"i just had a gut feeling"

zuroph

if i hear that once more as an excuse for voting no, i'll crack up. "i just had a gut feeling, i mean, why are all the politicians so eager for a yes vote?!"..er, because they're the people you elected to do whats best for the country. This country embarasses me so much sometimes.

*This is not an attack on people who had a legitimate reason for voting no. This is an attack on the idiots who lined up on your side who didnt have a clue.

I think i'll move to france, just frog off over there for good.

Rb

Bye.

zuroph

au revoir! xxx

Kama

Isn't it strange how we are always the rational ones, while those pesky others always seem to be infected with virulent irrationalisms?
Whether it was those Ignorant, Gullible No's, deceived by the Black Helicopters of Libertas dropping Aborshuns,
or the Sheeple of Yes, Brainwashed by Biffo of the Clan Bilberberg.

Lord forbid that we for one moment accept peoples expressed democratic opinions as something they consciously chose,
with both thought and passion?

Far better to concoct a stereotype or two, an Old Lady who stands as metonym for Ignorant Ireland, invoke some convenient personal political demons; anything to avoid the threat of having to accept something other than our own opinions and pre-conceptions, to actually have to communicate and accept a dissenting view as valid rather than 'ideological drivel' or 'fear-based hysteria' or whatever the reason du jour may be.

Ah well...We're only human.

^_^


PS:

And sure seeing how poorly it seems our collective brains are said to function, wouldn't we be better off listening to a more sensible organ? Vote Gut in 2012! Four More Years!

PH01

I have a gut feeling that there's going to be a second run at this in 11 months. Make sure you come back from France in time.

thecaptain

zuroph wrote: »

if i hear that once more as an excuse for voting no, i'll crack up. "i just had a gut feeling, i mean, why are all the politicians so eager for a yes vote?!"..er, because they're the people you elected to do whats best for the country. This country embarasses me so much sometimes.

Maybe the people know that the politicians are sell out globalist scum, representing the best interests of Europe, not this place.

And anyway, they have no say in matters anymore, Brussels speaks and they listen, trying to retain some dignity.

Ponster

zuroph wrote: »

I think i'll move to france, just frog off over there for good.

No point the weather is pretty bad over here this week and we already voted NO to almost the same treaty 3 years ago

djpbarry

Kama wrote: »

Lord forbid that we for one moment accept peoples expressed democratic opinions as something they consciously chose,
with both thought and passion?

I will happily do so when/if people support their stance with reasoned arguments.

MeatProduct

djpbarry wrote: »

I will happily do so when/if people support their stance with reasoned arguments.

We are made up of more than the ability to reason logically. Moreover reason is usually left at the door as we are controlled by our emotions/feelings. Show me a country that has a population so in control of their emotions that reason is the only factor behind every decision and I'll show you a country that doesn't exist.

Nick

zuroph

zuroph wrote: »

*This is not an attack on people who had a legitimate reason for voting no. This is an attack on the idiots who lined up on your side who didnt have a clue.

I think i'll move to france, just frog off over there for good.

Kama wrote: »

Lord forbid that we for one moment accept peoples expressed democratic opinions as something they consciously chose,
with both thought and passion?

:rolleyes:

thecaptain wrote: »

Maybe the people know that the politicians are sell out globalist scum

:rolleyes:

djpbarry wrote: »

I will happily do so when/if people support their stance with reasoned arguments.

again, if you had a good valid reason for voting no, well done. but 30% of the no vote listed "not understanding the treaty" as their reason for voting no. others listed reasons such as military neutrality, abortion, gay b+bs,tax raises etc etc.

that means at least a third of the no vote was for a reason that was never in debate. For this reason alone, id be happy to see this re-run. if the no campaign are so confident that people werent duped by lies, they'd have no problem with a re-run.

ChocolateSauce

I voted yes, had a gut feeling it would be no, and bet 200 euro at 9/4 odds on Paddypower.com that no would be the case.

At least for me the blow was softened...

zuroph

theozster wrote: »

I voted yes, had a gut feeling it would be no, and bet 200 euro at 9/4 odds on Paddypower.com that no would be the case.

At least for me the blow was softened...

again, this is something i have serious concerns about. should betting on a referendumk result be allowed? surely its encouraging people to vote in a certain direction to try cash in on their bet. maybe it should be banned.

Darragh29

Don't see your gripe with people who went on a gut feeling. I've gone against my gut feeling in the past and everytime without exception it was to my detriment. At the end of the day, the people who have been pushing us to accept this treaty are the same people who are standing idly by while our economy is literally falling down around us. The same people who have assured us that this treaty was completely watertight and anyone who voted against it was literally insane, were shouting from the rooftops no more than 12 months ago that anyone who said there was a downturn around the corner for our economy was also insane and was talking through their arse. Now we all see that those who had a "gut feeling" about the economy 12 months ago were indeed right all along. To be honest, what I'm getting sick of is the yes camp continuing to push this argument of, "if you left everything else out of it and just voted on the treaty". The world doesn't work like this, you have to be able to trust your salesman and if you can't, well we've all seen what can happen.

djpbarry

MeatProduct wrote: »

Show me a country that has a population so in control of their emotions that reason is the only factor behind every decision and I'll show you a country that doesn't exist.

I was speaking hypothetically. The reality is, as you have alluded to, the majority of people allow external issues to cloud their judgement when voting.

zuroph wrote: »

but 30% of the no vote listed "not understanding the treaty" as their reason for voting no. others listed reasons such as military neutrality, abortion, gay b+bs,tax raises etc etc.

Apparently, 70% of 'No' voters believed that a better deal could easily be negotiated (source).

Darragh29 wrote: »

The world doesn't work like this, you have to be able to trust your salesman...

Do you? If you go to a showroom to buy a car, do you take everything the salesman says as gospel? I doubt it. Lack of trust in the government is not a valid reason for voting 'No'; it's just lazy in my opinion.

MeatProduct

djpbarry wrote: »

I was speaking hypothetically. The reality is, as you have alluded to, the majority of people allow external issues to cloud their judgement when voting.

The issues are very internal and part of the human condition. Hence, trying to debate through reason alone is not founded in reality as the very formations of a persons reason are based on emotional conditioning and childhood trauma/events. We can debate all these issues about the EU but to do so under the pretence of it being purly rational in not realistic.

To say that someones reason is "clouded" makes it seem like this is not a permanent state when in fact it is and so it is for every person so if it is a condition that all of humanity has what is the point in even mentioning it as a factor as we are all in the same boat on a common ocean of emotional behavioral control? As an example my response to your message was decided not by reason alone but by how it made me feel.

Nick

djpbarry

MeatProduct wrote: »

The issues are very internal and part of the human condition. Hence, trying to debate through reason alone is not founded in reality as the very formations of a persons reason are based on emotional conditioning and childhood trauma/events. We can debate all these issues about the EU but to do so under the pretence of it being purly rational in not realistic.

That's not what I'm getting at. For example, according to today's Indo, "The huge influx of immigrants into the country was a factor in the 'No' vote". So people (admittedly, it does not state how many and I would certainly hope that it was a small percentage) were basing their vote on a side-issue that had absolutely nothing to do with the proposal put before them.

MysticalSoul

theozster wrote: »

I voted yes, had a gut feeling it would be no, and bet 200 euro at 9/4 odds on Paddypower.com that no would be the case.

At least for me the blow was softened...

The same Paddy Power who paid out to those who bet that it would be a yes vote preaturely? Lol

I voted yes, but too had a feeling it would be a no. The government made the same mistake as they did with the Nice Treaty, which was not having clear information available, as people do tend to vote no when they don't understand something.

Darragh29

djpbarry wrote: »

I was speaking hypothetically. The reality is, as you have alluded to, the majority of people allow external issues to cloud their judgement when voting.
Apparently, 70% of 'No' voters believed that a better deal could easily be negotiated (source).
Do you? If you go to a showroom to buy a car, do you take everything the salesman says as gospel? I doubt it. Lack of trust in the government is not a valid reason for voting 'No'; it's just lazy in my opinion.

At the end of the day, when you buy for example a car, you usually buy it with a warranty and to answer your question, yes, you obviously do trust the person who is selling you the product to be able to stand over and deliver upon the guarantee that comes with the product. If I couldn't trust the person to deliver that, I wouldn't buy from them. To bring this back to first principal, anyone who voted yes for this treaty and then said that they don't trust the government, this is just a nonsense. If you believe for a second that the message may be on shaky ground, then your vote is obviously on shaky ground. I voted for democratic accountability and to maintain our ability to make decisions that suit us, I don't want any more decision making devolved to Brussels. What works for Germany or France does not necessarily work for us...

djpbarry

Darragh29 wrote: »

At the end of the day, when you buy for example a car, you usually buy it with a warranty and to answer your question, yes, you obviously do trust the person who is selling you the product to be able to stand over and deliver upon the guarantee that comes with the product.

No. You're not putting your trust in the person at all - that's nonsense. That's why you get a receipt when you buy anything.

Darragh29 wrote: »

...anyone who voted yes for this treaty and then said that they don't trust the government, this is just a nonsense. If you believe for a second that the message may be on shaky ground, then your vote is obviously on shaky ground.

Trusting the government has nothing to do with it; the whole treaty is in writing for all to see. There is also plenty of independent information available. The government's stance on the treaty should have little bearing on your vote.

Panda Moanium

MeatProduct wrote: »

To say that someones reason is "clouded" makes it seem like this is not a permanent state when in fact it is and so it is for every person so if it is a condition that all of humanity has what is the point in even mentioning it as a factor as we are all in the same boat on a common ocean of emotional behavioral control?
Nick

Eh?? My mind is certainly clouded trying to make sense of this! :eek:

And people were complaining that the Lisbon Treaty wording was complicated!

Kama

The government's stance on the treaty should have little bearing on your vote.

Perhaps a 'better' vote would have been obtained by not campaigning for it?
A little bit of reverse psychology, eliminate the protest vote? ^^

kowloon

zuroph wrote: »

I think i'll move to france, just frog off over there for good.

Yes, you'll find many who would have voted yes, given the chance, over there! :pac:

djpbarry

Kama wrote: »

Perhaps a 'better' vote would have been obtained by not campaigning for it?
A little bit of reverse psychology, eliminate the protest vote? ^^

I don't think so. While many on the 'No' side have complained of bullying tactics, I imagine they would have found something else to complain about had the government not campaigned at all. In fact, they probably would have complained the government is not providing any input/advice and they cannot make a decision in the absence of said input. :rolleyes:

limklad

zuroph wrote: »

again, this is something i have serious concerns about. should betting on a referendumk result be allowed? surely its encouraging people to vote in a certain direction to try cash in on their bet. maybe it should be banned.

It only works if you can get the majority to agree (only by paying them off big and the word started leaking out and the referendum might be called off) and the bookmakers willing to make a loss (they are not stupid , but do make mistakes). It will not work out in the end so it is their own choice what they want to do with their money.

There a suggestion for the government should pay us off to vote their way!

limklad

zuroph wrote: »

if i hear that once more as an excuse for voting no, i'll crack up. "i just had a gut feeling, i mean, why are all the politicians so eager for a yes vote?!"..er, because they're the people you elected to do whats best for the country. This country embarasses me so much sometimes.

*This is not an attack on people who had a legitimate reason for voting no. This is an attack on the idiots who lined up on your side who didnt have a clue.

I think i'll move to france, just frog off over there for good.

Yippee, that right, go from one small NO (862,415) Lisbon Treaty country to a BIG NO (15,450,279) country to a nearly identical treaty: (The European Constitution). While you are there, you might want to visit Holland as well on holidays, you will be greeted with 4,705,685 NO voters. :rolleyes:

Holland is not that far from France, just head north (little bit eastish by a few degrees), just past Brussels until you see old wind mills and Big dykes and wide rivers.


You might want to take Tim (Do not vote against me because you are selfish) Robbins there too for a bit of companionship, to educate the French as well. Please get Tim to tell them, how selfish of them of not only allowing us to vote on the EU Constitution, but also stoping the future progress of the EU. Please say it VERY LOUD TO THEM for they might not hear you. You will soon get your answer. I can safely assume you have the "NO support" in this country for your trip, so Tim, I am not that selfish, I did not leave you out, so I consider your feeling because I wanted to include you too in this trip.