conchubhar1 wrote: » no a parliment and a referendum are different this is not a politics 101 class - and i know you know the difference the tds are elected every 5 years - a referendum is not a recurring item. especially not a year after the first one
dvpower wrote: » The most recent opinion polls suggest the people may have now changed their minds.
Rb wrote: » Why do you think this is? It's not because they've read the text since the last referendum, so therefore not really a valid reason to vote for the treaty. Or is it suddenly acceptable seeing as it's a "Yes"?
conchubhar1 wrote: » why would people suddenly go wait a minute lisbon was a good thing, i was blind but now i see that didnt happen, they are scared about the economy that is the reason for the change in opinions
ionix5891 wrote: » if anything the events of the last year should have reinforced the notion that we need europe and europe needs us, and that our "richness" was illusionary we even have an example now of countries not in EU or euro who follow same path as us and are now bankrupt or nearly bankrupt
conchubhar1 wrote: » we still need europe - its still there and we are still in the eu uk doesnt have the euro.... iceland crashed like we did, not because they werent in the eu
ionix5891 wrote: » how do you know that they; * didnt read the literature * visited sites like boards * read the numerous discussion or read/listened to the constant media discussions on the subject * talked about the subject in the pubs
ionix5891 wrote: if anything the events of the last year should have reinforced the notion that we need europe and europe needs us, and that our "richness" was illusionary we even have an example now of countries not in EU or euro who follow same path as us and are now bankrupt or nearly bankrupt
molloyjh wrote: » Oh sorry, so insome cases changing your mind does count and in others it doesn't. How very democratic of you.
dvpower wrote: » I say in large part due to the economic collapse; priorities have changed, people just don't want the uncertanty that rejecting Lisbon brings. Its a bit much to expect people in general to read the and try to understand the implications of the treaty. I just don't see significant numbers ever reading the treaty. That's why we need RTE and the like to analyse and report on it and politicians, unions and the like to advise on it.
Rb wrote: » I doubt it, tbh. If they didn't before voting last time, I doubt they've suddenly went out and done so now. It's not like there was a lack of information available at the time. What does this have to do with the text though? Nothing, it's quite the same as voting No to spite FF really or more accurately, voting no because you think they'll put micro-chips in our kids if it is ratified. Being afraid of the consequences shouldn't be a reason to vote in favour of (or against) the text, as the text doesn't outline consequences. The consequences of a general election and the way you vote are relevant and fair imo, but in a referendum on a text they shouldn't be a consideration. This, again, applies to both sides.
conchubhar1 wrote: » cowen said he didnt read it how is that any better than libertas lies?
ionix5891 wrote: » one can list alot of stupid reasons why people voted NO last year you be hard pressed to find stupid reasons why people voted YES the consequences are something to consider, what if Ireland didn't join the EU back in '72 and people listened to SF back then? :cool:
Rb wrote: » The recent elections have shown that apart from FF and their supporters, our country is crying out for a general election. This in itself brings uncertainty. Yet people are now in favour of a treaty they know nothing about to avoid uncertainty...some people just can't make their minds up I suppose! If it's a bit much to expect people to read and try to understand the treaty, then it's a bit much to be asking them to vote on it...which probably brings us back to the argument from another thread on voting licences!
conchubhar1 wrote: » i didnt vote no because sinn féin were voting no.. thats not to say that other didnt but others voted out of ignorance also but it was a yes vote...
conchubhar1 wrote: » but you cant say that sinn féin lied outright
molloyjh wrote: » No they just encouraged and preyed on ignorance. That's much better that is.
conchubhar1 wrote: » i question anyone to give one proper democratic reason why we are being asked to vote on a done issue. really, the irish people voted no. that should be the end of it.
Rb wrote: » Voter stupidity is a more accurate description really and is prevalent on both sides of the argument.
polishpaddy wrote: » Because were are f***ing idiots thats why,
Rb wrote: » "I voted yes to a treaty I know nothing about, or its implications for our country and its people, because my ma/my local fianna failer/ told me to" is a more stupid reason than anything I've heard from the No side tbh. As I said, voter ignorance was an immense problem on both sides, but if there is more support for a Yes now I would hazard a guess that the level of support on the side of Yes has multiplied, rather than the level of ignorance on the No side decreasing as a result of "education" and switching opinions. It's something that is very hard to back up as a lot won't even admit to it but if as Yes gets through next time, it will be a result of scare mongering and voter ignorance, not newly well educated voters on that side. The Yes side may deny this all they like, as it will suit them and their cause, but anyone with half a brain and a relatively open mind will know it holds true. I would say the immediate implications are something to consider, such as what effect could possibly have on our corporation tax rates or how the EU will behave should it go through (as we've seen they don't really respect our opinion on this, what else will they scoff at?) but thoughts of being kicked out of the Union, or being micro-chipped, are so unreasonable that they shouldn't even be considered when going to the polls.
conchubhar1 wrote: » we are being asked, because we are idiots. ok - that makes no sense.
