The backtracking has already started!

odoylerulez

Minister Lehinan when interviewed on RTE by Pravada Mountrose this morning in a counting centre. When asked "Was it the promise of jobs that swung the vote to a Yes". Lenihan said "We never promised jobs as a result of a Yes vote"

Yes to jobs indeed..


Man the next few months are going to be hilarious fun for all :pac:

moondogspot

Seen that alright. All those who voted Yes for jobs. There's your answer.

odoylerulez

yeah i know he didn't even wait for a week or so just shows how they feel toward the electorate. Once we have you suckered....ahh sure shag off.

free-man

An utter disgrace to our nation - sickening.

meglome

odoylerulez wrote: »

Minister Lehinan when interviewed on RTE by Pravada Mountrose this morning in a counting centre. When asked "Was it the promise of jobs that swung the vote to a Yes". Lenihan said "We never promised jobs as a result of a Yes vote"

Yes to jobs indeed..


Man the next few months are going to be hilarious fun for all :pac:

Did they promise jobs for a yes vote? references?

Max Power1

meglome wrote: »

Did they promise jobs for a yes vote? references?

"Yes to jobs" is fairly easy to understand

fictionaire

"Yes Minister" Martin on Rte this morning admitted that the minimum wage issue raised by the No side was an issue that needed to be look at.

Indeed, the backtracking has started.

Long Onion

I'd like to put you all to work this minute taking down all the "vote No or the baby jeebus will cry" posters.

You lost, deal with it.

turgon

Wait for the No side backtracking begins. Were all about to find out abortion and euthanasia and 1.84 wont be brought in, and that democracy still lives.

Max Power1

Long Onion wrote: »

You lost, deal with it.

Yes, becuase that was the response of the government last time

odoylerulez

Long Onion wrote: »

I'd like to put you all to work this minute taking down all the "vote No or the baby jeebus will cry" posters.

You lost, deal with it.

Bit like the pot calling the kettle eh

Long Onion

Max Power1 wrote: »

Yes, becuase that was the response of the government last time

So go back to Europe, get some protols that confirm that we will have a forced army of conscripted foetuses defending our frontier for €1.84 per hour, and we'll all have another vote.

Boskowski

I hope we learned our lessons for the NAMA debate.

Oh hold on, there is no debate, we won't have say on that one, how convenient...

odoylerulez

Long Onion wrote: »

So go back to Europe, get some protols that confirm that we will have a forced army of conscripted foetuses defending our frontier for €1.84 per hour, and we'll all have another vote.

nah sure whats the point the government and its supporters won. Not like the people really ever had a say anyways.

Im sure all democratic loving people of this fair isle accept the decison. Maybe you can learn a lesson from them.

Boskowski

Long Onion wrote: »

So go back to Europe, get some protols that confirm that we will have a forced army of conscripted foetuses defending our frontier for €1.84 per hour, and we'll all have another vote.

I don't agree with you, but I really like your rhetoric skills. Thumbs up for that one.

Max Power1

Long Onion wrote: »

So go back to Europe, get some protols that confirm that we will have a forced army of conscripted foetuses defending our frontier for €1.84 per hour, and we'll all have another vote.

thing is, Im not some religious idiot (coir) or anti-abortion narrowminded idiot, I had real reasons (explained here - I couldnt be bothered typing them again) for a no vote.

Except the power of false hope defeats reason.

Sierra Oscar

Well, I am guessing the no side will need to do some back tracking when in three years time we still have no abortion, no military conscription, when Ireland will not be an aircraft carrier and the minimum wage is not €1.84

Oh wait scrub the last one, Coir backtracked on that one before the vote.

odoylerulez

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Well, I am guessing the no side will need to do some back tracking when in three years time we still have no abortion, no military conscription, when Ireland will not be an aircraft carrier and the minimum wage is not €1.84

Oh wait scrub the last one, Coir backtracked on that one before the vote.

See thats the thing though. The no side lost. They don't have anything to answer for. Don't worry i've no doubt the real anger will be directed towards the government when people once again realise the level of deception that is going on. Like i said FUN TIMES AHEAD!:pac:

Raskolnikov

meglome wrote: »

Did they promise jobs for a yes vote? references?

Fine Gael poster read as follows . .

"Yes to Lisbon. Yes to jobs".

Where are the jobs?

odoylerulez

the jobs are in magical land with the chocolate rivers, unicorns and goody gumdrops

Raskolnikov

odoylerulez wrote: »

the jobs are in magical land with the chocolate rivers, unicorns and goody gumdrops

You're forgetting about the jobs for the boys in Brussels.

Max Power1

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Well, I am guessing the no side will need to do some back tracking when in three years time we still have no abortion, no military conscription, when Ireland will not be an aircraft carrier and the minimum wage is not €1.84

Oh wait scrub the last one, Coir backtracked on that one before the vote.

well your man from coir was on RTE this morning and was still staunchly defending this claim :mad:

Grr at religious idiot groups

cornbb

Read here for evidence that a Yes vote would be good for jobs. From the horses mouth, you know, the people who are actually in a position to create jobs:

Madam, – We are a group of Irish and Irish Americans deeply concerned with the outcome of Friday’s referendum. We are writing in our personal capacities, but are involved with many leading Irish organisations here and businesses with investments in Ireland. The fact is that the result of this week’s vote will affect Ireland’s relationship not only with Europe, but also with the United States – and will do so profoundly.

The US has invested $80 billion in Ireland; more than it has in Brazil, Russia, India and China. Some 600 US companies in Ireland employ 100,000 and export €60 billion of goods and services annually. Why should the US make such major investments in such a small economy? Ireland’s educated, enthusiastic workforce, allied with a relatively benign tax regime, are a crucial but insufficient explanation. The X factor is the fact that Ireland is the only English-speaking member of the euro area.

A presence in Ireland provides access to the EU internal market, one of the largest consumer markets in the world.

Ireland needs precious foreign investment now more than ever, while competition for that investment is at its most intense.

A No vote would indicate to many American investors that being integrated with international trade is not a priority for Ireland. If the Irish are prepared to reject a treaty concerned more with administrative issues than sovereignty, are they turning towards isolationism and can they be considered reliable trading partners?

This is not scaremongering. The fact is these questions are being asked here now in advance of the referendum.

The debate over whether Ireland is closer to Berlin than Boston is misplaced. Ireland has the luxury of being equally close to both. A No vote would distance Ireland from both Boston and Berlin. For the sake of Ireland’s relationship with the United States, as much as with Europe, a resounding Yes is essential on Friday. – Yours, etc,

LORETTA BRENNAN

GLUCKSMAN, ANTHONY

CALLAGHAN, JOHN DUFFY

JOHN FITZPATRICK, ADRIAN

FLANNELLY, DIARMUID

HOGAN, ADRIAN JONES,

PAUL KEARY, MICHELLE

KESSLER, BOB McCANN

BRENDAN McDONAGH,

JACK McDONNELL, KIERAN

McLOUGHLIN, TOM

MEAGHER, TOM MORAN,

BART MURPHY, JOHN

MURPHY, JOHN

O’DONOGHUE, NIALL

O’DOWD, SHEILA O’MALLEY

FUCHS, TOM O’NEILL, JIM

QUINN, JOHN RYAN, AINE

SHERIDAN, AL SMITH IV,

Note that the Glucksmanns in particular have been very generous to Ireland. See also the statements from Intel, and pretty much all other employers and those that are in a position to create jobs.

Now contrast this stark reality with the claims from the likes of Ganley and Coir that they were telling the truth. How long will they continue to dig those holes for?

alrightcuz

Ok i think the yes voters need to keep an eye on Europe not just Ireland lets see how other small country's are treated our vote was for them as well remember all the talk yes for Europe bla bla bla

meglome

Max Power1 wrote: »

"Yes to jobs" is fairly easy to understand

And those jobs could happen with company's seeing Ireland's commitment to the EU, just like us Yes campaigners have said all along. However there is and never was a promise of jobs. I have no idea where you got that.

Boskowski

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Well, I am guessing the no side will need to do some back tracking when in three years time we still have no abortion, no military conscription, when Ireland will not be an aircraft carrier and the minimum wage is not €1.84

Oh wait scrub the last one, Coir backtracked on that one before the vote.

And the one before that since we allowed the Yanks to have their rendition flights go through Shannon.

Edit: Also this one kinda takes care of the neutrality thing doesn't it?

Max Power1

meglome wrote: »

And those jobs could happen with company's seeing Ireland's commitment to the EU, just like us Yes campaigners have said all along. However there is and never was a promise of jobs. I have no idea where you got that.

its directly implied. Vote yes to jobs would infer that the opposite vote would have the opposite result. Simple really

ilovelamp2000

meglome wrote: »

And those jobs could happen with company's seeing Ireland's commitment to the EU, just like us Yes campaigners have said all along. However there is and never was a promise of jobs. I have no idea where you got that.

I'd imagine it was from the "Yes to Europe, Yes to Jobs" posters.

getcover

odoylerulez wrote: »

nah sure whats the point the government and its supporters won. Not like the people really ever had a say anyways.

The government support is at an all time low, and I'm fairly certain it was people who cast their votes to have their say yesterday...

meglome

Max Power1 wrote: »

well your man from coir was on RTE this morning and was still staunchly defending this claim :mad:

Grr at religious idiot groups

They really are a danger to No campaigners as they don't know where to draw the line. The chairman of the Labour court has has even expressly said that Cóir are wrong on this. No one, as far I can see, who's looked at this claim objectively believes it can happen. Who actually supports these loolaas?

odoylerulez

cornbb wrote: »

Read here for evidence that a Yes vote would be good for jobs. From the horses mouth, you know, the people who are actually in a position to create jobs:


Note that the Glucksmanns in particular have been very generous to Ireland. See also the statements from Intel, and pretty much all other employers and those that are in a position to create jobs.

Now contrast this stark reality with the claims from the likes of Ganley and Coir that they were telling the truth. How long will they continue to dig those holes for?

Wow just wow. No wonder this country is knee deep in recession with attitudes like that. Wouldn't want to become ever self reliant like say switzerland or sweden. Nah lets all just sit around on our a**ses and expect handouts from multinationals who pull out to china for cheaper labour costs whenever it suits them. After all they care about workers rights. Its not all about profits. Yes we owe these people our blind alligence and obediance. All hail dez magnificent super overlords!

I don't really like ganley but fair play to him at least he asked people to be open minded and not just believe everything you hear from the now proven corrupt and self serving politicans we have here. Like a breath of fresh air in a stagnant cesspool of corruption.

murphaph

turgon wrote: »

Wait for the No side backtracking begins. Were all about to find out abortion and euthanasia and 1.84 wont be brought in, and that democracy still lives.

To be fair-these sort of crazy claims were made by the lunatics and we all know that and most of us knew these were non-issues. The "yes for jobs" posters were erected by mainstream political parties and now Lenihan is already claiming they did no such thing.

AtomicHorror

Max Power1 wrote: »

"Yes to jobs" is fairly easy to understand

Apparently some of you didn't.

Who would honestly translate a vague "yes to jobs" into a specific "vote yes and we promise you will get a job"? That's unreasonable. If you're going to assume a meaning, surely it would be "yes to increase the likelihood of economic recovery and thus employment", which given that a yes vote enhances our chances of attracting both foreign investment and EU funding, is true.

Sorry if subtitles and shades of grey upset you guys, but sadly that's how reality works.

natsuko

This is interesting...

Someone sayin that the yes campaign didnt imply that a yes vote would be good for employment and another saying that the minimum wage issue IS something that is to be looked at???

Oh and the most brainwashin poster i saw was the sean kelly one... "Yes to Sport"... i mean... wtf???

uh, it makes me sick to the stomach that the majority of the voters are just sheep... anyone who voted yes without even understanding the whole thing are crazy... like i said to a friend who flipped a coin to vote(and came out yes)... "would you take a drink from a stranger without knowing what was in it???" ... but us being irish it was a stupid example.... :P

Anyway, so can we(the No side) ask for another vote cos we didnt get our own way??? No? Didnt think so...

murphaph

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Well, I am guessing the no side will need to do some back tracking when in three years time we still have no abortion, no military conscription, when Ireland will not be an aircraft carrier and the minimum wage is not €1.84

Oh wait scrub the last one, Coir backtracked on that one before the vote.

But the no side (I'm on it but not a lunatic on any fringe) aren't in government and aren't the ones now backtracking about the jobs promises (which now appear (already) to have been lies).

meglome

Max Power1 wrote: »

its directly implied. Vote yes to jobs would infer that the opposite vote would have the opposite result. Simple really

Rosco1982 wrote: »

I'd imagine it was from the "Yes to Europe, Yes to Jobs" posters.

Lads if you read back on the posts in here we were all saying (Yes campaigners) that a no vote might be bad for jobs and a Yes vote could be good for jobs. We gave reasons why we thought this but at no stage did anyone promise jobs.


And to put it another way...

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Apparently some of you didn't.

Who would honestly translate a vague "yes to jobs" into a specific "vote yes and we promise you will get a job"? That's unreasonable. If you're going to assume a meaning, surely it would be "yes to increase the likelihood of economic recovery and thus employment", which given that a yes vote enhances our chances of attracting both foreign investment and EU funding, is true.

Sorry if subtitles and shades of grey upset you guys, but sadly that's how reality works.

PaulieD

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Well, I am guessing the no side will need to do some back tracking when in three years time we still have no abortion, no military conscription, when Ireland will not be an aircraft carrier and the minimum wage is not €1.84

Oh wait scrub the last one, Coir backtracked on that one before the vote.

Coir are a minority. Please stop lumping all us No voters together.

RandomName2

turgon wrote: »

Wait for the No side backtracking begins. Were all about to find out abortion and euthanasia and 1.84 wont be brought in, and that democracy still lives.

That was part of the 'no' campaign's problem.

They backtracked before the vote.

Numerous figures on the no side disagreed with one another (run an image search of Declan Ganley and you're likely to find anti-Libertas propaganda produced by Sinn Fein).

Patricia McKenna was too honest to give credence to the 1.84 claim. Even Coir backtracked on this ('we did put a question mark at the end')

Ultimately the yes vote came down to the fact that

1) People were afraid of being thrown out of the EU or sidelined in terms of grants and fiscal liquidity

2) The public's confidence was shot due to the unanimous party support for Lisbon (so the people were seemingly fighting both the government parties, and the EU at the same time), and the fact that voting did not produce a veto of Lisbon.

3) Some sort of compromise seemed to have been reached with regards to the guarantees.

I liked how 'no' campaigners gave out free copies of the Lisbon Treaty to the public at the last vote. Wouldn't have minded seeing that again. Should have given one to Biffo.

murphaph

meglome wrote: »

Lads if you read back on the posts in here we were all saying (Yes campaigners) that a no vote might be bad for jobs and a Yes vote could be good for jobs. We gave reasons why we thought this but at no stage did anyone promise jobs.

Perhaps "yes for jobs" posters hanging off lamp posts was at best disingenuous then, eh?

odoylerulez

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Apparently some of you didn't.

Who would honestly translate a vague "yes to jobs" into a specific "vote yes and we promise you will get a job"? That's unreasonable. If you're going to assume a meaning, surely it would be "yes to increase the likelihood of economic recovery and thus employment", which given that a yes vote enhances our chances of attracting both foreign investment and EU funding, is true.

Sorry if subtitles and shades of grey upset you guys, but sadly that's how reality works.

Exactly i understand your point. I can see how you would believe this. After all remember who can take from from a simple 'no' vote that the people really mean yes. This is the government and its supporters logic my friends. Fuzzy if you will.

I mean yes to jobs its not just a conjob to take advantage of an economic recession and play on people's fears promising them jobs if you vote for lisbon. Not at all it means something entirely different. Who would have thought 3 simple words could have so many conjugations.

RandomName2

meglome wrote: »

Lads if you read back on the posts in here we were all saying (Yes campaigners) that a no vote might be bad for jobs and a Yes vote could be good for jobs. We gave reasons why we thought this but at no stage did anyone promise jobs.


And to put it another way...

What about the 'recovery ==> Lisbon' poster?

ilovelamp2000

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Apparently some of you didn't.

Who would honestly translate a vague "yes to jobs" into a specific "vote yes and we promise you will get a job"? That's unreasonable. If you're going to assume a meaning, surely it would be "yes to increase the likelihood of economic recovery and thus employment", which given that a yes vote enhances our chances of attracting both foreign investment and EU funding, is true.

Sorry if subtitles and shades of grey upset you guys, but sadly that's how reality works.

The Yes campaign lied.

That's how reality works

natsuko

O and not to mind our leading broadcaster, the one we trust to provide us with accurate and fair accounts of matters, are biased.

meglome

murphaph wrote: »

Perhaps "yes for jobs" posters hanging off lamp posts was at best disingenuous then, eh?

meglome wrote: »

Lads if you read back on the posts in here we were all saying (Yes campaigners) that a no vote might be bad for jobs and a Yes vote could be good for jobs. We gave reasons why we thought this but at no stage did anyone promise jobs.

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Apparently some of you didn't.

Who would honestly translate a vague "yes to jobs" into a specific "vote yes and we promise you will get a job"? That's unreasonable. If you're going to assume a meaning, surely it would be "yes to increase the likelihood of economic recovery and thus employment", which given that a yes vote enhances our chances of attracting both foreign investment and EU funding, is true.

Sorry if subtitles and shades of grey upset you guys, but sadly that's how reality works.

Lads you seem to have reading different things to me. I think it's quite clear from my post and AtomicHorror's what us Yes campaigners thought. And which we said in here on numerous occasions.

To be honest I'm fairly feckin astonished that after the number of times we discussed the whole 'yes for jobs' poster that none of you actually bothered to read what we kept saying.

moondogspot

http://www.fiannafail.ie/page/-/images/feature/blenihan_20sept09_600.jpg

Take a look at this picture.

meglome

meglome wrote: »

However there is and never was a promise of jobs. I have no idea where you got that.

http://photos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs126.snc1/5420_123077454097_120006514097_2260528_7260158_n.jpg

http://www.haconnect.ie/images/news/CorkChamber_VoteYes.jpg

http://02varvara.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/lisbon_treaty_posters.jpg

http://www.strongerwitheurope.ie/index.php/splashes/lisbon-yes

http://www.fiannafail.ie/page/-/images/feature/blenihan_20sept09_600.jpg

There's some "Yes for Jobs" posters there for you.

odoylerulez

Yes the one whose board is appointed by the government. But no real surprise in the coverage by them during the referendum. Some of it was downright hilarious in the extremes of support for the yes campaign. They proved very effective at fooling your average gombeen to which there are many populating these isles apparently. Now back to eastenders! I wonder if charlie is getting married!!!

Peckham

I'm still waiting for one person who voted Yes to be of the opinion that the "Yes to Jobs" was a direct promise that jobs would be created as a result of a vote in this way. The only people who seem to be making such a link are those on the No side.

In the same way that I'd be surprised if anyone voting No actually believed that a Yes vote would lead to the end of Irish democracy.

You have to give enough credit to people that they are intelligent enough to distinguish between political hyperbole and promise.

Many people (including me) voted Yes for reasons of economic recovery (which links in turn leads to jobs) on the basis that we're better off in the heart of Europe than on the margins of Europe. As one of the academics on RTE said about an hour ago - much of what happens in the EU is based on negotiations, bargaining and compromise - compromises wouldn't be in our favour if we had voted No.

This is what I took the "Yes to jobs" to mean.

murphaph

I knew all along that Lisbon wouldn't make a damn bit of difference to our economic prospects. The problems are most all internal to Ireland after all. I am just a little surprised at how quickly the Minister for Finance is now backtracking.

Lisbon never meant more jobs for Ireland. if anything it'll see faster EU expansion and more jobs leaving Ireland for even lower cost economies. That's what happened after Nice.

whatisayis

meglome wrote: »

Did they promise jobs for a yes vote? references?

http://www.fiannafail.ie/page/-/images/feature/blenihan_20sept09_600.jpg

My name is URL

RandomName2 wrote: »

What about the 'recovery ==> Lisbon' poster?

That really grinded my gears.. do you know which group it is that endorsed that one?