Are the No side conceding defeat?

dvpower

Before a vote is counted, there seems to be a current on these boards for a Yes victory.

Are No voters ready to concede defeat, or am I going to be kicking myself later this afternoon for my useless 'tapping into the zeitgeist' skills?

My name is URL

I concede defeat

It could have been a cleaner fight, the managers threw the towel in too early imo

1.84 etc... ffs.. more damage than good :pac:

jhegarty

dvpower wrote: »

Before a vote is counted, there seems to be a current on these boards for a Yes victory.

Are No voters ready to concede defeat, or am I going to be kicking myself later this afternoon for my useless 'tapping into the zeitgeist' skills?

Last time I checked a vote hadn't been counted.

Mrmoe

I conceded defeat weeks ago. The result will be/is obvious.

marco murphy

I'll have some laugh if it turns out to be no... with all these "No: sore losers" etc.

namloc1980

Perestroika wrote: »

I'll have some laugh if it turns out to be no... with all these "No: sore losers" etc.

Who said that here?

All will be revealed tomorrow evening. Still too close to call IMO.

Sparks

dvpower wrote: »

Are No voters ready to concede defeat

Nice to see that it's not a mature way to decide on our political future, but a national penis measuring event. Way to go.

marco murphy

namloc1980 wrote: »

Who said that here?

All will be revealed tomorrow evening. Still too close to call IMO.

Sorry, its all over P.ie.
Just sad eejits doing the rounds

Anyway; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMBDYOVYZRQ

Daftendirekt

No point worrying about it now. Just kick back and wait for the result!

I'm just glad it's all over.

stevenmu

Sparks wrote: »

Nice to see that it's not a mature way to decide on our political future, but a national penis measuring event. Way to go.

+1, it's been very noticeable that a lot of the debate on this has been more about getting one over on the other side than actually focusing on the treaty and what's best for the country.

Max Power1

its widely acknoweldged that the expected outcome is a yes vote. But why would the no side concede defeat? The vote counting begins tomorrow, lets see what happens

dvpower

Sparks wrote: »

Nice to see that it's not a mature way to decide on our political future, but a national penis measuring event. Way to go.

I'll take that as a concession.:pac:

kryogen

I assume it will be a yes disappointingly, the no campaign was run very poorly unfortunatly........

should be close either way and we might get a surprise tomorrow but all signs point to a yes vote

utick

treaty cant come into force until ratified by all countries so theres a bit to go yet for the yes men

thecornerboy

stevenmu wrote: »

+1, it's been very noticeable that a lot of the debate on this has been more about getting one over on the other side than actually focusing on the treaty and what's best for the country.

The religious fervour on the Yes side is interesting. Even a well written article by a respected journalist, Tom McGurk, was shouted down with slander on here.

The debates on Radio Lisbon...I mean RTÉ...disappointed me. There was no debate in a quiet room where two learned protagonists poured over the Treaty and had it out bit by bit. I didn't see any attempts by an ostensibly objective commentator to come to any conclusions about Lisbon (you could get commentators going both ways but the interesting thing would be to see how they approached the thing rationally). You can do something similar by having one from each side bash each other over the head with rolling pins for 10 minutes but it's not quite the same thing.

It was business as usual in these "debates" with a lot of talking out of turn. It was the usual point scoring boxing matches.

dvpower

dvpower wrote: »

Before a vote is counted...

jhegarty wrote: »

Last time I checked a vote hadn't been counted.

Glad to help.

dvpower

thecornerboy wrote: »

The religious fervour on the Yes side is interesting. .

(blah blah blah ..... .... ..... ...... ...)

thecornerboy wrote: »

It was the usual point scoring boxing matches.

Yep.

imeddyhobbs

Dictatorship http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship has won,its a yes this time and there will be no re run

PaulieD

It does look ominous for the No side. This whole campaign was a farce. It was all based on fear. Fear of conscription, fear of abortion, fear of unemployment, fear of poverty, fear of exclusion from the EU, fear of p*ssing off Brussels, the list is endless. One thing is clear in all this, neither side has covered themselves in glory.

kryogen

imeddyhobbs wrote: »

Dictatorship has won,its a yes this time and there will be no re run

ah look as a fellow no voter i feel i have to intervene here, yes its a pain in the hole that we had to vote again, of course it feels like an insult to the 800,000+ thousand people who voted no the last time and were just told, ah you didnt really mean it!

but the fact is that the irish people will have the say on this in a democratic fashion and if as is feared the yes vote prevails then i will stand by it as it is the will of the majority of the voters in a democratic fashion, you will have to stand by it aswell even if you dont like it, and trust me. i really dont like it!

kryogen

PaulieD wrote: »

It does look ominous for the No side. This whole campaign was a farce. It was all based on fear. Fear of conscription, fear of abortion, fear of unemployment, fear of poverty, fear of exclusion from the EU, fear of p*ssing off Brussels, the list is endless. One thing is clear in all this, neither side has covered themselves in glory.

this is one of the most intelligent statements to be made about this referendum

imeddyhobbs

kryogen wrote: »

ah look as a fellow no voter i feel i have to intervene here, yes its a pain in the hole that we had to vote again, of course it feels like an insult to the 800,000+ thousand people who voted no the last time and were just told, ah you didnt really mean it!

but the fact is that the irish people will have the say on this in a democratic fashion and if s s feared the yes vote prevails then i will stand by it as it is the will of the majority of the voters in a democratic election, you will have to stand by it aswell even if you dont like it, and trust me. i really dont like it!

The reality remains the same,give us the answer we want.

kryogen

imeddyhobbs wrote: »

The reality remains the same,give us the answer we want.

i understand your point but they didnt force anyone to vote yes, they ran a campaign based mainly on fear and if the no side had run a better campaign, it was also run primarliy on trying to scare people, we might have got the result we wanted.

a democratic vote does not constitute dictatorship......there is no harm in voting, if we had been asked to vote 25 times the irish people would have had the right to decide the outcome 25 times, the voting process is democratic.

like i already said, it was a pain in the hole to have to vote again but that is a democracy!

View

imeddyhobbs wrote: »

The reality remains the same,give us the answer we want.

The reality is the No campaign in Lisbon I was based on lies. Get guarentees from the other EU states that the lies really are lies and "Hey, Presto", the reasons a lot of voters voted No disappear who then turn around and vote Yes in Lisbon II.

The fact that the No campaign had to resort to fabricating stuff about the Treaty in the first place indicates that they knew in advance that had they argued against the Treaty based on what was really in it, they'd have lost Lisbon I.

PaulieD

View wrote: »

The reality is the No campaign in Lisbon I was based on lies. Get guarentees from the other EU states that the lies really are lies and "Hey, Presto", the reasons a lot of voters voted No disappear who then turn around and vote Yes in Lisbon II.

The fact that the No campaign had to resort to fabricating stuff about the Treaty in the first place indicates that they knew in advance that had they argued against the Treaty based on what was really in it, they'd have lost Lisbon I.

This is laughable. Yes for jobs? Yes for economic recovery?:rolleyes:

imeddyhobbs

View wrote: »

The reality is the No campaign in Lisbon I was based on lies. Get guarentees from the other EU states that the lies really are lies and "Hey, Presto", the reasons a lot of voters voted No disappear who then turn around and vote Yes in Lisbon II.

The fact that the No campaign had to resort to fabricating stuff about the Treaty in the first place indicates that they knew in advance that had they argued against the Treaty based on what was really in it, they'd have lost Lisbon I.

I'm not sure about this saying but it goes eaten pie soon forgotten but in this case we have to live with the pie forever

View

imeddyhobbs wrote: »

I'm not sure about this saying but it goes eaten pie soon forgotten but in this case we have to live with the pie forever

Actually we don't. If we decide in future we don't like the "pie", we can either try to change the part of the "pie" we don't like by persuading the other member states, or, should that fail, we can opt to do without the "pie" - i.e. leave the EU. And lest it be forgotten, one of Lisbon's change is to make it easier to leave the EU.

bkelly86

This is gonna make Irish people look so stupid first nice we say no then yes and now Lisbon again.

Scofflaw

View wrote: »

Actually we don't. If we decide in future we don't like the "pie", we can either try to change the part of the "pie" we don't like by persuading the other member states, or, should that fail, we can opt to do without the "pie" - i.e. leave the EU. And lest it be forgotten, one of Lisbon's change is to make it easier to leave the EU.

Note, however, that trying to change part of the pie involves paying attention to the EU between referendums.

cordially,
Scofflaw

PaulieD

bkelly86 wrote: »

This is gonna make Irish people look so stupid first nice we say no then yes and now Lisbon again.

It is not over yet, bkelly. Not a ballot has been counted. Remember, we are going on FF and FG exit polls.

ascanbe

I voted No this time, as I did last time; which turned out to be a waste of time.
It's been clear for a while this vote would result in a Yes.
Some of those advocating a Yes on here deserve a lot of credit in that they tried to allay fears rather than propagate them.
It will be a Yes, however, due to the populace being scared stiff over the consequences of voting No; so some of you shouldn't pat yourselves on the back too hard.
I have grave misgivings about this treaty; having a stake in the future of this country, i genuinely hope that they are unfounded.

imeddyhobbs

bkelly86 wrote: »

This is gonna make Irish people look so stupid first nice we say no then yes and now Lisbon again.

Good point,we will be known as push overs take a look here http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055698609

prinz

bkelly86 wrote: »

This is gonna make Irish people look so stupid first nice we say no then yes and now Lisbon again.

No we looked stupid when the government went back to Europe and said 'right lads we know this has nothing whatsoever to do with what's in the Treaty but could yez just make us guarantees about abortion, neutrality.... etc etc'. That made us look stupid.

bkelly86

like i just dont understand why people would vote no once and yes the second on the exact same treaty. it makes the the irish people look like such pushovers.

prinz

bkelly86 wrote: »

like i just dont understand why people would vote no once and yes the second on the exact same treaty. it makes the the irish people look like such pushovers.

Probably because a lot of the arguments used to get people to vote no were complete and utter nonsense, and not enough people the last time around took the time to check for themselves.

PaulieD

prinz wrote: »

Probably because a lot of the arguments used to get people to vote no were complete and utter nonsense, and not enough people the last time around took the time to check for themselves.

Probably because they were scared to death by threats of consequences and believed in lies such as vote Yes for jobs.

utick

prinz wrote: »

Probably because a lot of the arguments used to get people to vote no were complete and utter nonsense, and not enough people the last time around took the time to check for themselves.

its nothing to do with that and everything to dowith the economy.

prinz

utick wrote: »

its nothing to do with that and everything to dowith the economy.

Sorry, but there are a number of posters right here on boards that voted no the first time and yes the second. The 'yes for jobs' etc was not a reason given by any of them for changing.

Fuhrer

ascanbe wrote: »

It will be a Yes, however, due to the populace being scared stiff over the consequences of voting No;

Either that or they took a look at what they were voting for and decieded, hmmm, this seems worthwhile. I think Ill aprove it.


But hey, why say the other side was right when you can stupidly shout at them and scream epitaphs. Heaven forbid that you could be wrong or even more likely, completly misinformed and too stupid to comprehend that.

Mr Benevolent

I suspect it's going to be a No. Most of my friends and family have changed their minds to No over the past 3 weeks for some reason. The Boards poll says No as well. I would've voted Yes if I was in Ireland for the vote.

Scofflaw

Fuhrer wrote: »

Either that or they took a look at what they were voting for and decieded, hmmm, this seems worthwhile. I think Ill aprove it.


But hey, why say the other side was right when you can stupidly shout at them and scream epitaphs. Heaven forbid that you could be wrong or even more likely, completly misinformed and too stupid to comprehend that.

Be polite, please...er, also, it's more usually "epithets", although I do like the idea of screaming 'epitaphs' at people - the more so because certain No-side groups (such as Libertas) were doing exactly that.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Red Sleeping Beauty

Scofflaw, Libertas played minor role in the public debates/discussions this time compared to last time. They entered the campaigning a bit late I thought. It's doubtful if they'll (or Ganley) have had an impact.

I think everyone's accorded them/him with a bit too much status tbh.

imeddyhobbs

The yes side have it,politicians are liars.When FG are in power they will be looking at demonstrations by people who will be waving Lisbon posters that state yes for jobs and yes for recovery,the dunces that run the country will disown all notions that there will be new employment from the Lisbon treaty

PaulieD

imeddyhobbs wrote: »

The yes side have it,politicians are liars.When FG are in power they will be looking at demonstrations by people who will be waving Lisbon posters that state yes for jobs and yes for recovery,the dunces that run the country will disown all notions that there will be new employment from the Lisbon treaty

We are stuck with Brian Cowens Fianna Fail and the Greens until 2012, if it is a Yes vote. Make sure to get yourself one of them "Yes for jobs" posters. They may be handy in the near future.

Ever see the list of lies from Nice?

Scofflaw

Alan Rouge wrote: »

Scofflaw, Libertas played minor role in the public debates/discussions this time compared to last time. They entered the campaigning a bit late I thought. It's doubtful if they'll (or Ganley) have had an impact.

I think everyone's accorded them/him with a bit too much status tbh.

While that's irrelevant to the comment I was making, I don't agree. Until Ganley entered the debate, the media focus was on COIR, and the No side were really losing very badly. Once Ganley entered, the media attention switched to him, COIR retreated somewhat into the shadows, and simultaneously - whether coincidentally or not, the No side appeared to become a good deal more focused, coherent, and driven. The No campaigns also switched from the various weird and disparate bogeymen they'd been trying to conjure up to a coherent pair of messages - summed up in the Libertas poster featuring Brian Cowen. The level of online engagement also increased quite noticeably.

I also don't think Ganley's re-entry was of his own volition - I'm pretty certain he was persuaded to get involved, despite his earlier statement of retirement, for exactly those reasons.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Red Sleeping Beauty

Scofflaw wrote: »

While that's irrelevant to the comment I was making, I don't agree. Until Ganley entered the debate, the media focus was on COIR, and the No side were really losing very badly. Once Ganley entered, the media attention switched to him, COIR retreated somewhat into the shadows, and simultaneously - whether coincidentally or not, the No side appeared to become a good deal more focused, coherent, and driven. The No campaigns also switched from the various weird and disparate bogeymen they'd been trying to conjure up to a coherent pair of messages - summed up in the Libertas poster featuring Brian Cowen. The level of online engagement also increased quite noticeably.

I also don't think Ganley's re-entry was of his own volition - I'm pretty certain he was persuaded to get involved, despite his earlier statement of retirement, for exactly those reasons.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Nothing wrong with a coherent "no" campaign though is there ? It'll be interesting to see who if anyone will be conceding defeat for the "no side".

On Ganley's re-entry into this thing, I don't know what you're suggesting by him being persuaded. I'm quite curious by what you're getting at though.


Btw, as many of us know, political statements don't really hold that much weight do they?
Ganley said he wouldn't be involved, Cowen said he respected the will of the people and Gilmore said Lisbon was dead.

Scofflaw

Alan Rouge wrote: »

Nothing wrong with a coherent "no" campaign though is there ? It'll be interesting to see who if anyone will be conceding defeat for the "no side".

On Ganley's re-entry into this thing, I don't know what you're suggesting by him being persuaded. I'm quite curious by what you're getting at though.


Btw, as many of us know, political statements don't really hold that much weight do they?
Ganley said he wouldn't be involved, Cowen said he respected the will of the people and Gilmore said Lisbon was dead.

Indeed they don't, because political imperatives and pressures tend to require their retraction - the difference, in Ganley's case, is that he's not a politician.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Red Sleeping Beauty

Can I ask why you think Ganley reluctantly re-entered the Lisbon debate(s) ?
The Libertas posters and slogans and stuff definitely only came out towards the end (if you include when the first few campaigns started).

I hated seeing Gangley around. I resented that he was getting airtime over others (his bitchfest with O'Leary got about 15mins over Higgins and Cox's few mins on PrimeTime) and that he diverted any discussion or debate. As with before, when Ganley was introudced, there was ample questions about his motives and financing. Bit of a sham really for both "sides" having this guy involved. Can't see him conceding defeat as being relevant anyway.

tattoodublin

:eek: ...in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
—Adolf Hitler , Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X


That is of course rather painful for those involved. One should not as a rule reveal one's secrets, since one does not know if and when one may need them again. The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous
_Joseph Goebbels

Sam Vimes

PaulieD wrote: »

It does look ominous for the No side. This whole campaign was a farce. It was all based on fear. Fear of conscription, fear of abortion, fear of unemployment, fear of poverty, fear of exclusion from the EU, fear of p*ssing off Brussels, the list is endless. One thing is clear in all this, neither side has covered themselves in glory.

And yet people on the no side want to see this farce spread all over Europe

They all knew better

Sam Vimes

bkelly86 wrote: »

This is gonna make Irish people look so stupid first nice we say no then yes and now Lisbon again.

Yes it is. Maybe we should stop listening to extremists and vote on the facts the first time instead of the scary fantasies