QuoteI love the irony here.Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
You mean some form of Fascism? Always knew you leaned that way Pete..
You mean some form of Fascism? Always knew you leaned that way Pete..
TO TELL THE TRUTH IS REVOLUTIONARY
The ONLY foot.ie user with a type of logic named after them!
All of this has happened before. All of it will happen again.
I love the irony here.You mean some form of Fascism? Always knew you leaned that way Pete..
The results of the survey are both good & bad for the government.
- Such a high percentage of uninformed people means the government did not do its job. How difficult is it to tell people this does not lead to abortion or conscription.
- High percentage of uninformed gives an excuse for Lisbon II.
I feel it is embarrassing to the country that we will need another vote just because we cannot inform ourselves.The changes between Nice I & II were minimal.
We don't need another vote. The answer was "No". What part of that does the Government not understand?
Also, I'd suggest that the Government get their survey results and every where it says
"fear of conscription"
"fear of introduction of abortion"
"fear that a Snickers is going to be changed back to a Marathon"
the Government put a red line through the concern and writes "Mistrust of Politicians". And that's one thing that isn't going to change between Lisbon 1 and Lisbon 2.
Address the concerns in question and I am sure most of the people will find another reason to vote No.
I am also concerned about this surveys that was carried out at a cost of 170k. Why was it carried out and what was the objective? It's fundamentally wrong for public finance to be used to carry out such a survey if the only objective of the research was to assist the "Yes" side in fighting a second referendum and getting a "Yes" vote. In my opinion that would be a miss-use of public funds and may even have been unconstitutional. If FF, FG or L wanted to know that then they should have commissioned their own survey.
If we'd voted Yes would there have been a survey to inform us as to why we voted Yes or No??
BTW, did the survey indicate how many people voted Yes because they want to stay in the EU or because the political parties told them to?
Are these people not as equally "uninformed" as some of those that voted No?
Last edited by SMorgan; 12/09/2008 at 12:19 AM.
If there is another vote, we may as well have Zanu-PF run the EU. Clearly, Brussels love them.
The Irish Times had the report attached to their breaking news. It might still be there if you can find it. It broke down the ages & reasons for voting. On the Yes side below that you had government information, political party info etc... but all at small percentages.
On both the Yes & No the biggest reason for vote either way was "no specific reason"
What, you saying I lean towards Fascism? Pot, kettle situation?
Please enlighten me.
TO TELL THE TRUTH IS REVOLUTIONARY
The ONLY foot.ie user with a type of logic named after them!
All of this has happened before. All of it will happen again.
Found it, thanks.
The report states
"The non-specific tone of these responses indicates that the Yes vote was largely a pro-Europe vote rather than an endorsement of the Treaty on its specific merits. "
Are these people not as ignorant or misinformed as any of those that voted No without giving due consideration to the specific merits of the Treaty?
The survey indicates that a large section of the Yes vote were just herded out and simply and blindly followed party polictical advice on the issue.
Or that those 'blindly voting yes' have trust in the EU and are not susceptible to cynicism or suspicion and paranoia.
Last edited by dfx-; 12/09/2008 at 10:18 AM.
The Model Club
Tell all the Bohs you know
that we've gone and won two-in-a-row
and it's not gonna be three
and it's not gonna be four
it's more likely to be 5-1.
I read that as "no one specific issue".
Unless I remember wrong (and I'm sorry if I do) didn't you tell us in one of the socialism discussions that you'd be in favour of a socialist revolution even if the majority opposed it because most of us have had our opinions influenced by a capitalist media?What, you saying I lean towards Fascism? Pot, kettle situation?
Please enlighten me.
That is very similar to pete's comment that the uninformed shouldn't have a vote.
They voted as they were told to.
Maybe I know more gullible people than you do but I knew plenty who at one point or another thought this was the case(although Im not sure how they voted in the end.
Also a child in my class came in upset at this cos they thought they would be sent to war at 18 if this happened.
I have a problem with anyone who votes while they admit they dont understand it, whether they vote yes or no.
I have an even bigger problem with the people (mypost you are included on this because you have done this on this very thread) who said that if you don't understand it you must Vote No. People like that, and the people who vote without understanding the issue, are what's wrong with democracy.
Harsh thing to say, but there you have it
All citizens over 18 in the state are entitled to vote in referendums. Most politicians don't understand it either, not just here, except they have to vote Yes. The electorate are not obliged to agree with them. If you're an undecided voter, and are not convinced by the federalists, then you have no option but to exercise your democratic right, and vote No.
Last edited by mypost; 12/09/2008 at 4:22 PM.
Rubbish.
Being entitled to vote does not mean you must vote. It means you have a responsibility to research what you are voting on and make an informed decision.
If you couldnt be bothered doing this, be this a normal person or politician, you should not be voting.
You are making a choice by voting either yes or no, and neither choice should be taken lightly. When voting no on something, while technically keeping the status quo in legislation it may not translate to such in practice and may make things worse. Similarly while voting yes, the politicians may not always lead you in teh right direction.
There should be no 'Default' vote. Do your research or spoil your vote. There is nothing responsible about voting against something that for all you know could be of great benefit, simply because the politicians didnt convince you. You have your own responsibility when it comes to voting too
A parliamentary vote would result in less than 10 No votes in the Dail. Few of the 150+ TD's who would vote in line with party policy would have read/understood the document, but done what their leader instructed them to do. There would be a similiar heavy majority in the Seanad. The Bill has already passed the first and second stage in the Oireachtas. Now it's left to the electorate, to decide whether it stands or falls. It's up to the politicians, who remember also don't understand the Treaty, to "persuade" you to follow their advice. If you don't, you are equally entitled to disagree with them, and vote accordingly. We have decided in a free and fair vote, and the status quo remains.
And? Are we just writing facts irrelevant to what was being said?
Just because politicians do it doesnt make it right, similarly people voting when they are uninformed happens but its not right imo.
My post was not confined to the Lisbon treaty. I believe it in regard to all voting
That is democracy, everybody has the right to vote, and can vote as they wish, for all sorts of reasons.
It must be pointed out, that there were several reasons why they voted, giving the impression they all did because they didn't understand it, is wrong.
Last edited by mypost; 12/09/2008 at 5:03 PM.
*shudders at the thought of putting the LHC construction to a referendum*
The Model Club
Tell all the Bohs you know
that we've gone and won two-in-a-row
and it's not gonna be three
and it's not gonna be four
it's more likely to be 5-1.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks