Is a decision taken on the basis misinformation valid?

The_Minister

I was thinking about this while working through my way through the Lisbon Treaty thread in After Hours.
One of the points that continually appeared was that the people had voted already, and therefore should not vote again.

But, studies showed after the vote that most of those who voted no believed that the Lisbon Treaty would bring in conscription (completely untrue), abortion (nearly certainly untrue), drug legalisation, prostitution etc.
One man gave me a leaflet threatening a nuclear Holocaust if the Lisbon Treaty passed.

Basically, many of those who voted No had some odd ideas about what was actually in there. I'm not talking about things that are a matter of opinion such as the Lisbon Treaty damaging our neutrality, but about actual factual claims.

Is a decision based on a false premise valid?
If someone sells you something by lying about its properties you are able to sue them and get your money back.
But, with a referendum even if people are told complete lies and they vote no, is that not a valid reason to have another referendum?
If we vote on abortion, and people vote against it because they don't like euthanasia, or the government, have they really said no to abortion?
Would there not be a good argument for holding a new referendum once people had realised what they were actually supposed to vote on?

The_Minister

****, that was meant to be in the EU forum.

Dragan

Not really, it would never occur where the entire voting public has a full understanding of the issues at hand.

Not even close.

jumpguy

No, sadly not. There is no "Why?" box underneath the no or yes vote. If the no vote goes through, our international reputation will be in tatters. The youth of the country should just emmigrate if it does tbh.

Biggins

No, a decision taken on the baseless misinformation is not necessarily valid.
However as we are living in a seemingly democratic society still, the votes of those that you do not agree with ARE valid (no matter what their reason/opinions are, valid or not) and are counted. Guess what too, sometimes they are right and others are actually wrong! Go figure!
Thats democracy for you. Ya sign up to it, you get the bad with the good!

Lisbon treaty thoughts and spin

---

> http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055629094

komodosp

People voted "No" based on certain information which was untrue. The government went out and got guarantees that their fears would not come true, and are calling for the vote again.

This is democracy in action. The people don't like something - you find out what they don't like, get rid of that, and find out if they like the remainder. That is how it should be done as often as possible.

Too often, good things get abandoned because someone doesn't like a certain aspect of it, rather than just changing that aspect. This is sheer idiocy. As is voting "No" becuase "I already voted, I shouldn't have to do it again". If you don't like it in spite of the guarantees, then by all means vote "No" again. But don't vote out of spite.

RandolphEsq

As long as we still use democracy then OP the answer is yes

Manic Moran

Yes, for two reasons.

1) Who is to say that the basis was invalid? To what level of percentage of information must the invalidity be? Heck, people exaggerate their CVs, let alone political positions.

2) If the citizenry are too stupid or lazy to do their own research, that's their problem. Their country.

NTM

utick

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yes, for two reasons.

1) Who is to say that the basis was invalid? To what level of percentage of information must the invalidity be? Heck, people exaggerate their CVs, let alone political positions.



NTM

nail on the head. also on another thread i was reading there should be tests on the treaty before you are allowed to vote, what a ridiculous idea, if the test would be given by the people who wrote the treaty every treaty would be passed with 100% of the vote

Degag

Ok. I voted no to the original treaty because i could see no advantage to a yes vote to Ireland. Now my problem is that apparently we are getting a far better deal in the new treaty, however; I think it is an absolute disgrace that we are being treated like ignoramuses. It could nearly be described as Dictatorship in the guise of Democracy, in that our vote means absolutely nothing. I'm not sure which way i'm going to vote but i'm seriously thinking of voting NO to prove a point (every vote counts eh?:rolleyes:)

bluto63

No, I don't think so. It's misleading people, making them do something they wouldn't agree with because of fear.

lostexpectation

people had doubts before the campaign started the yes side didn't convince, they decided to vote no.

ChocolateSauce

The_Minister wrote: »

****, that was meant to be in the EU forum.

I asked a similar question there...no replies last time I checked!

ChocolateSauce

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yes, for two reasons.

1) Who is to say that the basis was invalid? To what level of percentage of information must the invalidity be? Heck, people exaggerate their CVs, let alone political positions.

NTM

I think the facts do in regard to the specific examples listed above.

tolosenc

Degag wrote: »

ignorami

FYP :pac:

Smart Bug

OP, how do you define validity? I.e. is it in an ethical sense or a purely practical sense?