Lisbon Treaty

[BohsPartisan]

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?

That is very similar to pete's comment that the uninformed shouldn't have a vote.

Hmmm... feel free to show me where I said that. Don't remember it. However a large minority can make a revolution as long as it institutes the fullest democracy afterwards.

[SMorgan]

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.....

And please include me as well.

A No vote is a default vote. Nobody should be signing up to any agreement they don't understand whether it be political or otherwise. Anybody that doesn't understand the agreement knows exactly what they are getting; no change. Those that vote yes without understanding the agreement don't know what they are getting.

I would also point out that Cowan and McCreevy admitted to not reading the agreement. In light of this I think the Yes side have a cheek to be talking about people voting on the agreement that don't appreciate its content.

As Ben Dunne said, "If you don't know, Vote No" A perfectly reasonable and fair position to take, in my opinion.

The lecture that the Yes supporters are handing out about democracy amounts to little more than nauseating hypocrisy. They are the one’s that won’t accept the democratic wishes of the Irish People, freely given.

[micls]

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.

Whre did I give the impression they did because they didnt understand it?

Of course everyone has the right to vote for whatever reasons they wish, who stated otherewisse? Again that doesnt make it right. You were the one that claimed no should be a default position.

And please include me as well.

A No vote is a default vote. Nobody should be signing up to any agreement they don't understand whether it be political or otherwise. Anybody that doesn't understand the agreement knows exactly what they are getting; no change. Those that vote yes without understanding the agreement don't know what they are getting.

I would also point out that Cowan and McCreevy admitted to not reading the agreement. In light of this I think the Yes side have a cheek to be talking about people voting on the agreement that don't appreciate its content.

As Ben Dunne said, "If you don't know, Vote No" A perfectly reasonable and fair position to take, in my opinion.

The lecture that the Yes supporters are handing out about democracy amounts to little more than nauseating hypocrisy. They are the one’s that won’t accept the democratic wishes of the Irish People, freely given.

You claim that no should be a default position, becuase if you vopte yes without understanding you dont kow what your getting. I would counter that if you vote no without understanding you dont know what your getting either. A no vote doesnt always mean nothing happens. Yes there will be no legislative changes but a No vote can have as wideranging affects as a yes vote. Sometimes, in circumstances, a change is very much needed(not specifically Lisbon) and to vote no while keeping the status quo can have very negative affects.

If you arent informed then either inform yourself or spoil your vote to make a point to those who should inform you.

The lecture that the Yes supporters are handing out about democracy amounts to little more than nauseating hypocrisy. They are the one’s that won’t accept the democratic wishes of the Irish People, freely given.

Would you like to show me somewhere where I havent accepted the vote?

Leaving lisbon aside, the right to vote comes with responsibility. I believe this regardless of what is being voted on and whether I am for or against. I wont vote if I havent taken the time to inform myself or if I simply cant understand, either yes or no. I think its an irresponsible thing to do as I clearly wouldnt understand the consequences of my vote.

While obviously theres no way to force others to do the same, I would hope that others would take the same stance. I would not like to cause a no vote(or yes) in a referendum when i do not know which is the best option.

[mypost]

A no vote doesnt always mean nothing happens. Yes there will be no legislative changes but a No vote can have as wideranging affects as a yes vote.

We are told that this vote is "vital" to make the EU run better. So, since our No vote, how has Europe been run. Bar the usual sulking from the TD's, the MEP's and the Commission, it's functioned well and continues to function well. That#s because the provisions under the Nice treaty allow it to happen.

the right to vote comes with responsibility. I believe this regardless of what is being voted on and whether I am for or against. I wont vote if I havent taken the time to inform myself or if I simply cant understand, either yes or no. I think its an irresponsible thing to do as I clearly wouldnt understand the consequences of my vote.

While obviously theres no way to force others to do the same, I would hope that others would take the same stance. I would not like to cause a no vote(or yes) in a referendum when i do not know which is the best option.

All very noble, but the reality is, there are deadlines in elections and referendums. You have until that time to make a judgement one way or the other. There are people in countries, who long for the right to vote that we have. It's important that you take advantage of the freedom to vote you have, and use it on the day, whatever your political leanings.

[jebus]

We are told that this vote is "vital" to make the EU run better. So, since our No vote, how has Europe been run. Bar the usual sulking from the TD's, the MEP's and the Commission, it's functioned well and continues to function well. That#s because the provisions under the Nice treaty allow it to happen.

Has any of us ever said the EU would come crashing down with the Lisbon Treaty?

All very noble, but the reality is, there are deadlines in elections and referendums. You have until that time to make a judgement one way or the other. There are people in countries, who long for the right to vote that we have. It's important that you take advantage of the freedom to vote you have, and use it on the day, whatever your political leanings.

This is true, but do you not also agree that part of having the right to vote involves informing yourself on what you are voting on? Otherwise people may as well go to a polling station and flip a coin

[micls]

We are told that this vote is "vital" to make the EU run better. So, since our No vote, how has Europe been run. Bar the usual sulking from the TD's, the MEP's and the Commission, it's functioned well and continues to function well. That#s because the provisions under the Nice treaty allow it to happen.

Eh, what has any of this got to do with the point I made? I dont remember claiming any of the above.

All very noble, but the reality is, there are deadlines in elections and referendums. You have until that time to make a judgement one way or the other. There are people in countries, who long for the right to vote that we have. It's important that you take advantage of the freedom to vote you have, and use it on the day, whatever your political leanings.

Rubbish. Havng a vote doesnt mean you have to use it despite not knowing what your voting about. its not like someone says, alright your voting in a hour make up your mind. There is plenty of time if you can be bothered. And if its simply too complex then you have the option of spoiling your vote to show this.

If anything id imagine the people that fought hard for the RIGHT to vote would be disgusted at people who couldnt be bothered informing themselves.

As Ive said before rights and responsibilities go hand in hand, you shouldnt use one and ignore the other.

[mypost]

This is true, but do you not also agree that part of having the right to vote involves informing yourself on what you are voting on? Otherwise people may as well go to a polling station and flip a coin

That's what some people did. Well maybe not literally, but there were reports of voters who went into the polling station in June, having not made up their mind until they received the ballot paper.

[micls]

That's what some people did. Well maybe not literally, but there were reports of voters who went into the polling station in June, having not made up their mind until they received the ballot paper.

I know, thats what Im complaining about

[mypost]

if its simply too complex then you have the option of spoiling your vote to show this.

As Ive said before rights and responsibilities go hand in hand, you shouldnt use one and ignore the other.

I don't believe in spoiled votes, and have never made one. It achieves nothing, but an anonymous statement on an anonymous ballot paper. The way to protest against the government at election time is to vote them out of office. The way to protest against them at referendums, is to tick the bottom box. That is more powerful than a spoiled vote.

[micls]

I don't believe in spoiled votes, and have never made one. It achieves nothing, but an anonymous statement on an anonymous ballot paper. The way to protest against the government at election time is to vote them out of office. The way to protest against them at referendums, is to tick the bottom box. That is more powerful than a spoiled vote.

A referendum is about more than teh government. Thats what local and national elections or for.

In a referendum your only concern should be making the right choice based on the options not making a point or protest against the government.

For example I thought the government ran an awful Lisbon campaign and in no way convinced me to vote yes. But having done some reading myself I thought voting yes was the best option regardless of the incompetence of our government. I dont see what benefit me voting no would have been simply to 'prove a point' when I believed in voting yes.

The contrary is also true for those who voted yes just because the main parties did.

[mypost]

But having done some reading myself I thought voting yes was the best option regardless of the incompetence of our government. I dont see what benefit me voting no would have been simply to 'prove a point' when I believed in voting yes.

Spoiled votes are protest votes. If you don't want to protest against the government, you either obey their orders i.e. tick the top box, or alternatively don't go to cast your ballot.

I am against any attempt to ignore the democratic will of the people. That's what happened in 26 countries. They were treated with ignorance and disdain by their own governments, especially in the UK. It was very easy therefore, for me to decide which way to vote.

[jebus]

That's what some people did. Well maybe not literally, but there were reports of voters who went into the polling station in June, having not made up their mind until they received the ballot paper.

I realise this, my preference would be to never allow these people a vote on anything ever again. If you're going to abuse the democratic process in this manner then you're not of the required intelligence to have a say on the running of the state. This goes for those that tossed a coin and voted Yes as well

[mypost]

Well, the fact is you can't deprive people their right to vote, just because you don't like why they did. It's a secret ballot, so noone knows the identity of who voted for what, who, and why.

1.6 million people voted in the referendum, the poll by IMS, was a very small fraction of that, and was a terrible waste of taxpayers' money.

[OneRedArmy]

Should have a general election, because the Government TD's incapable of explaining it.

I'd like to see the questions asked, because I know no one who thought conscription or abortion was an issue, yet these continue to be the focus of the Government when discussing the result. Was it a bit like Mock The Week's this is the answer what was the question...

You're a thought leader Macy as one of the papers this weekend (Saturday's Times) had a piece recommending exactly this.

I think this is exactly whats required. Its a serious enough issue to require the Government to put themselves on the line. However with the national mood being so low as a result of the state of the economy, not to mention one of the coalition partners being in the final throes of death (anyone else enjoying this immensely? ) you'd need to get a crowbar to loosen the FF grip on power as they know they might not be back for a while.

[mypost]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle4749331.ece

[OneRedArmy]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle4749331.ece

Hard to disagree with a lot of this (particularly the point that Yes and No voters didn't understand what they were voting for) except his suggestion that the obvious solution to people not understanding the Treaty is to change it.

Taking this argument to its natural conclusion, why don't we just get rid of all Acts and Statutory Instruments, as lets face it, the majority of the population would struggle to understand the legalese in them if forced to read them.

Fairly naive stuff from Cooper.

[pete]

Good article here about the hypocrisy of ejecting the Lisbon Treaty.

With recession looming I think jobs would be number one topic of discussion in any new Referendum. Novelty items like neutrality won't seem very important as unemployment rises.

[John83]

...Novelty items like neutrality won't seem very important as unemployment rises.

Yes. We should elect a strong new leader who will bring full employment, make empty promises about peace, and restore national pride by invading Poland. It's our turn after all.

[mypost]

With recession looming I think jobs would be number one topic of discussion in any new Referendum. Novelty items like neutrality won't seem very important as unemployment rises.

Britain and Spain have signed the conjob document. It's obviously stemmed the tide of rising unemployment there too.

Firms will cut jobs, regardless of which Treaty we're ruled by. They don't care about Treaties and Constitutions, they care about how cheap production and salaries will be, and where is the best location to do business. Ireland is excellently positioned geographically and still maintains a tax rate advantage, (thanks to the No vote) over our competitors.

[Reality Bites]

Britain and Spain have signed the conjob document. It's obviously stemmed the tide of rising unemployment there too.

Firms will cut jobs, regardless of which Treaty we're ruled by. They don't care about Treaties and Constitutions, they care about how cheap production and salaries will be, and where is the best location to do business. Ireland is excellently positioned geographically and still maintains a tax rate advantage, (thanks to the No vote) over our competitors.

Doesn't matter - The treaty will be -re-run!! this time with a better campaign by Yes Vote with the proviso - one more strike and you are out of EU-The masses will defect from No Side and vote Yes this will enable ratification process for remainder of EU Countries and the Superstate will march on.. Its like reading history before it happens really!