nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Exit poll: The post referendum thread. No electioneering.

Ozymandius2011

This is for people who have already voted in the referendum. How did you vote? I voted yes.

Mod: This thread is little more than a survey about how you voted. Please don't the ins and outs of abortion.

Mod: This is not a reiteration of the previous 8th threads. If you were threadbanned from those, you are not threadbanned here.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

pl4ichjgy17zwd

Wanderer78 wrote:

My fear with this campaign is the fact, those that voted no maybe now made feel excluded in our society, we must remember that 'exclusion and shame' was thrust onto those that had to leave this country for termination, let us not thrust the same on to those no voters, we must accept their beliefs, and include them into our society

You're right. By allowing them the choice of never having an abortion if they don't want to.

Wanderer78

Fighting Tao wrote:

By repealing the repeal? ???

Not at all, we ve had enough of anti-democratic referendums in this country, it's important to accept, a lot of people voted no, some simply did not vote, others spoiled their votes. It's important to understand why they done this, and to continue to include them in the democratic process, as best as possible, 'exclusion', has played a major role in this painful process, we need to try create a more inclusive society, not try continue to isolate people and their opinions

It wasnt me123

Wanderer78 wrote: »

My fear with this campaign is the fact, those that voted no maybe now made feel excluded in our society, we must remember that 'exclusion and shame' was thrust onto those that had to leave this country for termination, let us not thrust the same on to those no voters, we must accept their beliefs, and include them into our society

Like they included all the "baby murderers"!

They excluded and shamed women from the pulpit down, I'm afraid I do not have to accept their beliefs. Clearly even some of the people going to mass voted Yes so even they don't accept their beliefs.

They can have their beliefs, I just don't want to them to control my health care or education, etc. Believe in whatever you like, just don't make me follow the same set of rules cos I don't believe.

In an aside, I contacted Together for Yes Tipperary this morning to see if they would be around for a while to help motivate the no sayer TDs to get this legislation passed. They will, they are rebranding but will be canvassing again to get the legislation passed. So the Mattie McGraths, Healy Raes etc will not be allowed to drag their feet, society as a whole shouldn't let them.

Doctors room ghost

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well that would be odd as it is not possible for a user to remove thanks that i can see. perhaps you are misinformed.

You press the unthank button.not that odd is it?perhaps it’s you that’s misinformed

Fighting Tao

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Not at all, we ve had enough of anti-democratic referendums in this country, it's important to accept, a lot of people voted no, some simply did not vote, others spoiled their votes. It's important to understand why they done this, and to continue to include them in the democratic process, as best as possible, 'exclusion', has played a major role in this painful process, we need to try create a more inclusive society, not try continue to isolate people and their opinions

How is a popular vote anti-democratic?

Btw, only 21% of the electorate voted no. That’s not even 21% of all the people that could have registered.

Fighting Tao

Doctors room ghost wrote: »

You press the unthank button.not that odd is it?perhaps it’s you that’s misinformed

I think he meant that I couldn’t remove the thanks that others gave my post.

Loafing Oaf

Wanderer78 wrote: »

it's important to accept, a lot of people voted no, some simply did not vote, others spoiled their votes. It's important to understand why they done this, and to continue to include them in the democratic process, as best as possible

The only meaningful way of doing this is to get people with 'pro-life' views into the Dail and the only people who can make that happen are the no voters themselves. That's how democracies work.

iguana

Graces7 wrote: »

Exaggeration comes of insecurity and mendacity does not impress, quite the opposite.

Exactly! Which is why the No side using those tactics in their campaigning meant that they barely got 1 in 5 of the electorate out to vote No. It's why the Save the 8th and LoveBoth groups engendered such utter disgust and disdain from most of the population. I understand why people are prolife, I disagree with them but I understand why they feel like they do. But anyone who joined and remained in those two groups or shared and promoted the bile coming from them truly does do the opposite of impress.

pitifulgod

Graces7 wrote: »

Nah... that would have meant maybe a 85-15 vote. Exaggeration comes of insecurity and mendacity does not impress, quite the opposite.

The marriage referendum was won by less than this and that constituted a landslide. This was supposedly the most divisive referendum for the country in the last few decades. Given the actual result, it's very much so a landslide. In much the same way as the marriage referendum. We were told it was too extreme, that the public didn't desire the referendum but by the looks of the outcome, it would have passed comfortably for the last few years.

Water John

Anyone looking for tallies, might try this week's edition of their local paper. The Southern Star has tallies for Cork SW and some of NW, supplied to them by Together for Yes.
There was a slight No majority in only a handful of boxes. Generally 60:40.
Coppeen was almost 60:40 No but Terelton, next door over 3:1 Yes.
That is, the two extremes in Cork NW.
Goleen the highest in Cork SW with 81% yes.

Nettle Soup

_Dara_ wrote: »

One week on, I still can’t quite believe that sense prevailed so dramatically!

I know the weather helped but I think the landslide Yes put the country in a great mood. We know a wrong has been fixed.

_Dara_

Nettle Soup wrote: »

I know the weather helped but I think the landslide Yes put the country in a great mood. We know a wrong has been fixed.

I was buzzing off me own head into the wee small hours of Saturday once the second exit poll corroborated the first. Could. Not. Sleep.

Shurimgreat

Fighting Tao wrote: »

How is a popular vote anti-democratic?

Btw, only 21% of the electorate voted no. That’s not even 21% of all the people that could have registered.

And only 42% or thereabouts voted yes.

So almost 60% of the registered electorate were not in favour of repeal.

Since you brought up the stats! Stats can be made to fit any argument you want as I have just shown.

Shurimgreat

iguana wrote: »

Exactly! Which is why the No side using those tactics in their campaigning meant that they barely got 1 in 5 of the electorate out to vote No. It's why the Save the 8th and LoveBoth groups engendered such utter disgust and disdain from most of the population. I understand why people are prolife, I disagree with them but I understand why they feel like they do. But anyone who joined and remained in those two groups or shared and promoted the bile coming from them truly does do the opposite of impress.

I think you overestimate the impact of these groups.
There are loonies on both sides of the campaign. On the No side you had those who are opposed to abortion full stop.
On the Yes side you have those who will no doubt in years to come push for the 12 week cutoff to be increased, who want abortion freely available both on the medical card or not and who want to facilitate women from Northern Ireland down here, putting more pressure on an already stretched healthcare service.

From speaking to some older people, they had no clue what this referendum was about save trying to stop a repeat of the Savita case. They had little or no idea there was legislation already prepared which included unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks. Many decided not to vote because of a lack of awareness of what they were voting for.

Fighting Tao

Shurimgreat wrote: »

And only 41% or thereabouts voted yes.

So almost 60% of the registered electorate were not in favour of repeal.

Since you brought up the stats! Stats can be made to fit any argument you want as I have just shown.

If the no side really had gotten through to people there would have had more people out voting. They didn’t though. As it stands it was practically a walkover for the yes side.

Fighting Tao

Shurimgreat wrote: »

I think you overestimate the impact of these groups.
There are loonies on both sides of the campaign. On the No side you had those who are opposed to abortion full stop.
On the Yes side you have those who will no doubt in years to come push for the 12 week cutoff to be increased, who want abortion freely available both on the medical card or not and who want to facilitate women from Northern Ireland down here, putting more pressure on an already stretched healthcare service.

From speaking to some older people, they had no clue what this referendum was about save trying to stop a repeat of the Savita case. They had little or no idea there was legislation already prepared which included unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks. Many decided not to vote because of a lack of awareness of what they were voting for.

I haven’t seen anyone pushing for higher than 12 weeks. Any evidence of those pushing for the 12 week limit to be increased?

Shurimgreat

Fighting Tao wrote: »

I haven’t seen anyone pushing for higher than 12 weeks. Any evidence of those pushing for the 12 week limit to be increased?

Everything is possible in a post 8th unrestricted abortion world. The legislation is now in the hands of the legislators and there is nothing to stop future legislators doing anything they want with the 12 week limit, nothing at all.

Trust politicians they say. And already two scandals have reared their heads since the referendum result.
1. Politicians can retire at 50 and take their pensions while the rest of us have to work to 68.
2. Harris and Varadkar said they would do everything to help cervical check victims. They appear to have done SFA and many of these women have to take out personal loans to get the treatment they were promised from Harris and Varadkar. Their claims have also been opposed in court. Varadkar and Harris lied. They said one thing, but their actions are the opposite. New politics indeed!
You can't trust politicians sadly.

Shurimgreat

Fighting Tao wrote: »

If the no side really had gotten through to people there would have had more people out voting. They didn’t though. As it stands it was practically a walkover for the yes side.

A walkover?
66.4% of a 64% turnout.
Nearly 60% of the electorate didn't support repeal or the legislation to follow it.
Of the 64% who voted, nearly 50% don't support unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks.
So something like 67% or 2/3rds of the registered electorate do not support unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks.
Only 1/3rd support unrestricted abortion. Doesn't sound over-whelming to me!

So the stats can be used in many ways to look at the result. Either way the mandate for unrestricted abortion is weak to say the least.

Fighting Tao

Every day it’s something new and I can’t be arsed getting into it because at the end of the day every single no voter would end up a hypocrite if it was them or a loved one that needed an abortion.

Igotadose

Shurimgreat wrote: »

A walkover?
66.4% of a 64% turnout.
Nearly 60% of the electorate didn't support repeal or the legislation to follow it.

You don't know what the people that didn't vote support. It's more likely they match the same results as the referendum.

Of the 64% who voted, nearly 50% don't support unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks.

Based on one exit poll you project this? Where's the data backing up this assertion?

So something like 67% or 2/3rds of the registered electorate do not support unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks.
Only 1/3rd support unrestricted abortion. Doesn't sound over-whelming to me!

So the stats can be used in many ways to look at the result. Either way the mandate for unrestricted abortion is weak to say the least.

Unfortunately, the only real 'stat' we have, is the vote result. Everything else is speculative. You're choosing to use a poll result to project what the un-voting minority would like, which is a stretch. We don't know what they want, until they vote, and unfortunately they didn't, so all we have is 2/3 wanted the 8th amendment repealed.

iguana

Shurimgreat wrote: »

who want abortion freely available both on the medical card or not and who want to facilitate women from Northern Ireland down here,

Loonies for wanting exactly what is most likely to happen. Ok then.:pac:

As for the over stretched healthcare system. Do you know what other healthcare system is overstretched? The NHS, but it was ok as far as no voters were concerned to keep on making them deal with women from our country. :rolleyes:

retro:electro

You just knowwww that if No had one by the majority Yes did, they’d be using the landslide as a stick to beat the rest of us into submission. Declaring it a victory of monumental proportions. Shouting from the rooftops and dampening any kind of conversation about legislating for special cases because it was such an enthusiastic disparity. Its actually hilarious to watch at this point.
The stomping feet and shaking fits and temper fits that aren’t dissimilar to Kevin the Teenager get more and more entertaining as each day passes.

Achasanai

retro:electro wrote: »

A sore loser is shunned by all, but everyone loves a winner

Philippians 2:3 ”Do nothing from rivalry and conceit, but in humility and loss count others more significant than yourselves”

We can all play the bible game hun.

I think the Didache is Graces7 preferred sacred text.

pitifulgod

Shurimgreat wrote: »

I think you overestimate the impact of these groups.
There are loonies on both sides of the campaign. On the No side you had those who are opposed to abortion full stop.
On the Yes side you have those who will no doubt in years to come push for the 12 week cutoff to be increased, who want abortion freely available both on the medical card or not and who want to facilitate women from Northern Ireland down here, putting more pressure on an already stretched healthcare service.

From speaking to some older people, they had no clue what this referendum was about save trying to stop a repeat of the Savita case. They had little or no idea there was legislation already prepared which included unrestricted abortion up to 12 weeks. Many decided not to vote because of a lack of awareness of what they were voting for.

I don't believe you. You say you met older people who didn't know about 12 weeks? That's absolute nonsense, you're trying to paint older people as confused and uninformed. In general they would make up a significant proportion of the people who watch Claire Byrne Live, Prime Time or listen to Liveline. It was discussed on all of these in detail. So either you know some of the most poorly informed older people or you've invented a man with a pint.

In addition to this. It's already been mentioned that people from the North will most likely be able to avail of abortion services here. They're citizens of Ireland as much as you or I. In addition to this, given the fact we sent a 100k + to the UK over 35 years, we can't really complain.. We should also support the most vulnerable in society, many of whom are on medical cards. Basically we shouldn't be absolute pricks to the vulnerable or those not supported at all in North. So not loony and you don't give a damn about the health service, you're using it as an excuse.

iguana

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Every day it’s something new and I can’t be arsed getting into it because at the end of the day every single no voter would end up a hypocrite if it was them or a loved one that needed an abortion.

Well for the next 40 days it's penance.
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2018/06/01/kathy-go-home/

gctest50

Shurimgreat wrote: »

..........

and who want to facilitate women from Northern Ireland down here, putting more pressure on an already stretched healthcare service.

.

First, who in their right mind would turn away a woman from Northern Ireland needing a medical/surgical procedure ?

And for the last few decades, we've put pressure on a stretched health service in Liverpool / Manchester etc - we "owe" them time

Water John

Shrum, your's is a totally unprofessional analysis of voting and related stats. It doesn't work that way.
It was an unforeseen margin, not predicted by anyone.

Fighting Tao

iguana wrote: »

Well for the next 40 days it's penance.
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2018/06/01/kathy-go-home/

NIMBYism. Sure it was grand to export abortion. No penance needed for doing so.

Graces7

Fighting Tao wrote: »

Every day it’s something new and I can’t be arsed getting into it because at the end of the day every single no voter would end up a hypocrite if it was them or a loved one that needed an abortion.

Not true. The only losers in all this are the babies being deprived of life itself , and all those who enable that .

Wrongway1985

Shurimgreat wrote: »

On the Yes side you have those who will no doubt in years to come push for the 12 week cutoff to be increased, who want abortion freely available both on the medical card or not and who want to facilitate women from Northern Ireland down here, putting more pressure on an already stretched healthcare service.

Down here?? Where do you think you are? many miles away is it? The problems with the healthcare system are irrelevant to the issue, they need to be alleviated in time sure (not Shur btw :pac:) but using that as an excuse to block services to block a portion of women just because they live up the road is of low mentality.

Our countries women were given help in other countries for years and one of your ideas is to ensure our country denies other women? Bizarre.