Off Topic Thread 4.0

kuang1 wrote: »

I opted out very deliberately from following Irish based news 7 years ago.
Hence my ignorance on this...but what are current polls suggesting?
If the vote was held today do we have a fair idea of which way it would go?

Deleted User wrote: »

Polls have the amendment being repealed currently. I'd say it will be closer than what the polls have been indicating but I'd be surprised if there isn't a repeal.

There is an interesting trend on the polls before other Referendums on similar issues historically in Ireland. I'll see if I can find it. Attached is an Irish Times article that eludes to it, but I have definitely seen the data in a more granual form. If I recall correctly, women in the 30-60 bracket overwhelmingly swung in the last abortion referendum (which I know was a long time ago). They had been significantly more likely than men to support it, but come voting day they were significantly less likely than men to support it.

I guess it's natural that the emotive arguments are more effective on women who have become mothers.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/abortion-poll-findings-dramatic-but-attitude-change-has-been-gradual-1.3368761

errlloyd wrote: »

I just don't get posters. They're a little bit useful for local elections, where potentially new members of the constituency don't even know the names of the councillors and could benefit a bit from the reminder.

But this is a referendum. What are the posters meant to be. Some sort of dick measuring competitions to show who got more money from US interest groups. No one is going to make a decision on whether they think its a baby or bunch of cells based on a red poster that says vote no.

Any particular poster or just all posters on this board? :P

errlloyd wrote: »

I just don't get posters. They're a little bit useful for local elections, where potentially new members of the constituency don't even know the names of the councillors and could benefit a bit from the reminder.

But this is a referendum. What are the posters meant to be. Some sort of dick measuring competitions to show who got more money from US interest groups. No one is going to make a decision on whether they think its a baby or bunch of cells based on a red poster that says vote no.

You probably don’t get them because they aren’t aimed at you. The poster campaign is squarely aimed at the older voters I’d say. Which is the core vote for the no campaign. It’s been a steady stream of emotive content mixed with worst case scenario proclamations. I would say it will be very effective in the long run.

I’d expect that the yes campaign will be more focused on new media. Though I’m not on Facebook or Twitter, so don’t really know if they’re visible their either.

swiwi_ wrote: »

I detested election posters in Ireland. Such an eyesore especially out in the countryside.

One thing I think Ireland could learn from NZ when it comes to elections/referendums, no advertising on polling day. It's illegal. It means all posters, hoardings etc. have to be gone or they get fined. You put 'em up, you take 'em down.

.ak wrote: »

We actually have that as well here too, just think it's a set date after elections.

Personally I don't get posters for electrions. Hardly like you're going to look up and go 'Hmm, yeah I'll vote for that socially awkward looking ****, especially because they've put one up on every pole for the next 10 miles.'.

Yeah, you're also not allowed canvas on polling day, and I think posters within a certain distance of a station have to come down.

Yeah_Right wrote: »

Really? I remember a several times over the past few years seeing posters hanging off poles or half falling down all over the place weeks after the election. Is the punishment not enforced? The politicians should be fined to make sure their supporters clean up.

They are fined. A Fine Gael TD was fined €3,000 a couple of years ago for this.

.ak wrote: »

We actually have that as well here too, just think it's a set date after elections.

Personally I don't get posters for electrions. Hardly like you're going to look up and go 'Hmm, yeah I'll vote for that socially awkward looking ****, especially because they've put one up on every pole for the next 10 miles.'.

Its subtle but its simply the repetition of a name that gives it more weight and prominence in our minds. We are more likely to attend to the name the more we hear it and we draw the inference that the prominence of that name means that we and lots of other people back that person.

Sounds bizarre when you stop and think about it and Imm sure some folk reading this will be sceptical as to whether people actually fall for it, but I can assure you its a measurable and very real phenomenon. Advertisers use it to their advantage all the time on TV, Radio and in the media. In your normal days activity you will be bombarded with hundreds of brand identities and they each try to grab your attention. Its an industry worth billions because the success it has is worth even more.

swiwi_ wrote: »

2007. Before the tiger became a mere kitten.

It was always a sceptic kitten.

swiwi_ wrote: »

2007. Before the tiger became a mere kitten.

I genuinely thought given the date and name that you were talking about Tiger Woods when I first read this

Think I won a tenner on the Grand National sweepstakes in work. My horse came last