Lisbon vote October 2nd - How do you intend to vote?

WeeBushy wrote: »

Just as voting No to get back at the government is or isn't a good use of your vote?

I hope that was just a typo

Yes meant to say Just as voting No to get back at government is a not a good use of one!

WeeBushy

bayviewclose wrote: »

Yes meant to say Just as voting No to get back at government is a not a good use of one!

Order has been restored

meglome wrote: »

Do you even believe this rubbish?

One thing I do think is James Connolly would be incredibly angry about the bull**** being spouted in his name.

Yes that particular poster I think you are referring to really annoys me. For a particular group to be speaking for a group of individuals who are long gone just defeats their argument.
In saying that I expect the 1916 proclamation to come more into focus as the 100th anniversary draws nearer.
And I hope the principles are not hijacked by people to serve their own interests. But that discussion is for another day.

Anyone who voted 'yes' the last time, should be embarrassed to admit that they will vote 'yes' again. How convenient that you get a second bite at the cherry! Shame on you! If you voted 'yes' the first time, and are voting 'no' this time - respect! I'll try not to get into the pros and cons of the whole Lisbon thing, and just stick to the basic principle what should happen when democracy is exercised.

If we are a normal and morally flush society, the second referendum should be an even more resounding 'no' than the first. If one bothers to partake in the democratic process, by default, you probably have an an appreciation of how it should work and have a respect for the individuals right to vote.

So why would you not respect the process that you already partook in, even if you lost? If someone says, "lets' put it to a vote", shouldn't the show of hands be the, 'end of'. Isn't it the clearest indicator of mass will? That's all anybody asks for. If it's not democratic, what is it?

Democracy should be about mutual respect of peoples rights to express their views through a vote. Let's try the shoe on the other foot. How'dya like them apples? It stinks doesn't it, when your democratic expression gets trampled on. That's what is happening to the 'no' voter.

I respect anyones right to their opinion, and if the I was a 'yes' voter last time out, I would have to vote 'no' this time out of respect for the process that many citizens of many countries still today, die for.

So 'yes' voters, why are you so special?

It can't be said enough times how ludicrous it is to have a second referendum. It's not a kids party, and we're not voting between chocolate-cake and banana-bread, to then given a second vote because little Timmy is bawling because he was on the losing side - "ah, but look at Timmy. All the other kids are well-behaved and Timmy is just crying louder than anyone else. Can't y'all be the bigger man, and give the crying child what we wants".

Lets' stand together as a nation, and respect ourselves. If the 'yes' vote comes through in October, I leave to the 'yes' voters to piece together the shards of our dignity left scattered on the European floor. We'll just try and win their hearts by trying harder for the Eurovision Song Contest. Let's wear that court-jester costume that we returned to the fancy-dress shop in Lisbon 1.

Addendum:
And don't give me, "we got our legal assurances". Do you even know what a 'legal assurance' is? Let's look at that:

legal
adjective

Relating to the law or to lawyers, as in legal profession.
Something which has a basis in the law, such as legal precedent.

assurance
noun

The act of assuring; a declaration tending to inspire full confidence; that which is designed to give confidence.

So now we know the meanings of the words, but when we put them together, don't they kind of sound benign?

Well ladies and gentlemen, I give you your 'legal assurance' at 0:13:

“We did not strive to get out of that (British) domination to get into a worse one.” Eamon De Valera

oh come on! a link to Fox News video this is really becoming fun

Gordon Brown and his party have less credibility by this stage than FF probably

oh and hello there new member

welcome to boards > politics > European Union

It can't be said enough times how ludicrous it is to have a second referendum.

liek we never had them before here :rolleyes:

whats the problem? if the people want to vote NO again then that will be that Lisbon will end up dead in water

if it bothers you so much that we are being asked to vote on treaty + changes resulting out of out last vote

then go ahead and lodge your vote, but remember that you are wasting your vote by not voting on issues in the treaty itself

/

ei.sdraob wrote: »

oh come on! a link to Fox News video this is really becoming fun

Gordon Brown and his party have less credibility by this stage than FF probably

oh and hello there new member welcome to boards > politics > European Union

It matters not who's camera was there. I'm assume being facetious about calling Sky News, Fox News. And you're right, they're both bastard children of Murdoch, but it goes to show that someone telling porkies. And our lot, (any of them) are Walter Mitty clones.

But my main point is the respect of democracy.

Aiyic wrote: »

It matters not who's camera was there. I'm assume being facetious about calling Sky News, Fox News. And you're right, they're both bastard children of Murdoch, but it goes to show that someone telling porkies. And our lot, (any of them) are Walter Mitty clones.

But my main point is the respect of democracy.

I think what is more important that assurances are honoured. And from this link below it seems that any assurances given to irish still have to be ratified by all member states

http://www.poptel.org.uk/against-eurofederalism/d114psteustmnt.html

Aiyic wrote: »

It matters not who's camera was there. I'm assume being facetious about calling Sky News, Fox News. And you're right, they're both bastard children of Murdoch, but it goes to show that someone telling porkies. And our lot, (any of them) are Walter Mitty clones.

But my main point is the respect of democracy.

Murdoch gives no **** about democracy

he hates the EU as its the only entity that can put an end to his dodgy business practices and monopolies

He tru his media does everything to discredit the EU despite the EU doing more good for the people of Europe than Murdoch's empire ever did

and yes Sky news = Faux News = Fox news, hell they even have same presenters now and share coverage (recession ha!)

Hockney

I'm voting No to see if they'll run it a 3rd time!

The 3rd Annual Montgomery Burns Treaty For Outstanding Achievement In The Field Of Excellence - Now With MORE Guarantees!

Hockney wrote: »

I'm voting No to see if they'll run it a 3rd time!

The 3rd Annual Montgomery Burns Treaty For Outstanding Achievement In The Field Of Excellence - Now With MORE Guarantees!

Yes a lot of posters up. Not as many faces being put up this time round.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Murdoch gives no **** about democracy

he hates the EU as its the only entity that can put an end to his dodgy business practices and monopolies

He tru his media does everything to discredit the EU despite the EU doing more good for the people of Europe than Murdoch's empire ever did

and yes Sky news = Faux News = Fox news, hell they even have same presenters now and share coverage (recession ha!)

I couldn't give a toss about Murdoch, but he has nothing to do with what I said originally. And it's way off topic to go on about him. I'm more concerned with this countries 'leader's' inability to listen to it's people. When does the phrase, "the people have spoken", actually carry any weight, and provide closure?

Thanks for the welcome!

But if you think a special exception is being mad for Ireland, think again. Why would they?

Hockney wrote: »

I'm voting No to see if they'll run it a 3rd time!

The 3rd Annual Montgomery Burns Treaty For Outstanding Achievement In The Field Of Excellence - Now With MORE Guarantees!

That is (unfortunately) not beyond the bounds of possibility.:(

Aiyic wrote: »

I couldn't give a toss about Murdoch, but he has nothing to do with what I said originally. And it's way off topic to go on about him. I'm more concerned with this countries 'leader's' inability to listen to it's people. When does the phrase, "the people have spoken", actually carry any weight, and provide closure?

Thanks for the welcome!

But if you think a special exception is being mad for Ireland, think again. Why would they?

Well reason treaty is being re-run is because it needs to be ratified by all member states.
When you think about it, the same people who voted last time will vote this time.
But what matters and I have said is before that people are absolutely sure that the guarentees put in place hold up in court.

K-9

bayviewclose wrote: »

I think what is more important that assurances are honoured. And from this link below it seems that any assurances given to irish still have to be ratified by all member states

http://www.poptel.org.uk/against-eurofederalism/d114psteustmnt.html

Ah, Mr. Bonde!

Aiyic wrote: »

"the people have spoken", actually carry any weight, and provide closure?

ah yes the people have spoken "issue"

the people have voted in FF! thats it no more elections!! lets welcome our new "incapable" and "corrupt" overlords

seriously how about you start reading here > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

you will notice that the ability to vote is the corner stone of democracy

you are proposing we remove that ability since "the people have spoken" and the people dont change their minds right? :cool:

marco_polo

bayviewclose wrote: »

I think what is more important that assurances are honoured. And from this link below it seems that any assurances given to irish still have to be ratified by all member states

http://www.poptel.org.uk/against-eurofederalism/d114psteustmnt.html

Yes but you do realise that the link is written by Jens-Peter Bonde. Abould as credible as Anthony Coughlans 13 points. The flawed legal reasoning which has been repeated ad nauseum elsewhere has been debunked over and over again.

Does anyone know if a cross, silver bullets or garlic are effective at killing No campaign lies? Because facts seem to have no effect :rolleyes:.

RandomName2

ei.sdraob wrote: »

ah yes the people have spoken "issue"

the people have voted in FF! thats it no more elections!! lets welcome our new "incapable" and "corrupt" overlords

FF doesn't get voted in. FF immediately calls for another general election. And they get it. As fast as it can be humanly organised (15 months later). AND they funnel the public's money into their campaign to futher their own ends. And they makes threats concerning the reprecussions of FF not being in government.

Cornerstone of democracy people!

marco_polo wrote: »

Yes but you do realise that the link is written by Jens-Peter Bonde. Abould as credible as Anthony Coughlans 13 points. The flawed legal reasoning which has been repeated ad nauseum elsewhere has been debunked over and over again.

Does anyone know if a cross, silver bullets or garlic are effective at killing No campaign lies? Because facts seem to have no effect :rolleyes:.

Are you saying everyone on No Campaign are telling lies?

Galwaybuzz

I'll voting yes, but i'm still pretty worried about the future, the way i see it is..we screwed with it and we're screwed without it!!!

oscarBravo

RandomName2 wrote: »

AND they funnel the public's money into their campaign to futher their own ends.

Are you suggesting the government has illegally used public funds to promote a "yes" vote?

marco_polo

bayviewclose wrote: »

Are you saying everyone on No Campaign are telling lies?

No, I am saying that Anthony Coughlan has published a list of 13 mistruths, and Mr Blonde (who is a good friend of the former) has produced another one in the afformentioned link.

All of these have been thoroughly debunked by numerous different sources time and time again, and yet keep getting reinserted over and over again into the debate, by good folk such as yourself.

Is that clear enough?

Galwaybuzz

As for the No Campaigners, i don't know about them telling lies, but they are manipulating people, especially myself as a young voter, i had initially heard more pros than cons of giving a Yes vote ,then one day on my way into town, i saw a big Coir poster staing that if one did vote YES, we would have a minimum wage of 1.84eruo, that is crazy!!!! I atomatically thought, wtf, but eventually i got that issue cleared up and i am still going to vote Yes!!!

AuRevoir

Galwaybuzz wrote: »

As for the No Campaigners, i don't know about them telling lies, but they are manipulating people, especially myself as a young voter, i had initially heard more pros than cons of giving a Yes vote ,then one day on my way into town, i saw a big Coir poster staing that if one did vote YES, we would have a minimum wage of 1.84eruo, that is crazy!!!! I atomatically thought, wtf, but eventually i got that issue cleared up and i am still going to vote Yes!!!

...As for the Yes Campaigners, I don't know about them telling lies, but they are manipulating people, especially myself as a young voter, I had initially heard more cons than pros of giving a Yes vote, then one day on my way into town, I saw a big poster of Fianna Fáil which said 'Yes for the economy.' I just stood back in disbelief, absolutely amazed at what I saw. Could this actually be the exact same Fianna Fáil who have put our economy in such jeopardy.. I automatically thought, wtf, but eventually i got that issue cleared up and i am still going to vote No!!!;)

RandomName2

oscarBravo wrote: »

Are you suggesting the government has illegally used public funds to promote a "yes" vote?

Not illegally, they can do what they want with our money, can't they? Sure, they were elected at some stage...

Vote Yes for the economy? Could have used the money they spent on those posters on the same economy that they have so neglected as of late.

Will we be voting electronically on October 2nd or are FF still paying the storage fees for the e-voting machines?

AuRevoir wrote: »

...As for the Yes Campaigners, I don't know about them telling lies, but they are manipulating people, especially myself as a young voter, I had initially heard more cons than pros of giving a Yes vote, then one day on my way into town, I saw a big poster of Fianna Fáil which said 'Yes for the economy.' I just stood back in disbelief, absolutely amazed at what I saw. Could this actually be the exact same Fianna Fáil who have put our economy in such jeopardy.. I automatically thought, wtf, but eventually i got that issue cleared up and i am still going to vote No!!!;)

FF dont have a say (thankfully) in the running of the European economy

remember this is a treaty on Europe

i also have a story i went into town and seen a poster from SF, the same people who opposed every single eu treaty up to and including joining the EU

ei.sdraob wrote: »

ah yes the people have spoken "issue"

the people have voted in FF! thats it no more elections!! lets welcome our new "incapable" and "corrupt" overlords

seriously how about you start reading here > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy

you will notice that the ability to vote is the corner stone of democracy

you are proposing we remove that ability since "the people have spoken" and the people dont change their minds right? :cool:

Yes. I am proposing that democracy is outlawed. That's why I wrote about the democratic expression being trampled on.

Yes, twist my words. "the people have spoken", so we should never have democratic process again!!

Is that what you extrapolated from what I said.

RandomName2 wrote: »

with our money, can't they? Sure, they were elected at some stage...

Vote Yes for the economy? Could have used the money they spent on those posters on the same economy that they have so neglected as of late.

what money has FF taken from taxpayers (me) and used on posters?

show me the money as they say!

Aiyic wrote: »

Yes. I am proposing that democracy is outlawed. That's why I wrote about the democratic expression being trampled on.

Yes, twist my words. "the people have spoken", so we should never have democratic process again!!

Is that what you extrapolated from what I said.

please answer

is it undemocratic to vote on an issue that has changed to address the concerns of the people

RandomName2

ei.sdraob wrote: »

what money has FF taken from taxpayers (me) and used on posters?

show me the money as they say!

Look at last weeks Sunday Times. Page 2.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

please answer

is it undemocratic to vote on an issue that has changed to address the concerns of the people

It is undemocractic to not respect a referendum. Re-run the referendum as soon as possible without ANY changes. Not give ANY guarantees that the second referendum would be respected (quote Cowen 'I will not even contemplate a second defeat') and then make threats that Ireland would be chucked out of the EU if there is a second No vote.

K-9

Galwaybuzz wrote: »

As for the No Campaigners, i don't know about them telling lies, but they are manipulating people, especially myself as a young voter, i had initially heard more pros than cons of giving a Yes vote ,then one day on my way into town, i saw a big Coir poster staing that if one did vote YES, we would have a minimum wage of 1.84eruo, that is crazy!!!! I atomatically thought, wtf, but eventually i got that issue cleared up and i am still going to vote Yes!!!

They prey on fears, the minimum wage relating to immigration etc.

Just seen nuclear power being used in another thread. Hadn't seen that one this time, until today.