Gardai Investigating Voter-Registration promo

ardmacha · 25-04-2015 08:44PM

Apart from the obvious issues here, there has to be a question as to whether having trained Gardai sitting a table registering voters is a good use of police time and whether some other public officials could not do this job and let the Gardai investigate crime.

Little CuChulainn · 25-04-2015 08:49PM

ardmacha wrote: »

Apart from the obvious issues here, there has to be a question as to whether having trained Gardai sitting a table registering voters is a good use of police time and whether some other public officials could not do this job and let the Gardai investigate crime.

These things are being outsourced bit by bit. The Age Card, motor tax and driving licence have all been outsourced, reducing the amount of involvement Gardaí have with them. Things like this will probably follow the same route.

evolving_doors · 25-04-2015 09:08PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

It's not my position, it's the way it is. No affiliation with political parties or secret societies. It's in the oath Gardaí take.

Ok we're getting somehwere now. You accept that the gardai are supposed to be apolitical then.

I think you might be associating the term 'political' with just the general elections/european elections and council elections..

hence your acceptance that it's OK for the gardai to associate with a particular side in a referendum as you don't see that as political. i beg to differ however.

See the definition of political:

"of or relating to the government or public affairs of a country".

So you can take it from that that 'public affairs' would refer to referenda also.

As the gardai are supposed to be apoliticial therefore, they should NOT be associating with particular sides or both (through promotions/photocalls/canvassing etc).

It's in the oath they take.

Little CuChulainn · 25-04-2015 09:19PM

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Ok we're getting somehwere now. You accept that the gardai are supposed to be apolitical then.

I think you might be associating the term 'political' with just the general elections/european elections and council elections..

hence your acceptance that it's OK for the gardai to associate with a particular side in a referendum as you don't see that as political. i beg to differ however.

See the definition of political:

"of or relating to the government or public affairs of a country".

So you can take it from that that 'public affairs' would refer to referenda also.

As the gardai are supposed to be apoliticial therefore, they should NOT be associating with particular sides or both (through promotions/photocalls/canvassing etc).

It's in the oath they take.

I'm not sure if you are genuinely unable to comprehend my posts or if you are just trolling at this stage. I'll try lay it out one more time. I believe that the Gardaí can be apolitical by being all inclusive, or in simpler terms, facilitating any groups which requests their assistance in a professional capacity. In this case that means signing registration forms for people who wish to be added to the supplementary register.

This would not apply to political parties because the oath specifically forbids affiliation with them. I'm well aware that you disagree with me but it appears you don't understand exactly what we are in disagreement about.

evolving_doors · 25-04-2015 10:54PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

I'm not sure if you are genuinely unable to comprehend my posts or if you are just trolling at this stage.

No I think your thinking is simply illogical. I'm not sure if you are genuinely able to understand logic or you are just using the troll word as a deflection.

Here is a summation of your positions in bullet point:

Tell me at least one point you wouldn't agree with.

1. You are in favour of the Op's incident of a garda appearing in a photocall organised by Yes Equality with a Judge who is Promoting the same side.
2. You believe this photocall was purely for registration purposes and not for the promotion of one particular side.
3. Extending this further to your 'all inclusive' approach: If any side organises a 'voting registration' drive with a garda in tow you are happy that the garda present is impartial and they are there simply to sign the forms.
4. If a side is specifically canvassing say a No vote during these 'voting registration' initiatives you are fine that a garda is present and supporting this by their presence.
5. You are fully aware that the garda present is facilitating the garnering of votes for a particular side as that's what the purpose if canvassing is.
6. You draw a distinction between a referendum and a general election.
7. A garda would not be acting apolitically (as is their remit) by " facilitating any groups which requests their assistance in a professional capacity " for a general election. i.e. if they set up a 'voter registration' desk outside the Fianna Fail Ard Fheis.
8. A garda would be acting apolitically (as is their remit) by " facilitating any groups which requests their assistance in a professional capacity " for a general referendum. i.e. if they set up a 'voter registration' desk outside the headquarters of say the Iona institute.
9. You accept the definition of political as "of or relating to the government or public affairs of a country".
10 You accept that a referendum is a "public affair of the country".
11.By the gardai being 'all inclusive' you understand that this means they must be fair to both sides.
12. By being equally fair to both sides, a garda (community garda is your preference) must travel to anywhere where there is a voter registration drive. It doesn't matter to you or the guard if canvassing for one side only is taking place at these voter registration drives.

You don't have to respond to all those points. I just contend that you agree with all of them from reading your posts.

So at the very least pick one you don't agree with. If you agree with them all then just say so and I'll point out the contradiction in your position.

Little CuChulainn · 25-04-2015 11:09PM

Gebgbegb wrote: »

No I think your thinking is simply illogical. I'm not sure if you are genuinely able to understand logic or you are just using the troll word as a deflection.

Here is a summation of your positions in bullet point:

Tell me at least one point you wouldn't agree with.

1. You are in favour of the Op's incident of a garda appearing in a photocall organised by Yes Equality with a Judge who is Promoting the same side.
2. You believe this photocall was purely for registration purposes and not for the promotion of one particular side.
3. Extending this further to your 'all inclusive' approach: If any side organises a 'voting registration' drive with a garda in tow you are happy that the garda present is impartial and they are there simply to sign the forms.
4. If a side is specifically canvassing say a No vote during these 'voting registration' initiatives you are fine that a garda is present and supporting this by their presence.
5. You are fully aware that the garda present is facilitating the garnering of votes for a particular side as that's what the purpose if canvassing is.
6. You draw a distinction between a referendum and a general election.
7. A garda would not be acting apolitically (as is their remit) by " facilitating any groups which requests their assistance in a professional capacity " for a general election. i.e. if they set up a 'voter registration' desk outside the Fianna Fail Ard Fheis.
8. A garda would be acting apolitically (as is their remit) by " facilitating any groups which requests their assistance in a professional capacity " for a general referendum. i.e. if they set up a 'voter registration' desk outside the headquarters of say the Iona institute.
9. You accept the definition of political as "of or relating to the government or public affairs of a country".
10 You accept that a referendum is a "public affair of the country".
11.By the gardai being 'all inclusive' you understand that this means they must be fair to both sides.
12. By being equally fair to both sides, a garda (community garda is your preference) must travel to anywhere where there is a voter registration drive. It doesn't matter to you or the guard if canvassing for one side only is taking place at these voter registration drives.

You don't have to respond to all those points. I just contend that you agree with all of them from reading your posts.

So at the very least pick one you don't agree with. If you agree with them all then just say so and I'll point out the contradiction in your position.

4 and 5: You've made an error in your logic. You assume that only Yes voters would sign up at a Yes stand and only No voters at a No stand. In fact, anyone can sign up regardless of their intention. From that point on, most of what you said is partially correct, nut with your own spin on things.

evolving_doors · 25-04-2015 11:28PM

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

4 and 5: You've made an error in your logic. You assume that only Yes voters would sign up at a Yes stand and only No voters at a No stand. In fact, anyone can sign up regardless of their intention. From that point on, most of what you said is partially correct, nut with your own spin on things.

Well those points are your position actually.
Rather than just claiming spin could you point out the other partially incorrect statements.

No my logic is based on how canvassing works.
Canvassing is the solicitation of votes.
Namely votes for your side.
Its not as if the person sees the big NO sign with the canvassers around it and thinks oh I must go and register as I want to vote yes.
The people doing the canvassing know that their job is to engage with like minded people. If there is voter registration going on dont you think they will try to filter out the opposing side and attract the right profile to propose their side.
This is what canvassing is.
This is what a garda is being used for.
You see nothing wrong with that.

marienbad · 25-04-2015 11:35PM

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Well those points are your position actually.
Rather than just claiming spin could you point out the other partially incorrect statements.

No my logic is based on how canvassing works.
Canvassing is the solicitation of votes.
Namely votes for your side.
Its not as if the person sees the big NO sign with the canvassers around it and thinks oh I must go and register as I want to vote yes.
The people doing the canvassing know that their job is to engage with like minded people. If there is voter registration going on dont you think they will try to filter out the opposing side and attract the right profile to propose their side.
This is what canvassing is.
This is what a garda is being used for.
You see nothing wrong with that.

Give people more credit , there is no filtering and registrants are not complete fools. You are flogging a dead horse at this stage .

Little CuChulainn · 26-04-2015 09:30AM

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Well those points are your position actually.
Rather than just claiming spin could you point out the other partially incorrect statements.

No my logic is based on how canvassing works.
Canvassing is the solicitation of votes.
Namely votes for your side.
Its not as if the person sees the big NO sign with the canvassers around it and thinks oh I must go and register as I want to vote yes.
The people doing the canvassing know that their job is to engage with like minded people. If there is voter registration going on dont you think they will try to filter out the opposing side and attract the right profile to propose their side.
This is what canvassing is.
This is what a garda is being used for.
You see nothing wrong with that.

I'll just give you an example of where you add your own spin.

6. You draw a distinction between a referendum and a general election.
7. A garda would not be acting apolitically (as is their remit) by " facilitating any groups which requests their assistance in a professional capacity " for a general election. i.e. if they set up a 'voter registration' desk outside the Fianna Fail Ard Fheis.

I've not drawn a distinction between a general election and a referendum. I have been very specific in drawing a distinction between affiliating with political parties and assisting other groups. You have made your own conclusions from this and attributed them to me. The rest of your post is all the same. You take what I say, add your own conclusion, then present it as mine and argue against it. I'm not even sure why you are still arguing. It should be evident we aren't going to come to an agreement.

evolving_doors · 26-04-2015 06:44PM

marienbad wrote: »

Give people more credit , there is no filtering and registrants are not complete fools. You are flogging a dead horse at this stage .

There is no filtering during canvassing?
You firmly believe that?
I think someone is deluding themselves.
Ah ya I forgot, its in a canvassers civic duty to canvass both sides to be all inclusive??

Filtering is precisely what you'ld do to maximise a vote. Appeal to like minded individuals on the street (i presume at the very least there are posters advertising which side is holding the 'voter registration').

But if you continue to deny the purposes of a canvassing drive then tis yerself thats flogging the dead horse.

Its only in the public interest right?
So I presume Yes Equality and other sides will be out in force for the next general/european/local elections too getting people to register. Its not as if they have any ulterior motive eh?

marienbad · 26-04-2015 07:46PM

Gebgbegb wrote: »

There is no filtering during canvassing?
You firmly believe that?
I think someone is deluding themselves.
Ah ya I forgot, its in a canvassers civic duty to canvass both sides to be all inclusive??

Filtering is precisely what you'ld do to maximise a vote. Appeal to like minded individuals on the street (i presume at the very least there are posters advertising which side is holding the 'voter registration').

But if you continue to deny the purposes of a canvassing drive then tis yerself thats flogging the dead horse.

Its only in the public interest right?
So I presume Yes Equality and other sides will be out in force for the next general/european/local elections too getting people to register. Its not as if they have any ulterior motive eh?

Do you know if either yes or no registration campaigns have refused to register people they suspect as opposed to them ?

evolving_doors · 27-04-2015 09:44PM

marienbad wrote: »

Do you know if either yes or no registration campaigns have refused to register people they suspect as opposed to them ?

That's besides the point. As I said marienbad, it's basic canvassing.

You target the person most likely to side with you and encourage them to do so. If you have a table the last thing you want to do is get an opposing side to sign a registration form. I think if you don't understand the concept behind canvassing then any further explanation is wasted on an innocent mind. So we'll put that aside for now. If you don't believe in canvassing then we'll move on.

So, maybe to help me understand; just talk me through what your proposal is.

How do you think the policy you are advocating would bring about the effects you claim it would.

I've being saying it's wrong but I've neglected to ask ye how ye would actually operate it. Namely, promoting voter registration by using the gardai on the streets or in photocalls. Could you talk me through it step by step.

I'll start you off from a likely scenario. What is the stage of events to get the gardai behind the desk on the street or into the photo shoot? I'll propose Yes Equality but it would be equally aplicable to say The Iona Institute.

1. You are in the office of Yes Equality/Iona Institute.

marienbad · 27-04-2015 09:59PM

Gebgbegb wrote: »

That's besides the point. As I said marienbad, it's basic canvassing.

You target the person most likely to side with you and encourage them to do so. If you have a table the last thing you want to do is get an opposing side to sign a registration form. I think if you don't understand the concept behind canvassing then any further explanation is wasted on an innocent mind. So we'll put that aside for now. If you don't believe in canvassing then we'll move on.

So, maybe to help me understand; just talk me through what your proposal is.

How do you think the policy you are advocating would bring about the effects you claim it would.

I've being saying it's wrong but I've neglected to ask ye how ye would actually operate it. Namely, promoting voter registration by using the gardai on the streets or in photocalls. Could you talk me through it step by step.

I'll start you off from a likely scenario. What is the stage of events to get the gardai behind the desk on the street or into the photo shoot? I'll propose Yes Equality but it would be equally aplicable to say The Iona Institute.

1. You are in the office of Yes Equality/Iona Institute.

I am not advocating any policy , I just took time out to pull you up on your one sidedness , and you are scrambling ever since . Let it go ,it is done.

evolving_doors · 27-04-2015 10:30PM

marienbad wrote: »

I am not advocating any policy , I just took time out to pull you up on your one sidedness , and you are scrambling ever since . Let it go ,it is done.

Indeed you did, and I took the time to compile my posts to show that my argument was irrespective of the side it took place on....

But yet again I'll repost them below with the emboldened part to show it doesn;t matter which side is using the gardai in such a manner.

Is your position so weak that you have to persist in repeating a false claim rather than deal with the issue in hand?
I suspect your maneuver is to attempt to get the thread locked by dragging it into a squabble over what I didn't say (despite me taking the time to restate my position in posts).

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Eh! nonsense yerself, the issue/thread topic has nothing to do with " getting upset at the thought of two men holding hands". I never mentioned anything about men holding hands.

The issue/thread topic is about gardaí being used by either side of a campaign to endorse their position.
In this case a garda was used by Yes Equality to promote their position (i posted a link to Yes Equality's press release earlier which mentioned the garda and the judge (who is a proponent of the yes side).

Gardai Endorsing one side is wrong, Gardai endorsing the other side is wrong. Gardai endorsing 2 sides at the same time with some wishy washy thing about promoting registration is lunacy. Especially when the logic suggested is "ah shur let them do 2 wrongs and we'll be allright".
Nevermind the 'community guard doing their civic duty thing', thats tenuous to say the least.

Best thing is:
Let referendum comission promote a good turnout for whatever reason.
Let both sides promote whatever they want.

Leave the guards out of it.

Gebgbegb wrote: »

If you think the topic is about the no or yes side then youre being misled.

Whether the photo call was organised by the yes or no side is moot. The issue is that a member of the gardai was being used by one side.

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Read my posts Marienbad, The thread title is in reference to the one particular incident. My argument is, and has always been, that NEITHER side should be doing it (using the gardai for their own ends). The logic is obvious:

If I'm arguing that it's wrong for one side to do it, I am also implying that neither side should be doing it. Because (as I said) 2 wrongs don't make a right.

But anyway, if you're core logic is that it's Ok for either side to use the gardai in such a manner because 'the other side is doing it' well then we'll have to agree to disagree.

And... if you genuinely believe either side are doing the voter registration purely out of 'civic interest' (whilst canvassing possible voters BTW) then you're more trusting than most.

I'm sure Yes Equality and Iona will be going out with their tables and Gardai in tow the next General/Council/European election as well. After all, it's in the public interest they'd be doing it? no?

Sigh!

So again:

How do you think the situation you are advocating would bring about the effects you claim it would.

I've being saying it's wrong but I've neglected to ask you how you would actually see it operating. Namely, promoting voter registration by using the gardai on the streets or in photocalls. Could you talk me through it step by step.

I'll start you off from a likely scenario. What is the stage of events to get the gardai behind the desk on the street or into the photo shoot? I'll propose Yes Equality but it would be equally aplicable to say The Iona Institute.

1. You are in the office of Yes Equality/Iona Institute. You decide it would be a good idea to promote all voters to register... what next?

marienbad · 27-04-2015 11:21PM

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Indeed you did, and I took the time to compile my posts to show that my argument was irrespective of the side it took place on....

But yet again I'll repost them below with the emboldened part to show it doesn;t matter which side is using the gardai in such a manner.

Is your position so weak that you have to persist in repeating a false claim rather than deal with the issue in hand?
I suspect your maneuver is to attempt to get the thread locked by dragging it into a squabble over what I didn't say (despite me taking the time to restate my position in posts).

Sigh!

So again:

How do you think the situation you are advocating would bring about the effects you claim it would.

I've being saying it's wrong but I've neglected to ask you how you would actually see it operating. Namely, promoting voter registration by using the gardai on the streets or in photocalls. Could you talk me through it step by step.

I'll start you off from a likely scenario. What is the stage of events to get the gardai behind the desk on the street or into the photo shoot? I'll propose Yes Equality but it would be equally aplicable to say The Iona Institute.

1. You are in the office of Yes Equality/Iona Institute. You decide it would be a good idea to promote all voters to register... what next?

Laughable , you are putting so much work into issues I never raised , I pointed out the no campaign were also getting assistance from the Gardaí, which you had either decided to ignore or didn't know about - no more no less '

Rather than accept that with some grace you have gone off fighting some paper tiger all of your invention. The bald guys fighting over a comb come to mind ,

Now Good Night

evolving_doors · 27-04-2015 11:46PM

The issue you just raised was my bias and i countered it (for the second time!).. and you proceed with

marienbad wrote: »

...Laughable , you are putting so much work into issues I never raised ...

So I think it's pretty evident that my previous claim of you trying to turn this into a "he said she said" squabble to get the thread closed is correct.

marienbad wrote: »

I pointed out the no campaign were also getting assistance from the Gardaí, which you had either decided to ignore or didn't know about - no more no less '

Rather than accept that with some grace you have gone off fighting some paper tiger all of your invention. The bald guys fighting over a comb come to mind ,

Now Good Night

Bully for you! But pointing out that someone else is also doing wrong isn't really an argument to propose it! (Hence why I said it was moot). I've heard that line from 4 year olds and even they know that it's not really going to work with adults.

I'm pointing out to you now that my position is that it's wrong no matter who does it , but you have confused this with me ' ignoring the other side'. But you persist in your 'close thread' manouver saying I am biased or back-tracking ...paper combs/tigers/bald guys or other random words that comes into your fingers.

Marienbad: Is your one single argument point hinging on it being justifiable because 'both sides are at it'?Because thats the only argument you've brought to this thread (except for the usual stifling of on-topic debate.)

Gardai Investigating Voter-Registration promo

Comments