A second Referendum has not ruled out. We can test the response in this Machine Nation Poll. In the previous Poll, a Yes vote was marginally favoured.

Please assume that you would be voting on a similar document to the one you voted on yesterday (minor amendments only)

cactus flower wrote:

A second Referendum has not ruled out. We can test the response in this Machine Nation Poll. In the previous Poll, a Yes vote was marginally favoured.

If they announce a rerun - Im heading to Antartica!

Is it time to spam everyone on p.ie again? Will I stick it on the portal?

Your poll is a bit unqualified though cactus - you'd have to mention significant changes before I'd vote Yes. There'd have to be a huge change in atmosphere about the European project in general..

If it was based on the very same Amendment and Treaty do you mean ?

If it was based on another fudge..oops.... I mean minor or no amendments.

Astounded anyone is capapble of considering this possibility without being engulfed in outrage. We HAVE voted. It's done.

Aside from that, I believe a re-run this time will enrage people and quite likely result in an even worse result for the yes side.

The only options now left for the government are either to railroad another vote, unconstitutionally and illegally or to fix the vote in a second referendum - something which I personally believe they are entirely capable of.

Aragon wrote:

Astounded anyone is capapble of considering this possibility without being engulfed in outrage. We HAVE voted. It's done.

Aside from that, I believe a re-run this time will enrage people and quite likely result in an even worse result for the yes side.

The only options now left for the government are either to railroad another vote, unconstitutionally and illegally or to fix the vote in a second referendum - something which I personally believe they are entirely capable of.

ah would ya chill out - there'll be no referendum for at least 3 years at the earliest.

My recomendation to you would be to grow a trendy beard -as feck off to the continent and shag as many fench chicks as possible while Ireland is bete Noire of Europe and return when the property market has bottomed out and you'll have serious opportunities - provided of course that you had the nuts to nail that french chick in Arles in the first place!

ediy

Keep voting Lads - vote early, and vote often!

cactus flower wrote:

Keep voting Lads - vote early, and vote often!

The way God intended it, with your 101 polling cards!

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Keep voting Lads - vote early, and vote often!

The way God intended it, with your 101 polling cards!

A Nationalist candidate to the old gerrymandered Derry Corporation , Eddie Mc Ateer, was asked how, given the fact that seats were by and large fixed, did they manage to win an extra seat. Amid allegations of strong turnouts from the graveyards, Mc Ateer replied "..the fools, the fools , they have left us our fenian dead....."

It's way too early - and fudgy - to be considering this. All we have is the Lisbon Treaty - who knows what changes if any, will be made.

Way too hypothetical for me, I'm afraid.

bump - dead or alive, you may vote here

Not a statistically significant sample yet - the Yes side may all be licking their wounds or gone on their holliers.

I think I'd vote Yes in a re-run since the alternative seems very unappealing.

I might abstain... I'm really jarred off with the way Europe has treated us since the no vote (although I personally voted yes) and I also had huge caveats about no-one else in Europe getting a vote

On the other hand, I am also hugely jarred off that either or both of the US/UK/Nato's vested interests have been plugged to the max by Libertas, so maybe I'd vote yes again... I dislike the war mongers more than an undemocratic Europe and I also think our energy security issues would be better served in a united EU

Unless the nearly-governing Tories would like to cut us a deal on North Sea oil and gas.....

I think we should be forgetting about oil unless we strike some in Castlecomer.

Sarkozy's military ambitions are clear and they are very much tied up with the Lisbon Treaty contents. If you look at the NATO thread here you'll see that France announced yesterday that they intend to rejoin after 40 years out of it. African and middle eastern oil are part of that scene: whether our energy security is the same as the security of the oil producing countries I would not like to say.

I think you may have nailed Libertas yesterday with your interesting one-liner. It is certainly worth a look in the UK direction before being sure that is not where they come from.

We are living in an increasingly volatile world and that is reflected in the difficulty of tying down an agreed agenda between the governments and peoples of 27 countries.

I hope we can keep focused on what we are voting for, rather than who we are voting with - if we are looking over our shoulders too much we may not see where we are going.

I have heard anecdotal reports of people who voted No the firsttime but would Yes without hesitation if it came up again. One voted 'No' because he hates Cowen but intended at that time voting Yes if there was a second one. The other person voted no because they didn't understand it but would vote yes now after seeing what the ramifications of a No vote are.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

I have heard anecdotal reports of people who voted No the firsttime but would Yes without hesitation if it came up again. One voted 'No' because he hates Cowen but intended at that time voting Yes if there was a second one. The other person voted no because they didn't understand it but would vote yes now after seeing what the ramifications of a No vote are.

That is how a lot of it is going to pan out. I think the soft No which is about 10-15% will swing back the other way in a re-run of the referendum. There'll be a lot more green on the screen in a second referendum.

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

I have heard anecdotal reports of people who voted No the firsttime but would Yes without hesitation if it came up again. One voted 'No' because he hates Cowen but intended at that time voting Yes if there was a second one. The other person voted no because they didn't understand it but would vote yes now after seeing what the ramifications of a No vote are.

I've heard people who voted Yes and people who voted No saying they would change their votes. A lot would depend on what happened before a second vote, if there was one. A problem facing the Yes vote is that the more people study Europe and the Treaty the more they find they don't like. It is all very well to spend a week saying that we need the Treaty to fight climate change, but then people find out there are only 6 words on climate change in the Treaty. In my view the only way Yes will win is if in my view is if they are able to put people into a state of fear. I can't see how that is healthy.

cactus flower wrote:

Zhou_Enlai wrote:

I have heard anecdotal reports of people who voted No the firsttime but would Yes without hesitation if it came up again. One voted 'No' because he hates Cowen but intended at that time voting Yes if there was a second one. The other person voted no because they didn't understand it but would vote yes now after seeing what the ramifications of a No vote are.

I've heard people who voted Yes and people who voted No saying they would change their votes. A lot would depend on what happened before a second vote, if there was one. A problem facing the Yes vote is that the more people study Europe and the Treaty the more they find they don't like. It is all very well to spend a week saying that we need the Treaty to fight climate change, but then people find out there are only 6 words on climate change in the Treaty. In my view the only way Yes will win is if in my view is if they are able to put people into a state of fear. I can't see how that is healthy.

Dont take this the wrong way CF - but I think you are letting your own prejudices get in the way of reading the writing on the wall on the whole EU issue - I found that the more people knew and understood about it - the more likely they were to vote yes . You will also find that a lot of people are far less squeamish about whole neutrality/militarisation issue , and far more sanguine and realistic about the EU acting collectively and militarily than the Left here would like to believe -and people understand that if you want to be a member of the club that it is give and take and responsibilities have to be shouldered.

All will depend on our economic situation and how the electorate in general view the performance of our elected representatives - even if the economic situation is bad - if they feel that the politicans are trying and actually are giving the image of actually giving a fuck for a change - and if the Lisbon treaty is put to us again as a take it or leave it - do you want to stay in the fast lane or associate status - it will be a Yes vote. People dont care about the minuate of political theories or spend hours worrying about the morality of this and that and what it might lead to - they go with their gut and their pocket.

Anyway all that is a long long way away - ask me in December again.

Fear of real dangers is healthy and certain types of scare mongering may be justified e.g. scare mongering that exploiting other countries may lead to war, scare mongering that the world will become uninhabitable it we don't change our ways and stop wasting energy, scare mongering that hospitals viruses are out of control, scare mongering that unsafe sex causes health problems.

I reckon the whole country is in fear of the future on many different levels and this is why some voted No. If that fear can be doubled back on them then it will be effective. One way or the other, if there is another referendum then each person will have a vote.

Edo wrote:

Anyway all that is a long long way away - ask me in December again.

No way José , you're getting asked now !

I for one was fairly torn by this and see what you are saying about the more you read it the more you are inclined to want to vote yes. It depends on what you read though. And on what you hear.

What might be on a lot of people's minds is the idea of a Community that is more like a business enterprise but until they had heard others expressing it, people were afraid to say "this is not what I have in mind deep down - there must be something better, more immediate, more intelligible and more inclusive and wholesome".

It looks as though this was how the Architects approached it with the Laeken thing but then d'Estaing ignored that for some reason ... Maybe the Socialists have another scheme for Europe - it would be interesting to hear that too, now.

Have you seen the Laeken Declaration Edo and what is your opinion of it and how and why do you think the Lisbon Treaty falls short of it ?

http://www.saxonbooks.co.uk/laeken_declaration.htm