Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Beechwoodspark

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Look it up yourself. Couldn’t be bothered engaging with you if you are that naive.

If you can't back up your statements, maybe don't make them?

pleas advice

Deleted User wrote: »

I was making the point that if he had written my version where she voted "no", people here would have supported him and bemoaned the fact she hadn't seeked out more information before voting.

Maybe later, I'll try again and see the responses.

Too subtle

bucketybuck

nullzero wrote: »

She said she had no idea what the details of it were.
She's her own person and can vote anyway she likes but could have made an effort to understand why she voted the way she did.

Such arrogant thinking. "My wife voted yes in the end, but she didn't really know what it was all about..."

Sure mate, the pretty little lady was probably too busy doing the ironing to bother with all that information, right? :rolleyes:

Who do you think you are fooling, your wife as a woman knew damn well what was really important about this vote, she probably just kept quiet about it to avoid some tiresome arguments and mansplaining from the man of the house.

Itssoeasy

Cora Sherlock on rte. she's understandably not happy with the apparent result.

Achasanai

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Well my question is if people disagree with the church including it seems so many elderly people then why on earth are they still going to mass? Do the decent thing and stop attending mass if you feel so strongly about it.
But no they will be at mass next sunday blessing themselves and saying rosaries and the like.

A Church is not (just) the buildings and the leaders: it's the people, too. Those people obviously have faith, and perhaps want to change the Church from within. The RCC in particular changes its teachings and theologies all the time, even with regards to abortion.

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Because it’s the cool trendy choice. Think of the photo ops in dublin castle later on. Think of the badges...badges as far as the eye can see. And stickers too! Wow!!

Plenty of badges and stickers for the No side too.

Odyssey 2005

A no campaigner on RTE now still spitting out graphic bile ,even after the no campaign has been crushed.

Edit. Cora Sherlock..

tigger123

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Cora Sherlock on rte. she's understandably not happy with the apparent result.

Now she shows up.

wexie

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Cora Sherlock on rte. she's understandably not happy with the apparent result.

You hadn't expected the No side to be graceful losers had you?

Itssoeasy

A campaign decision to withdraw Cora Sherlock from the tv debate. It sounded like there is more to that.

Necro

Fr Tod Umptious wrote:

Far more difficult to get a single demographic as interested or engaged.

Definitely agree. I suppose, perhaps naively, I would expect the younger voters to look at the results, look at the choice their demographic made and think to themselves - 'We could really make a difference.'

It's a romantic and flawed view but it saddens me when I hear of people like my sister and her age group voting yesterday, yet when I asked her previously in the last GE...

'Can't be arsed'

No way to view politics in the country you live in.

Anyways I'll duck out now and leave ye to it :pac:

Itssoeasy

wexie wrote: »

You hadn't expected the No side to be graceful losers had you?

I simply just posted that she was on rte radio.

Harry Palmr

The religious ideologues will not go quietly that's for sure.

Where does this leave Fianna Fail and Michael Martin? He backed yes, his parliamentary party was strongly no, so is he leading his party against their will ? And are they, being significantly out of touch with their constituents, going to take a hit at the next general election?

juanjo

wexie wrote: »

You hadn't expected the No side to be graceful losers had you?

At least they get to make their own choice in their personal situations now. Not the case if the no had won.

Walter Bishop

Beechwoodspark wrote: »

Look it up yourself. Couldn’t be bothered engaging with you if you are that naive.

Ah the usual, make a statement then tell the person you're supposedly discussing this with to do your research for you..

Beechwoodspark

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The religious ideologues will not go quietly that's so for sure.

Where does this leave Fianna Fail and Michael Martin? He backed yes, his parliamentary party was strongly no, so is he leading his party against their will and are they, being significantly out of touch with their constituents going to take a hit at the next general election?

There’s plenty in the parliamentary party who want M Martin out. For various reasons.

Odyssey 2005

Itssoeasy wrote: »

A campaign decision to withdraw Cora Sherlock from the tv debate. It sounded like there is more to that.

But the b#####ds sold it as a conspiracy

Can we end this charade where his wife's vote must be respected because she's a strong independent woman?

There are many examples in these threads of women, or stories of women, voting "no", and they've been lambasted. The bias is comical. You don't respect her vote because she's a woman, you respect it because she voted right. Very progressive.

railer201

Voted Yes, and the result is not before its time - this how a democracy should function with majorities ruling and not powerful minorities manipulating events to match their own hymn sheets.

yosser hughes

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The religious ideologues will not go quietly that's for sure.

Where does this leave Fianna Fail and Michael Martin? He backed yes, his parliamentary party was strongly no, so is he leading his party against their will ? And are they, being significantly out of touch with their constituents, going to take a hit at the next general election?

Fianna Faíl voters were the ONLY ones in a majority for a No vote according to exit polls. (Renua don't really count)
It tells you something about the Fianna Faíl voter. Make your own minds up as to what that is.

pleas advice

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The religious ideologues will not go quietly that's for sure.

Where does this leave Fianna Fail and Michael Martin? He backed yes, his parliamentary party was strongly no, so is he leading his party against their will ? And are they, being significantly out of touch with their constituents, going to take a hit at the next general election?

From exit polls it was a 50 50 split from FF supporters, 75 yes for SF and FG

Guy:Incognito

Achasanai wrote: »

A Church is not (just) the buildings and the leaders: it's the people, too. Those people obviously have faith, and perhaps want to change the Church from within. The RCC in particular changes its teachings and theologies all the time, even with regards to abortion.





Plenty of badges and stickers for the No side too.

I drove behind a woman the other day who had restricted the view out of her back window to a postage stamp with all the various no stickers. There was a woman in a prius at the walkinstown roundabout driving what looked like a campaign van there was that many no stickers on it.

FrancieBrady

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The religious ideologues will not go quietly that's for sure.

Where does this leave Fianna Fail and Michael Martin? He backed yes, his parliamentary party was strongly no, so is he leading his party against their will ? And are they, being significantly out of touch with their constituents, going to take a hit at the next general election?

According to the exit poll discussed by RTE earlier, the lowest Yes vote among party voters was from FF voters, (somewhere in the low 50%'s while FG and SF was up in the 70% range)

Michael is in some bother.

tigger123

pleas advice wrote: »

From exit polls it was a 50 50 split from FF supporters, 75 yes for SF and FG

I can see this result leading to gains for FG and SF in the next election. They're on the right side of history.

Mountainsandh

73% of yes voters say that they did not change their mind over the past 5 years.

I think it is great to witness that.
I thought from the onset that the campaign was superfluous and that really, aside from a little extra information mostly in the form of personal stories, this was a moral dilemma to be reflected on at a personal level.

It seems we mostly all felt that, and it shows how mistaken the no side were (and are ? judging by nullzero comments for example) to think that Yes voters were uninformed and unaware.

This was not a last minute choice to fit in with the crowds.
This is like a meeting point that we all reached in our own time, many were there all along, many were on the way, some just arrived.

Damien360

I voted yes but wonder will anything change. New laws have to be drafted and the No campaign have a new battle ground outside TD's houses.

If a FF government lands in the Dail in the next 12-18 months for whatever reason will their support base demand no change and the status quo remain with no law enacted on this ?

martyoo

John McGuirk on RTE. Sore af.

seamus

FrancieBrady wrote: »

According to the exit poll discussed by RTE earlier, the lowest Yes vote among party voters was from FF voters, (somewhere in the low 50%'s while FG and SF was up in the 70% range)

Michael is in some bother.

I think you mean Fianna Fail are in some bother.

They're now the official right-wing conservative party of Ireland. Their voter base can only diminish over time unless they follow Michael and become more relevant.

VinLieger

Harry Palmr wrote: »

The religious ideologues will not go quietly that's for sure.

Where does this leave Fianna Fail and Michael Martin? He backed yes, his parliamentary party was strongly no, so is he leading his party against their will ? And are they, being significantly out of touch with their constituents, going to take a hit at the next general election?

Martin is a bit safer with a yes vote but tbh FF and its memebers beliefs are pretty miveable they will go qhere they think the votes are, Martin might have a bit more power to clear out the old intransigent conservatives on his front bench

retro:electro

I think when this is all over we need to have a conversation about why exactly The Iona Institute have been allowed to self appoint themselves as dictators for the Irish moral compass and are given a national platform to spew their venom? They hold no sway here. Their absolutely regressively backwards recall has been rejected it it’s droves over and over. It’s time they all fcuked off into oblivion.

iguana

Michael Healy Rae has this morning expressed his intention to respect the will of the people. The mandate is too strong for any politician who values his/her career to kick up much of a fuss about it. The legislation may not sail through but it will be enacted by the end of the year.