lisbon is bridge too far for the average irish joe "to Get"

easyontheeye

simply, is it any surprise that we are going to see a no vote? sure the working class heavily outweigh the middle class. The government take 100% of the blame here. they should have been out in force in working class areas ramming the yes vote down peoples throats. the general consensus in working class areas was ...if you dont know vote no..sad but reality!

ShooterSF

easyontheeye wrote: »

simply, is it any surprise that we are going to see a no vote? sure the working class heavily outweigh the middle class. The government take 100% of the blame here. they should have been out in force in working class areas ramming the yes vote down peoples throats. the general consensus in working class areas was ...if you dont know vote no..sad but reality!

Ah yes dumb working classes you really have to shove it down their throats when will they learn to just follow the lead of the higher classes. Bull****.

justfortherecor

I'm also a yes voter but this sort of elitism from the OP is ridiculous and should not be touted as a reason for the impending failure of the Treaty.

In before the lock...

Jip

It's not just the OP spouting this crap, take a look in the main thread at the moment, almost 2 out of 3 people on the Yes side (this may or may not be fact !) are using the same argument.

johnnyq

Down with elitism

sink

I'm a yes voter anf i'm not using that argument. There were yes voters who didn't know what they were voting for either. My opinion is that people are not boithered to learn about what they are voting on equally.

ShooterSF

sink wrote: »

I'm a yes voter anf i'm not using that argument. There were yes voters who didn't know what they were voting for either. My opinion is that people are not boithered to learn about what they are voting on equally.

True sink I don't think anyone would accuse you of such but you can see why what the op said is rather insulting.

easyontheeye

i think we are insulting europe when we have 3 million on the electorate and more than 50% didn't bother their hole to get out and vote...thats shameful, nearly as much as voting no just because you dont know!

Jip

Stay on topic, get back to your point about the 'average irish joe' who don't get Lisbon, you're original point has nothing to do with those who didn't vote, or are you back tracking ?

jmayo

easyontheeye wrote: »

simply, is it any surprise that we are going to see a no vote? sure the working class heavily outweigh the middle class. The government take 100% of the blame here. they should have been out in force in working class areas ramming the yes vote down peoples throats. the general consensus in working class areas was ...if you dont know vote no..sad but reality!

Attidues like that give just give people another reason to vote NO.
Damm the masses. How dare they

TelePaul

While I don't agree with the OPs absolutism, I do think that a great many people - voters on both sides - didn't have access to information that they could readily understand. I think certain opposition parties were able to exploit this, but really it oulines a failure on the part of our current government.

Rb

easyontheeye wrote: »

simply, is it any surprise that we are going to see a no vote? sure the working class heavily outweigh the middle class. The government take 100% of the blame here. they should have been out in force in working class areas ramming the yes vote down peoples throats. the general consensus in working class areas was ...if you dont know vote no..sad but reality!

Oh and what should have been done about those going and voting yes just because they think we owe Europe something, or because they like Brian Cowens hair?

Bullshít. Quite funny that you're suggesting the working class are idiots when you can come out with such utter tripe.

lisbon_lions

"If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like." Chomsky.

The people have spoken my friend, deal with it.

Sleepy

easyontheeye wrote: »

sure the working class heavily outweigh the middle class.

I thought we had a population which would economically be considered to be over 80% middle class?

ShooterSF

Any chance this thread could be closed, Im sure both sides can accept it's grossly insulting and ignorant!

dresden8

Sleepy wrote: »

I thought we had a population which would economically be considered to be over 80% middle class?

Money doesn't equal class obviously in the op's view.

Amberman

Considering that the architect of the European constitution said that the masses would be lead without their knowledge into accepting something that we dare not put in front of them openly, and that a European prime minister asked that the treaty be "unreadable", its no surprise that voters are

1. Sceptical.
2. Uninformed.
3. Confused.

It was designed that way and the masses just werent as easily led as our our "masters" had hoped.

thecaptain

You see mate, the average joe knows when he is being sold out.

djpbarry

thecaptain wrote: »

You see mate, the average joe knows when he is being sold out.

Is that so? Seems to me that a large number of "average joe's" didn't even know what they were voting on.

Amberman

djpbarry wrote: »

Is that so? Seems to me that a large number of "average joe's" didn't even know what they were voting on.

Ofcourse they didnt...thats the way it was designed to be.

djpbarry

Amberman wrote: »

Ofcourse they didnt...thats the way it was designed to be.

But hang on a tick; there were plenty of voters who WERE pretty informed and DID have a good idea what the treaty was about, even if they were in the minority (I'm basing this on the lengthy discussions that were had on this forum over the last number of weeks, as well as my own experience in the "real world").

So if SOME people can get their head around the treaty, surely everyone else (or even a majority of people) can?

GuanYin

Read the sticky at the top of the forum.

Anyone breaking the rules on this thread will be banned outright, no warnings, no questions.

gordon_gekko

the no side led by mr ganley in particular done a masterfull job in presenting this treaty as the biggest conspirosy theory of the century
you would think the eu was the matrix after listening to libertas and co

in reality there was much much less to this treaty than met the eye

stink_fist

gordon_gekko wrote: »

the no side led by mr ganley in particular done a masterfull job in presenting this treaty as the biggest conspirosy theory of the century
you would think the eu was the matrix after listening to libertas and co

in reality there was much much less to this treaty than met the eye

Shut up

Sparks

Speaking as someone who was born working class, pfffft.

djpbarry

Sparks wrote: »

Speaking as someone who was born working class, pfffft.

What's that got to do with anything?

Sparks

I'm refuting the opinion of the OP and agreeing with the second, third and fourth posters, and pointing out that I don't believe he knows what he's talking about, and simultaenously putting forward why I believe I do, all with one easy sound effect. Forgive me for being concise...

djpbarry

Sparks wrote: »

I'm refuting the opinion of the OP and agreeing with the second, third and fourth posters, and pointing out that I don't believe he knows what he's talking about, and simultaenously putting forward why I believe I do, all with one easy sound effect.

Ah, I see; very good.

Carry on.

johnnyq

Sparks wrote: »

I'm refuting the opinion of the OP and agreeing with the second, third and fourth posters, and pointing out that I don't believe he knows what he's talking about, and simultaenously putting forward why I believe I do, all with one easy sound effect. Forgive me for being concise...

It pains me to say it but i'm waiting for the papers across europe to say one of the following were the reasons we voted no (really hope i'm wrong here):

1) Ungrateful Irish
2) Dustin The Turkey
3) Stupid Irish couldn't *get* it

All of which are totally without justification but that generally doesn't stop people. All we need do is look at the scaremongering - both ways - to see this.

Sparks

The thing about the papers across Europe saying so is that the next day they're fish'n'chip wrappings.
Governments should have a somewhat longer view...

djpbarry

johnnyq wrote: »

3) Stupid Irish couldn't *get* it

In fairness, quite a number of 'No' voters on here have cited this as one of the main reasons for the 'No' vote.

Sparks

Several posters came on here and said they were stupid, did they?

djpbarry

Sparks wrote: »

Several posters came on here and said they were stupid, did they?

Several said they didn't understand the treaty and so were voting 'No'. That said, I'm sure there were plenty of 'Yes' voters who didn't understand it either.

easyontheeye

Sparks wrote: »

Several posters came on here and said they were stupid, did they?

not getting lisbon == stupid

does it? i never said that

Sparks

So they didn't say they were stupid then, they just said that they didn't understand the treaty (which, to be fair, even I found tough going and I've got a little formal legal training and have a little experience in reading Irish law). Would that be right?

Sparks

easyontheeye wrote: »

i never said that

I never said you did. I said djpbarry did.

Mike Funnelly

Thank God we voted no, so those Euro Nazis in Brussels can't screw us over any more than they can already, who the feck gives France and Germany the right to Chastise US the People of Ireland for making up our own minds, why the hell don't they give their people a vote to see if they should ratify it. Hopefully some of the other countries in Europe who weren't sure about it, will have the balls to say NO aswell, to show the French and Germans that they will not get their thousand year Reich.

Sparks

Just the Germans Mike. The French wanted a thousand pound Brie, not a thousand year Reich. It's a common mistake, easy to make.

djpbarry

Sparks wrote: »

So they didn't say they were stupid then, they just said that they didn't understand the treaty (which, to be fair, even I found tough going and I've got a little formal legal training and have a little experience in reading Irish law). Would that be right?

I think we need to back up a little; johnnyq was speculating as to what the media in the rest of Europe would make of the 'No' vote here. He suspected that the fact that a large number of people here admitted to not understanding the treaty may be highlighted. I merely stated that many posters on here admitted to not understanding the treaty and, as such, that particular assessment may well be an accurate one; I was not accusing anyone of being stupid.

However, I DO believe that voting (whether you vote 'Yes' or 'No') on something that you do not understand IS stupid.

Mike Funnelly

djpbarry wrote: »

I think we need to back up a little; johnnyq was speculating as to what the media in the rest of Europe would make of the 'No' vote here. He suspected that the fact that a large number of people here admitted to not understanding the treaty may be highlighted. I merely stated that many posters on here admitted to not understanding the treaty and, as such, that particular assessment may well be an accurate one; I was not accusing anyone of being stupid.

However, I DO believe that voting (whether you vote 'Yes or 'No') on something that you do not understand IS stupid.

How is it stupid if you vote no you're not changing anything, if you voted yes on the otherhand without knowing, that truly is stupid. if we had voted yes it would have meant that in the future the Dail and Seanad, who we vote in could make decisions like this for us without a referendum, they could say yes to anything without us being able to do anything. These oh so gifted people all saying to vote yes and then getting their eyes opened so rudely a couple of hours ago

djpbarry

Mike Funnelly wrote: »

How is it stupid if you vote no you're not changing anything...

Putting your name to something you don't understand is foolish; every decision has consequences.

Mike Funnelly wrote: »

...if we had voted yes it would have meant that in the future the Dail and Seanad, who we vote in could make decisions like this for us without a referendum, they could say yes to anything without us being able to do anything.

No they couldn't. The constitution cannot be altered without a referendum; ratifying Lisbon would not have changed that fact.

titan18

Mike Funnelly wrote: »

How is it stupid if you vote no you're not changing anything, if you voted yes on the otherhand without knowing, that truly is stupid. if we had voted yes it would have meant that in the future the Dail and Seanad, who we vote in could make decisions like this for us without a referendum, they could say yes to anything without us being able to do anything. These oh so gifted people all saying to vote yes and then getting their eyes opened so rudely a couple of hours ago

So you're saying that the people you vote for in the General Elections should not have the right to pass laws and make important decisions for you in the name of this state,even though you've voted them in.If you've voted them in to the Dail,they should have the ability to say Yes to a treaty.

johnnyq

titan18 wrote: »

If you've voted them in to the Dail,they should have the ability to say Yes to a treaty.

And thus change our constitution without our consent. Ya, I'd really like that to happen. Don't forget, it would have if we didn't get to vote in this treaty.

Sure what else in our constitution is important? They should just be able to railroad over that too.:rolleyes:

djpbarry

johnnyq wrote: »

And thus change our constitution without our consent. Ya, I'd really like that to happen. Don't forget, it would have if we didn't get to vote in this treaty.

Not sure what you mean by this (bit in bold)?

johnnyq

djpbarry wrote: »

Not sure what you mean by this (bit in bold)?

Sorry that's a bit unclear.

It combines two separate arguments and are unfortunately slightly irrelevant - sorry not thinking straight

First, if this had only gone through the dail (say it could have) then going on the results it would not have reflected the will of the people.

Second, I read about a line of argument saying (but I can't source it atm) that an Irish vote wasn't technically necessary (as it possibly fell outside the remit of the crotty case) and that the Dail could have legally (not politically of course) voted it through without such a vote taking place. But this of course wouldn't have changed the constitution since Lisbon would *apparently* be operating within it.