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; } } }

Child Item

Stop NAMA by voting No to Lisbon

Hobo Sapiens

The only practical way to stop Grand Theft NAMA is to force a general election after which a new coalition will adopt some hybrid of the FG/Labour proposals. Whatever the hybrid, it can hardly be as bad as NAMA, the FF plan to rob the PAYE taxpayer while bailing out the bankers and developers.

To force a general election, FF must lose the Lisbon vote. I am calling on Don't Knows to put the future well-being of this country before the demands of Eurocrats. The EU can continue as it is without Lisbon. But NAMA would destroy this country for generations.

Stop NAMA - vote No to Lisbon.

Find more posts tagged with

lisbon

nama

Quick Links

Comments

K-9

SkepticOne wrote: »

Moves would have to be made to have him replaced.

This could happen with a No, by another FF'er though!

SkepticOne

thebman wrote: »

Even if it did cause the government to fall (which it may not as all major parties are pushing yes except SF) then what? What about Lisbon itself, you know the thing we were actually supposed to vote on?

But it is important to consider the wider political consequences of the vote. There are plenty of other threads discussing the possible fallout of a particular Lisbon result on this forum.

Edit: Here's one:
"McCreevy: Treaty rejection could hurt nation’s image"
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055686422

squod

I don't get it either OP. In fairness there's plenty of reasons to vote no. This isn't one of them.
You do now have a golden opportunity to campaign against FF's re-election between now and the next general election though.

SkepticOne

Dinner wrote: »

So, an election where his party were being voted on (and were punished) didn't 'sufficiently' affect him. But a no vote in referendum on a treaty where all but 1 party in the dail support it would 'sufficiently affect him'?

I don't see any world where that make sense.

Let me ask you this: in what sense could he be seen to be representing Ireland in Europe after a second no result? His mandate would effectively be gone even if technically it is still there on paper. Moves would have to be made to have him replaced.

thebman

Pfft lock the topic TBH. No discussion possible. Its a stupid idea and won't achieve anything.

Even if it did cause the government to fall (which it may not as all major parties are pushing yes except SF) then what? What about Lisbon itself, you know the thing we were actually supposed to vote on?

It would be irresponsible to vote for these reasons and its irresponsible to push the agenda IMO which is why I think the topic should be locked. Not a mod obviously though

marco_polo

SkepticOne wrote: »

You think Cowen would survive a second Lisbon No?

Considering they still have a comfortable majority. Which one do you think would voluntarily jump, the party on 17% or the one on 2%?

SkepticOne

marco_polo wrote: »

Yes with both parties popularity ratings gone through the floor, and facing electoral meltdown, I am sure they will be rushing out to the electorate straight after a Lisbon defeat. :rolleyes:

This thread is starting to make me question the value of holding referendums at all. If some of the electorate here have so little respect for their vote.

You think Cowen would survive a second Lisbon No?

Dinner

SkepticOne wrote: »

Obviously it did not affect him sufficiently to threaten his position but then again I would not have expected it to. A second No in Lisbon would be different. As I have pointed out, he chose not to respect the first vote.

So, an election where his party were being voted on (and were punished) didn't 'sufficiently' affect him. But a no vote in referendum on a treaty where all but 1 party in the dail support it would 'sufficiently affect him'?

I don't see any world where that make sense.

marco_polo

Yes with both parties popularity ratings gone through the floor, and facing electoral meltdown, I am sure they will be rushing out to the electorate straight after a Lisbon defeat. :rolleyes:

This thread is starting to make me question the value of holding referendums at all. If some of the electorate here have so little respect for their vote.

SkepticOne

Dinner wrote: »

How tenable was his position after the local elections?

Obviously it did not affect him sufficiently to threaten his position but then again I would not have expected it to. A second No in Lisbon would be different. As I have pointed out, he chose not to respect the first vote.

Dinner

SkepticOne wrote: »

No, I was saying that I didn't believe his position would be tenable after a second Lisbon rejection.

How tenable was his position after the local elections?

SkepticOne

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

So you expect the man who didnt respect the first lisbon referendum (in your opinion) to willingly end this government?

No, I was saying that I didn't believe his position would be tenable after a second Lisbon rejection.

BlitzKrieg

What you've got to remember is that Cowen chose not to respect that.

So you expect the man who didnt respect the first lisbon referendum (in your opinion) to willingly end this government?

SkepticOne

Daftendirekt wrote: »

Last time I checked, Lisbon hadn't been ratified.

That's because he doesn't have the legal power to do.

Daftendirekt

SkepticOne wrote: »

The first referendum was a referendum on Lisbon. What you've got to remember is that Cowen chose not to respect that.

Last time I checked, Lisbon hadn't been ratified.

SkepticOne

Dinner wrote: »

Not a chance. All he has to is to say what some of us have been saying for a long time; It was a referendum on Lisbon, not the government.

The first referendum was a referendum on Lisbon. What you've got to remember is that Cowen chose not to respect that.

Dinner

I was very surprised when he survived an awful European and local election result. But he did.

And after that result there was no one to shift the blame on to and no reason which would be valid explanation for the performance. But he's still there.

You honestly think that if a no vote is returned that Cowen will step down?
Not a chance. All he has to is to say what some of us have been saying for a long time; It was a referendum on Lisbon, not the government. He will point to FG and Labour and say that they were in favour of it too, therefore it must have been a problem with Lisbon rather than his government.

As I said before, anybody who thinks a no vote will force a general election is kidding themselves.

Kama

Agree. A % of No will inevitably be against Cowen, whether thats right or wrong is irrelevant, politics is dirty and contagious stuff. Formally, there's no reason I know of for it to affect him, but I doubt he'd survive it myself.

SkepticOne

I would be very surprised if Cowen survived a No result.

meglome

SkepticOne wrote: »

Why do you think the government won't fail? Obviously it is not a foregone conclusion that it would fail, but I don't see how anyone could be sure that the government would survive.

I can answer with two words why it won't fail... Fianna Fail. They have long since stopped listening to anyone.

Practically speaking though nothing is impossible just very very unlikely and has never happened before. But hey it's not impossible that I'll get hit by a falling star tomorrow either.

SkepticOne

TechFreak wrote: »

OP your an foolish to think that by voting against Lisbon the government will fall.

Why do you think the government won't fail? Obviously it is not a foregone conclusion that it would fail, but I don't see how anyone could be sure that the government would survive.

the_syco

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

a new coalition

Good luck with that. As much as people hate FF, the majority of those who vote, tend to vote FF. Sure, you could have 60% of Ireland hating FF, but if only 10% of them votes, it wouldn't make much difference... As it stands, those who vote, tend to vote for FF.

Why? Because the opposition are a useless pack of ****. Maybe if FG replaced Enda with someone who had a pair of balls, who would constantly attack the government, before the f**k-ups, and not after they happen, as they do now, they'd get elected.

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

It makes even more sense to vote No because it's an obscure document yet one that,when you scan its content, reduces Ireland to being a mere outpost of a new EU state.

As opposed to an outcast?

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

If you believe that NAMA is a bad deal for the ordinary PAYE taxpayer or pensioner, then voting No to Lisbon is probably the only way to stop the government from putting the country into harm's way.

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

Stop NAMA and Vote No.

Christ all f**king mighty. Where do you come up with this tripe?

Surelite

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

The only practical way to stop Grand Theft NAMA is to force a general election after which a new coalition will adopt some hybrid of the FG/Labour proposals. Whatever the hybrid, it can hardly be as bad as NAMA, the FF plan to rob the PAYE taxpayer while bailing out the bankers and developers.

To force a general election, FF must lose the Lisbon vote. I am calling on Don't Knows to put the future well-being of this country before the demands of Eurocrats. The EU can continue as it is without Lisbon. But NAMA would destroy this country for generations.

Stop NAMA - vote No to Lisbon.

This is the most ridiculous thing i've ever heard!!!!
Voting no will NOT STOP NAMA.

Nama is needed to stabilise the countrys financial system - free up credit in the banks so they can start lending to businesses again, start employing people again and get our economy back into growth.

GROW UP! - We need to do whatever it takes to fix our country!

marco_polo

greendom wrote: »

Cure cancer, aids and ensure peace throughout the World - Vote No to Lisbon.

Sorry, but I love cake so its a yes for me. :pac:

TechFreak

Lisbon and NAMA are totaly seperate.

OP your an foolish to think that by voting against Lisbon the government will fall.

You obviously have no understanding of either topic and are just looking for attention

Sam Vimes

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

The reality of Lisbon is that it would mean the end of Ireland's sovereignty.

re·al·i·ty (r-l-t)
n. pl. re·al·i·ties
1. The quality or state of being actual or true.

Nope, doesn't match the definition of reality

greendom

Cure cancer, aids and ensure peace throughout the World - Vote No to Lisbon.

Scofflaw

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

This thread is not particularly aimed at the unquestioning Yessir who cannot fathom why anybody would vote No. I am appealing to Boarders who have sincere doubts about Lisbon to consider the likelihood that a No vote will trigger a general election and thus stop NAMA.

The reality of Lisbon is that it would mean the end of Ireland's sovereignty. The issue of sovereignty is ignored by the big parties and the mainstream media who see Lisbon an opportunity to become well-paid apparatchiks of an EU federal state (or 'empire', as Barroso admitted in 2007). The responsible No voter is more interested in freedom and integrity than cosy cartels and irresponsibility.

Whether the defeat of Lisbon will trigger a general election is impossible to predict but I find it hard to see the government surviving a second No to Lisbon.

There's a lot of irony in referring to Rb as "an unquestioning Yessir".

Are you here to explain and discuss how voting no to Lisbon has anything to do with NAMA, or are you just here to keep repeating the same point over and over?

cordially,
Scofflaw

meglome

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

This thread is not particularly aimed at the unquestioning Yessir who cannot fathom why anybody would vote No. I am appealing to Boarders who have sincere doubts about Lisbon to consider the likelihood that a No vote will trigger a general election and thus stop NAMA.

I think you're mixing two different things up. There are people in here who are voting Yes or No who have carefully reasoned why they will. I may not agree with all of them them but I will certainly respect their decision. On the other hand there are people who come in with bull**** NWO type conspiracy theory reasons and wonder why most of the rest of us don't agree with them. Then, more often than not, will insult us for not agreeing with them. I will listen to anyone who comes in here with logical reasons (with proper references) to vote Yes or No. But irrational/paranoid bull**** will still be irrational/paranoid bull****.

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

The reality of Lisbon is that it would mean the end of Ireland's sovereignty. The issue of sovereignty is ignored by the big parties and the mainstream media who see Lisbon an opportunity to become well-paid apparatchiks of an EU federal state (or 'empire', as Barroso admitted in 2007). The responsible No voter is more interested in freedom and integrity than cosy cartels and irresponsibility.

Here's the thing, the No campaign have been saying this since before we joined the EU in 1973 and they are still saying it. Just how many times do they think they can roll out the same lines and we are going to believe them? You have nothing sensible to back up your assertion we are losing our sovereignty (it such a thing really exists to begin with).

Hobo Sapiens wrote: »

Whether the defeat of Lisbon will trigger a general election is impossible to predict but I find it hard to see the government surviving a second No to Lisbon.

How many times has this happened in the past? That would be none in case you're wondering. So I find it hard to believe that you find it hard to believe.

Hobo Sapiens

Rb wrote: »

I notice the OP didn't even bother looking at the replies, and just came out with more BS with no grounding in reality.

Click

This thread is not particularly aimed at the unquestioning Yessir who cannot fathom why anybody would vote No. I am appealing to Boarders who have sincere doubts about Lisbon to consider the likelihood that a No vote will trigger a general election and thus stop NAMA.

The reality of Lisbon is that it would mean the end of Ireland's sovereignty. The issue of sovereignty is ignored by the big parties and the mainstream media who see Lisbon an opportunity to become well-paid apparatchiks of an EU federal state (or 'empire', as Barroso admitted in 2007). The responsible No voter is more interested in freedom and integrity than cosy cartels and irresponsibility.

Whether the defeat of Lisbon will trigger a general election is impossible to predict but I find it hard to see the government surviving a second No to Lisbon.