United Ireland Poll - please vote

Barry904 wrote: »

I see there is no answer to my question of why the partitionists and unionists are so scared of a referendum when they seem so certain the poll of a few hundred people is as good as fact?

Tbh I wouldn't want a poll now in case it would pass. There is literally no clear picture of what a united ireland would look like, what a transition would be like, how much it would cost, who would pay for it. Every single person who voted yes to a united ireland would have a different idea in their head of what that means.

Brexit was run on a vague promise of "taking back the country" - it was nonsense and I would hope Irish people north and south wouldn't sleepwalk into a similar scenario without having a fairly clear idea of what the outcome would look like

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

Tbh I wouldn't want a poll now in case it would pass. There is literally no clear picture of what a united ireland would look like, what a transition would be like, how much it would cost, who would pay for it. Every single person who voted yes to a united ireland would have a different idea in their head of what that means.

No-one wants a poll now.

There's almost a Beckettian quality to how Partitionists go on about a border poll:
They don't want one because we haven't prepared for it while also telling us that we shouldn't prepare for it because no one wants it while also telling us that in fact it us, those in favour of a UI that actually fear it and don't want it.

Brexit was run on a vague promise of "taking back the country" - it was nonsense and I would hope Irish people north and south wouldn't sleepwalk into a similar scenario without having a fairly clear idea of what the outcome would look like

There's literally no reason to think we would. I mean, did ye all have amnesia as to how we run referenda here?

Since the ill-fated Brexit Omnishambles in 2016 we've had three constitutional referenda including one on the 8th Amendment don't forget.

We'll handle the run up to a referendum just fine.

Barry904 wrote: »

I see there is no answer to my question of why the partitionists and unionists are so scared of a referendum when they seem so certain the poll of a few hundred people is as good as fact?

Don't think they are scared of a border poll, just want to see the GFA respected. Those calling for a border poll now are the ones disrespecting the GFA.

FileNotFound wrote: »

This is a funny comment.

They would be welcome to join the Republic or leave their homes. Sounding like the Brits now...

It's not actually funny.

It isn't that long ago that a poster on here was proposing a relocation programme akin to something from Cromwell's or Hitler's time.

It was claimed it would be "voluntary".

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Want to point out where you're seeing this?
This is the second time I've asked you.

A whole heap of posters on here claiming a referendum isn't needed in the South.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

We don't know. We can't possibly know, but we can use our brains to figure out that things WILL change. It's a bit obvious that in the event of a NI: YES and ROI: NO that things will get, messy.

The ROI couldn't possibly continue as is. How are you guys so politically naive?

The ROI would continue as is, Northern Ireland would leave the UK, become independent, and hopefully join the EU.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Explain to me how you think a NO vote in this State after a Yes vote in the North doesn't have negative impacts?

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Y
You want to make concessions to people so they don't get violent in the event of a consensual democratic vote

I think I am beginning to understand your position. In the event of a NO vote down South, the republican movement will target the Southern State, because they don't accept a consensual democratic vote, is that it?

blanch152 wrote: »

A whole heap of posters on here claiming a referendum isn't needed in the South.

I don't think that's the case.

Care to link me to these posts. Shouldn't be hard, there's heaps of them.

blanch152 wrote: »

The ROI would continue as is, Northern Ireland would leave the UK, become independent, and hopefully join the EU.

Is that so?

So you're just gonna make stuff up now is it?

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Is that so?

So you're just gonna make stuff up now is it?

Well, the North will have voted to leave the UK, and opt for unification. If unification is off the agenda because the South rejects it, then the only option is independence. It takes two to make a marriage, unless you are in favour of gunshot weddings.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I don't think that's the case.

Care to link me to these posts. Shouldn't be hard, there's heaps of them.

Check out Francie's many posts on the subject.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Explain to me how you think a NO vote in this State after a Yes vote in the North doesn't have negative impacts?

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Y

You want to make concessions to people so they don't get violent in the event of a consensual democratic vote on reunification.

blanch152 wrote: »

I think I am beginning to understand your position. In the event of a NO vote down South, the republican movement will target the Southern State, because they don't accept a consensual democratic vote, is that it?

---

That's a serious level of disingenuous editing. And the subsequent hot-take?

Are you actually for real?

---

There's no way you can have a debate or a discussion with you at the best of times, but when you approach this discussion in this fashion, then to me anyway, it's quite clear you have no intention of even remotely trying to act in good faith.

Absolutely abysmal conduct.

blanch152 wrote: »

Check out Francie's many posts on the subject.

Absolutely not. You made a statement and I asked you to back it up. The onus is on you buddy.

I can ask for a fifth time if you want?

blanch152 wrote: »

Well, the North will have voted to leave the UK, and opt for unification. If unification is off the agenda because the South rejects it, then the only option is independence. It takes two to make a marriage, unless you are in favour of gunshot weddings.

What's the point with engaging with you?

droidman123 wrote: »

No problem,could you give a rough outline of what concessions would/should be given to unionists in the event of a u.i.?

I assume the unionists would want the right to do their summer walk abouts enshrined. Unless of course they can be classified as the same as a paddys day parade. A government would be expected to recognise heritage that many of us have little time for.

Then given that such things cannot be geo locked, we may see orange men march in Dublin.

Then I feel that unionist parties would seek to find a victory in defeat as something to sell to their fan base (to save themselves).

Mind you I could be way off the mark.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

No-one wants a poll now.

There's almost a Beckettian quality to how Partitionists go on about a border poll:
They don't want one because we haven't prepared for it while also telling us that we shouldn't prepare for it because no one wants it while also telling us that in fact it us, those in favour of a UI that actually fear it and don't want it.

There's literally no reason to think we would. I mean, did ye all have amnesia as to how we run referenda here?

Since the ill-fated Brexit Omnishambles in 2016 we've had three constitutional referenda including one on the 8th Amendment don't forget.

We'll handle the run up to a referendum just fine.

My post was in the context of the previous post

But you are right of course - I've no doubt we will have a decent run up to the campaign where all camps will get their say before any vote. But in those other referendums there were many debates on the pros and cons long before a referendum was called. Lots of people here and elsewhere are staunchly in favour of a united ireland but nobody can actually clarify what it might look like or what a transition would look like. Nobody needs permission to begin outlining their vision for what a ui would look like

FileNotFound wrote: »

I assume the unionists would want the right to do their summer walk abouts enshrined. Unless of course they can be classified as the same as a paddys day parade. A government would be expected to recognise heritage that many of us have little time for.

Then given that such things cannot be geo locked, we may see orange men march in Dublin.

Then I feel that unionist parties would seek to find a victory in defeat as something to sell to their fan base (to save themselves).

Mind you I could be way off the mark.

Wait, did you just come up with the idea of a Parades Commission? Genius!

BonnieSituation wrote: »

What's the point with engaging with you?

Still waiting for an example of how the south will change in th event of a No vote.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

---

That's a serious level of disingenuous editing. And the subsequent hot-take?

Are you actually for real?

---

There's no way you can have a debate or a discussion with you at the best of times, but when you approach this discussion in this fashion, then to me anyway, it's quite clear you have no intention of even remotely trying to act in good faith.

Absolutely abysmal conduct.

You have refused to answer a simple question as to the negative effects on the South of a NO vote, when the North votes YES. Your references to violence and refusal to accept a democratic vote in another context offer the only clue to your thought process, but it would be very easy for you to clear this up by coming clean as to what you mean.

Claiming to want an honest debate while refusing to elaborate on a contestable statement is not engaging in good faith.

[Deleted User]

Presume the election of Poots brings a UI another step closer.
It shows up unionism yet again, a well known homophobe being elected its leader, really crazy stuff. Surely most unionists are going to defect away from that party soon, hopefully a lot go to Alliance.

StupidLikeAFox wrote: »

My post was in the context of the previous post

But you are right of course - I've no doubt we will have a decent run up to the campaign where all camps will get their say before any vote. But in those other referendums there were many debates on the pros and cons long before a referendum was called. Lots of people here and elsewhere are staunchly in favour of a united ireland but nobody can actually clarify what it might look like or what a transition would look like. Nobody needs permission to begin outlining their vision for what a ui would look like

So you're suggesting we start having that debate and not have it shut down y those who are afraid of what a UI may bring?

Not a us on a message board, but an open debate involving politicians etc perhaps?

Some sort of New Ireland Commission perhaps?

https://www.derryjournal.com/news/people/sdlp-launch-new-ireland-commission-today-with-new-expert-panel-announced-3226152

FileNotFound wrote: »

Still waiting for an example of how the south will change in th event of a No vote.

I can't help you if you can't help yourself.

If you don't see how there will be upheaval in the event of a "ROI: NO, NI: YES" event, then there's not much hope.

But you came up with the Parades Commission idea. So that's something.

Next you'll be telling us about Orange Lodges in Ballsbridge and Orange parades in Rossnowlagh!

[Deleted User]

I think it’s great that there is debate already about how the South would have to accommodate unionists.
Never heard any debate about acknowledging Irish nationalism with a replacement to the UK flag for example, even now the unionists won’t back the Irish language. This is part of why partition failed, and it looks like lessons have been learned outside the unionist community.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I can't help you if you can't help yourself.

If you don't see how there will be upheaval in the event of a "ROI: NO, NI: YES" event, then there's not much hope.

There are at least two of us who fail to understand what your great mind is conceiving as a negative outcome of a ROI: NO, NI: YES event, so maybe you would explain it in simple terms so we can understand.

You wouldn't be suggesting a return to violence by those rejecting a democratic vote, would you?

blanch152 wrote: »

You have refused to answer a simple question as to the negative effects on the South of a NO vote, when the North votes YES.

Come on? Really. You see it just all going back to normal the next day do ya?

We'll chalk up to learning and we'll forget all about that little Reunification referendum that failed there yesterday?

Your references to violence and refusal to accept a democratic vote in another context offer the only clue to your thought process,

Please point these out in full. Thank you.

but it would be very easy for you to clear this up by coming clean as to what you mean.

What's the question?

Claiming to want an honest debate while refusing to elaborate on a contestable statement is not engaging in good faith.

Says the guy willingly taking post after post out of context and then setting up strawman after strawman and then when that's not enough he quotes and edits posts to just blatantly make up lies.

Oh to type what I'm thinking right now.

---

You've been asked FIVE times to show were "Republicans" as you've called them, have said they don't want a referendum.

You've some gall to be going around accusing me of refusing to answer anything.

blanch152 wrote: »

There are at least two of us who fail to understand what your great mind is conceiving as a negative outcome of a ROI: NO, NI: YES event, so maybe you would explain it in simple terms so we can understand.

You wouldn't be suggesting a return to violence by those rejecting a democratic vote, would you?

How can you possibly be so naïve to think that the State, as founded can go on the next day after ROI: NO, NI: YES happens go on as normal like nothing happened, without any consequences?

No idea why you obsess over violence. Is that all you know? Or do you mean, violence that you would approve of?

There might be a situation alright. Is that the right word for this?

I can't predict exactly what will happen, but it's almost a certainty that in this scenario occurring there's going to be issues for a Republic founded on the ideal of reunification, rejecting one of its founding principles.

How could it not?

How could there not be problems?

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I can't help you if you can't help yourself.

If you don't see how there will be upheaval in the event of a "ROI: NO, NI: YES" event, then there's not much hope.

But you came up with the Parades Commission idea. So that's something.

Next you'll be telling us about Orange Lodges in Ballsbridge and Orange parades in Rossnowlagh!

Another hollow response.

You can do better than that?

You clearly stated the Republic would have changes in the case of a No vote in the South. I just ask you to name 1 of them. Surely a simple task for someone so well informed.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

How can you possibly be so naïve to think that the State, as founded can go on the next day after ROI: NO, NI: YES happens go on as normal like nothing happened, without any consequences?

No idea why you obsess over violence. Is that all you know? Or do you mean, violence that you would approve of?

There might be a situation alright. Is that the right word for this?

I can't predict exactly what will happen, but it's almost a certainty that in this scenario occurring there's going to be issues for a Republic founded on the ideal of reunification, rejecting one of its founding principles.

How could it not?

How could there not be problems?

You are of the opinion that there will be problems in the event of a ROI: NO, NI: YES but you are being very evasive in what those problems entail. Cmon, stop playing hard to get, what are you insinuating here?

BonnieSituation wrote: »

How can you possibly be so naïve to think that the State, as founded can go on the next day after ROI: NO, NI: YES happens go on as normal like nothing happened, without any consequences?

No idea why you obsess over violence. Is that all you know? Or do you mean, violence that you would approve of?

There might be a situation alright. Is that the right word for this?

I can't predict exactly what will happen, but it's almost a certainty that in this scenario occurring there's going to be issues for a Republic founded on the ideal of reunification, rejecting one of its founding principles.

How could it not?

How could there not be problems?

So now your providing hollow reponses to a few people asking the same simple question.

Come on now. Be a team player.