Reasons to vote No/No

DUBLINIRL

I'm quite surprised at the percentage of the No/No vote with around 2 out of every 3 voters going for No in the referendum.

I'm curious to know why people voted the way they did if you wouldn't mind sharing with the class?

downtheroad

The terms "durable relationship" and "strive" were far too vague and wishy washy to be inserted into the constitution

Jim_Hodge

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121872021#Comment_121872021

This precisely. Nothing to do with dissatisfaction with the government. Just that the wording was too vague and added nothing to what already existed.

Itssoeasy

The care vote I was always more undecided on, and the AG advice that was leaked made me sure I couldn’t vote yes, so I voted no.

thegame983

Because the whole thing was f**king stupid & a waste of time.

Alexus25

Because I didn't understand it or properly read it

namloc1980

It was very poorly worded and framed. The Care one, carers and people who need care were thrown under the bus at the altar of ideology.

For the Family one, "durable relationships" was all sorts of problematic.

Dave_D_Rave

I didnt know there was a referendum until last week.

Didnt really have a clue what they were about to be honest, geerally I would keep up with current affairs.

893bet

Yes side couldn’t present an argument for change. Not one tangible advantage for any group could be described.

So No.

mikethecop

i dont believe that the government has its citizens best intreats at heart

it was framed as " we know best so do what we say"

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121872037#Comment_121872037

Well we have plenty of history to tell us that the voters neither reward nor punish a government at a referendum. As to the reason it is always hard to say, it could be the wording - perhaps the concept is acceptable, just the timing is not right or something else. I expect some surveys in the coming weeks will tell us more.

gym_imposter

It was only ever important to those who dwell in NGO bubble land, it was those folks who lobbied the government to hold the referendums

People tend to say no to things they don't give a sh1t about

Jim_Hodge

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121872325#Comment_121872325

I was giving my reasons and they were far from hard to say. I honestly couldn't care less what a survey says, to be honest.

banie01

Absolutely awful drafting of the proposed amendments. In regards to the family amendment, inserting "durable relationship" without actually seeking to specify a frame of reference for what 1 is. Then when pressed on that?

Ministers replying that "the courts will decide". That's incredibly lazy drafting, and it ignores the role of the legislature.

Politicians make the law, their intent when drafting laws is always at the crux of any judicial review. Courts will often seek to interpret that intent in crafting rulings. If the intent of the legislation is to have the courts decide? Then what intent other than "virtue signalling" can a court interpret?

The most irksome thing regarding the definition of durable relationship IMO? Is that there already exists mechanisms to recognise same, be it marriage, civil partnership or the Cohabitation recognition as per the 2010 act.

Instead of making the hard legislative choices? The Govt punted and expected everyone to ignore the glaring issues with the proposed wordings and "be progressive"

On the care amendment, IMHO there was a huge opportunity to afford positive rights upon the disabled and those others affected by it. Rather than acknowledging the State's role and responsibility via meaningful wording? It instead chose "strive" which allows a wide degree of latitude in avoiding actual responsibility.

The State has a responsibility to support, defend and vindicate the rights of every citizen but, that responsibility is particularly important in ensuring the rights of the marginalised.

TLDR; Awful drafting and quite easily manipulated language. Vagueness and aspirational language are not suitable for constitutions.

Sam Russell

The word DURABLE is one I've heard in economics referring to HOUSEHOLD DURABLE GOODS like washing machines. If it is not defined in law, then it means nothing or anything.

STRIVE was OK if it meant that the Gov has to prove it took some positive action to right a failing of care.

Scoliosis is an example where the Gov has not kept up to its obligations under current status quo, so would this 'STRIVE' have made a difference? Obviously the voters thought not.

Furze99

1) The terms "durable relationship" was too open ended and lacking in any clarity as to what change you'd be voting for.

2) The reference to women/ mothers in the constitution is perfectly acceptable acknowledgment of their special role in society.

DUBLINIRL

I was unaware of the issue with the care referendum by those with a disability.

DUBLINIRL

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121872580#Comment_121872580

Regarding (2) I discussed this with a couple of young women recently and they were in favour of this change as they were both highly qualified professionals who felt that it was outdated and placed an expectation on them that they would take on more of the domestic and childcare duties than their male partners.

csirl

One argument I heard was that giving iadditional rights to people always comes with a financial cost to the government. An overtaxed squeezed middle suffering from a cost of living crisis will end up footing the bill.

DUBLINIRL

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121872685#Comment_121872685

That is an interesting insight and I can see how it would sway people towards a No vote.

MrMusician18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121872325#Comment_121872325

Traditionally this is the case but have a government has rarely been as resoundingly defeated - the third largest ever defeat overall on family and largest ever defeat on care.

Some boxes in working class areas were almost entirely No, and there were strong no votes where AS accommodation is a difficulty. There is clearly more here than not being happy with the wording tbh.

It's my view that there is a significant element of anti government/establishment sentiment in the No vote. Government and indeed mainstream politics in general are worried about what this will translate to in the locals and Europeans.

Manach

Chesterton's Fence: if you don't know what something does, think very carefully before you decide to amend it. The government "Yes" campaign failed that test with the constitutional changes.

gym_imposter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121872673#Comment_121872673

Luxury beliefs - issues, vast majority have more important concerns in their lives

Those women are certainly out there but not at all typical

kippy

I'd echo a lot of what was said above.

Some of my thoughts/opinions were backed up by certain things that were said by either side in the past while.

I don't know how widely covered this interview was (and I appreciate the channel linked to isn't widely "liked" in certain quarters) but minute 1 to minute 3ish on this clip was of interest to me and if there is ANY level of truth to that story the political establishment need to be brought to task on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wxl4gU4Ts-s

There was a piece from Steen V Martin on Prime time also where steen pointed out that a change to the constitution could easily have major impact on existing laws (making them unconstitutional) - Martin wasn't able to answer that, as well as the confusion around "durable relationship" which really didnt help the Yes argument.

On the opposite side,

The entire content of this clip from last week and specificilly these lines from McEntee:

"There'll always be an attempt to confuse information when it comes to referendums"

and

"The only unintended consequences we will have if we vote no on Friday is that the 1 million plus people in this country, the children that you refer to will wake up and will be told by everyone else in this country will be told that their relationship is not a family relationship......if we wake up on saturday morning having missed this opportunity to tell these families that they are as important as families based on marriage"

McDowells retort was telling also - to be fair to him.

https://www.virginmediatelevision.ie/player/show/1294/216800/0/The-Tonight-Show?searchTerm=tonight

People have to remember that the majority of these politicians aren't specialists or indeed have any base level of intelligence. There's no real "test" that they have, apart from "getting votes". When they try and convice indivituals to do things, its not necessarily because they know what they are talking about.

I wasn't in it to "kick" the government or indeed other political parties who were for Yes. It was simply the wishy washy nature of what we were being asked to amend/change and the implications of same.

SuperBowserWorld

I definitely think the government is pretty much hated around the country. For oh so many reasons. You'd have to be blind or wallowing in the property market not to see that.

dmakc

The wording, but I'd be lying if the thought of Roderick O'Gorman sipping on victorious champagne last night didn't also influence me.

road_high

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058339839/reasons-to-vote-no-no

There was a whole load of reasons- I simply didn’t like the wording- too ambiguous and was going to open the floodgates. Senior FG ministers admitted it would allow all kinds of family reunification to untold numbers: no way straight off.

I value women’s place in the family and society- it doesn’t compel women to stay at home at all- there is a difference in genders and in my experience women are the primary caregivers in the home. It’s just reality.

Also immigration issues and durable relationships were a huge factor in my No vote. We need to tighten the rules not expose the state and taxpayer to countless liabilities.

The cherry on the top was the opportunity to give the left wing government and their NGO media establishment a good drubbing- they’ve had it coming a long time. No No was a no brainer and had settled on that weeks ago.

road_high

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058339839/reasons-to-vote-no-no

On reflection I know only two people voting yes and one of them was to only one of the amendments. There was a big surge on Friday to vote no and when I think of all the Nos I spoke to it’s not surprising now.

road_high

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121873751#Comment_121873751

This government is far too dictatorial and arrogant. They do absolutely nothing for the middle income earner like me- I’ve zero goodwill towards them

road_high

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121872037#Comment_121872037

Dissatisfaction with the government was a factor but the dodgy proposals in themselves were more than enough to cement a No.

Seth Brundle

Mod: I'll remind posters to read the Politics forum charter before posting here.

Two below standard posts deleted.