you with"
Vote Yes for Growth
Vote No for permanent austerity

I am soooooooooo scared by those positive yes slogans, the fear is unreal

[Galwayguy35]

The No side were a disaster in the debates apart from Ganley who did well I thought.

[hatrickpatrick]

Originally Posted by Wendero

not only to the pot-smoking leftists (most of whom I imagine still live in their parents basements and claim to have been abducted by aliens).

Stopped reading there.

[hatrickpatrick]

Originally Posted by The Waltzing Consumer

Vote Yes for stability
Vote No "Don't give them another stick to beat you with"
Vote Yes for Growth
Vote No for permanent austerity

I am soooooooooo scared by those positive yes slogans, the fear is unreal

"Vote yes or we'll be f*cked and broke within 2 years"
Sure, the yes side is SO much better

[Wendero]

I'm not saying 40 % of the country are left-winged potheads - I'm against the treaty (couldn't vote since I'm not a citizen), and I've never tried pot nor am I left-winged (I'm an intellectual conservative who just finished a degree in economics).

But the campaign only really appealed to the loony left-wingers. I think, like someone mentioned, that Sinn Fein wasn't really interested in winning - if they were, they wouldn't have put the name "Sinn Fein" on their posters etc (every time normal people hear that "Sinn Fein wants you to vote no", they become more likely to vote Yes). You have to keep your head down so that you can convince people who don't like you to vote the way you want them to.

[Dob74]

Yes won because they went out with a simple message.
Stability is important especially to older people receiving pensions.
I would consider myself a strong no voter but I was conflicted til the last moment and could have voted yes. Scared coz i dont want the country to implo