Lisbon 2: prepare to bend over and recieve ur destiny!

skelliser

So we're gonna get a second referendum on the lisbon treaty!
Hooray for democracy!

Xavi6

Does that mean more Lisbon threads? Ah cock

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

I'm still voting no, the rest of europe can shag off...

Dennis the Stone

The Daily Mail HQ just had a huge collective ****

hellboy99

Taking into account the current situation with the country and the lack of concern shown by our government to help I would say it will be another "no" vote. No vote from me again.

Quazzie

I might actually vote this time!

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Q2002 wrote: »

I might actually vote this time!

Noooooooo don't do it... that's exactly what they want. How much are they paying you... damn them continentals... DAMN THEM ALL TO HELL!!!

Mark200

Is it going to be exactly the same thing or are they negotiating to get things changed in it?

thelordofcheese

I for one welcome another 11Billion threads full of people who can't be bothered to research the issue at hand giving out about how they'll vote 'No' to stick it to the 'gubberment'. May death come swiftly to their enemies.

Vegeta

Hmmmmm I have very mixed feelings about all of this

I voted yes the last time.

Saying that, if (realistically, when) this comes around again I feel like voting No.

Not because the government couldn't run a bath but because the result was No the last time around.

In respect of that decision, has the Treaty been changed in any significant way? (Hard to do I know especially when most of the reasons people are against the Treaty are untrue)

If this is put to vote again I may vote No. Is that spiteful and ignorant, probably but I don't like the trend of having to re run voting in such a short space of time.

Biggins

O Christ, enough!

I'm sick of the whole subject. The Government can sod off!

walshb

I respect every persons right to vote how they they see fit.
Ok, the people voted less than a year ago and already,
this Government is trying to put the vote to the people again and is using 'oh, we have
this new assureance and that new assurance'

My stance is simple, for the sake of democracy and for respect and solidarity to all those
who voted on Lisbon, I believe that a NO should be voted to send out a clear
messgae to the government, "How dare you NOT respect the vote of the electorate."

Had I voted YES, I would now vote NO in solidarity for the right to
democracy and that to me is correct.

They did this with the Nice vote too. Over in Europe apologising
because we exercised our democratic right to vote YES or NO.
How dare they!

They forced the 2ND Nice vote; and what happened?
Yes, we bowed to pressure and voted YES. Instead of sending the
message again and voting NO; with the YES camp supporting
their fellow people and switching to NO. The electorate can be very odd!

Just my take! The whole point I am making is not how to vote or why we should vote YES or NO, it is that we should be RESPECTED and not lectured and forced to VOTE
a certain way, just because the govt is being dictated to by the EU

Had some other countries had the vote, the feeling is that a lot would
also have voted NO!

Dord

Hmm... I don't remember moving to Zimbabwe...

Biggins

Aaa sure its only the thick Irish. We'll re-run the damn thing yet again and again till we get what we want!
Hurray for democracy!

IF a T.D. lost his seat in an election, would you allow him to get a re-run too just a year later? I can hear it now... "No - 'cos thats different because..."
Well just because the electorate didn't understand the mandate of such an example T.D. - he/she don't get to run again so soon!
- but for the E.U. and their mandate? Hell, once again, let have a re-run! It's the thick Irish, they will let us away with it.


Its a non-funny joke which shows once again that France, Germany, etc are treating the Irish public like dumb sheep to be herded - and whats worse is that our quisling government is caving in to the masters of Europe.

All hail the soon to be "Federation of United Europe"!

seamus

Let's give them a tiny bit of credit. They will change something. Such as the commissioner. Or perhaps they'll actually do something stupid like write it into the constitution that the treaty can't affect our position on abortion and direct taxation.

ronbyrne2005

Completely fair and democratic to run it again with changes to allay the concerns of the cranks. Even though I hate this government I'll still vote Yes as I'd rather lose a little power to EU and be in the EU in these hard times than give FF more power or control. IMO the more laws and rules and regulations we get from EU the better as the politicans here only want rules/laws that suit them and their cronies

humanji

Ok people, I know this is going to fall on deaf ears, but 28% of the population voted no. And a portion of that admitted to not voting on what was actually in the treaty. How is following the will of an ill-informed minority democratic? Think about it. If nobody except for 2 people actually managed to vote last time, and they voted yes because they thought it was about ice-cream, would you honestly want to honour that vote?

Why not actually read the treaty (it's honestly not that hard, I managed it FFS, and I'm thick as pig shìt!) and deciding what's best for you? What's the worst that can happen? Sure if the treaty is really that bad for everyone, it'll be a no vote again. One day out of your life isn't going to make that much of a difference.

oztots

Im going to agree with ronbyrne here, our government is inept, and only slightly corrupt at best. They'll bend over backwards for the guys with money, and the only time they'll even look at you is when they come canvassing for votes.

I for one welcome.....

thelordofcheese

humanji wrote: »

Why not actually read the treaty (it's honestly not that hard, I managed it FFS, and I'm thick as pig shìt!) and deciding what's best for you? What's the worst that can happen? Sure if the treaty is really that bad for everyone, it'll be a no vote again. One day out of your life isn't going to make that much of a difference.

Everybody shut up and listen to this, because it's the most sensible thing that will be said in this thread.

skelliser

well i read the treaty and voted yes, the no won and i unlike our government respect that decision.

The attitude that prevailed from sarkozy and his ilk since then and there complete contempt for us means i shall be voting NO.

walshb

humanji wrote: »

Ok people, I know this is going to fall on deaf ears, but 28% of the population voted no. And a portion of that admitted to not voting on what was actually in the treaty. How is following the will of an ill-informed minority democratic? Think about it. If nobody except for 2 people actually managed to vote last time, and they voted yes because they thought it was about ice-cream, would you honestly want to honour that vote?

Why not actually read the treaty (it's honestly not that hard, I managed it FFS, and I'm thick as pig shìt!) and deciding what's best for you? What's the worst that can happen? Sure if the treaty is really that bad for everyone, it'll be a no vote again. One day out of your life isn't going to make that much of a difference.

What?

How the hell do you know that I or others did or did not read the treaty?

You sound completely like the chancers trying
to force this on us.

Those same chancers themselves didn't even know the treaty details

This gets better alright; it is NOW being intimated that the YES voters read the treaty
and it wasn't simply a case of "my govt want me to vote this way," but the NO
voters didn't read it and just voted NO.

I say that the majority didn't read, (That's a a given!)
the treaty, YES and NO, so if they didn't read it, then why the hell vote YES to
something they didn't read? It works both ways. IMO, it makes more sense
to vote NO to a treaty you know nothing about

thelordofcheese

walshb wrote: »

I say that the majority didn't read, (That's a a given!)
the treaty, YES and NO, so if they didn't read it, then why the hell vote YES to
something they didn't read? It works both ways. IMO, it makes more sense
to vote NO to a treaty you know nothing about

Stop making excuses for voter ignorance.
It's disgusting.

walshb

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Stop making excuses for voter ignorance.
It's disgusting.

I'm worried you are actually serious?

Biggins

I too read the treaty (more than once to clarify sections), posted it in full on my own website, etc.
I voted on it also.

...but its only the thick Irish! We didn't like their answer so lets make the feckers re-run it again!

Its disgusting!

jimi_t

ronbyrne2005 wrote: »

IMO the more laws and rules and regulations we get from EU the better as the politicans here only want rules/laws that suit them and their cronies

I'd have a good long think about that one if I were you.

We're an Island shaped hole the EU has been pouring vast amounts of cash in. 20 years on we have no infastructure, shag all of a healthcare system and are just experiencing the backlash after a completely wasted artifical economic 'boom'. Our educated workforce is off to Australia/USA and our primary industries and construction are more or less non-existent (and before we get into subsidies etc... we are living in a far more globalised and far different world than that of the 70s/80s).

Now given that we'll have significantly less importance and representation at the EU table if Lisbon is ratified (which may be deserved at this point, but nonetheless), how could it possibly make things better? Our problem in Irish government isn't the laws and rules and regulations in place, its the management of what little money we get and the widespread corruption. Basing a vote for Lisbon on the fact that the majority of our government is incapable of doing anything properly is facile at best and dangerous at worst.

Tom65

There was a "no" vote because of fears over certain aspects of the Treaty. If assurances are given regarding these fears - taxation, abortion, "EU Army" - and the Commissioners are kept as they are (ridiculous in itself - they are too many), then why shouldn't we have a second vote?

The EU needs to make adjustments. The constitution failed, they changed it. If the Lisbon Treaty failed to the Irish electorate, why not make adjustments/assurances to help it pass? They aren't going to drop the evolution of the EU just because of 28% of one country in the EU. It will have to change. The question is to find a level of, or approach to, change that is acceptable to the EU citizens.

topper75

No and double no.

We shall not be dictated to - neither by Empire nor by Union.

niceirishfella

My understanding is that the are going to use the Electronic Voting machines at long last.

The have gone to tender to have an electronics company modify them to have just one button on the panel.

1 button only, Labelled "Yes".

Thats Democracy for you!

thelordofcheese

walshb wrote: »

I'm worried you are actually serious?

I am serious.

It *is* disgusting, telling people it's essentially ok not to know anything about a subject you're being asked to vote on is far more an affront to the idea of democracy than a second referendum.

Of course, it makes mroe sense to tell people it's ok to be ignorant if they then proceed to vote in line with you.

In short, everyone who uses the "If you don't understand the treaty vote No (or Yes as the case may be)" is a total shit.

humanji

thelordofcheese wrote: »

Everybody shut up and listen to this, because it's the most sensible thing that will be said in this thread.

Cheques in the post.

walshb wrote: »

What?

How the hell do you know that I or others did or did not read the treaty?

You sound completely like the chancers trying
to force this on us.

Those same chancers themselves didn't even know the treaty details

This gets better alright; it is NOW being intimated that the YES voters read the treaty
and it wasn't simply a case of "my govt want me to vote this way," but the NO
voters didn't read it and just voted NO.

I say that the majority didn't read, (That's a a given!)
the treaty, YES and NO, so if they didn't read it, then why the hell vote YES to
something they didn't read? It works both ways. IMO, it makes more sense
to vote NO to a treaty you know nothing about

Or, you could read my post. People are crying out over democracy being ignored. But only 28% of people voted no. That means 72% didn't vote not. That's not to say they voted yes, or would vote yes, just that they didn't vote no. And of taht bunch many have admitted to not knowing what the treaty was about. I'm not talking about the yes voters, as they don't matter in that above statement.

A fully informed referendom is needed, not the half arsed attempt that was before. Plenty of people read the treaty and plenty understood it. But this amount of people were dwarfed by those who voted in ignorance (be it yes or no).

The best analogy that I read over in the politics forum was that the people were given two contracts ("yes" and "no")and asked to sign one. But too many people believed that they were given one contract and assumed that if they didn't sign it, everything would remain the same. That simple isn't right.

Wagon

I'm voting "no" again so. Poxy government can go **** themselves and so can that wanker Sarkozy. I can't take this damn thing seriously anymore.