Lisbon 2: Referendum in Ireland on the 2nd of October

[Neil]

Let's be fair, gentlemen.  Absolutely everyone is full to the brim of contempt for the electorate.  The only thing more contemptible than your average politician is your average voter.

[Valmy]

I love how everybody rushes to interpret the elections based on whatever fantasy they are living in.  The Pro-Euro Union people insist the failure in the first referendum was based on fear mongering and lies spread by the no campaign.  Now that the referendum has been successful the Euro skeptics are rushing to spin it to where the Irish were forced by the authoritarian gauntlet of the EU to vote themselves into slavery.

[citizen k]

I love how everybody rushes to interpret the elections based on whatever fantasy they are living in.

What else are they supposed to do?

[Razgovory]

I love how everybody rushes to interpret the elections based on whatever fantasy they are living in.

What else are they supposed to do?

Good question.

[Threviel]

I love how everybody rushes to interpret the elections based on whatever fantasy they are living in.  The Pro-Euro Union people insist the failure in the first referendum was based on fear mongering and lies spread by the no campaign.  Now that the referendum has been successful the Euro skeptics are rushing to spin it to where the Irish were forced by the authoritarian gauntlet of the EU to vote themselves into slavery.

That actually sounds like a fair assessment based on the posters from earlier in the thread. In Sweden at least the no-side in these things never let's the truth (or even something close to it) come in the way of their campaigns.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

the result of a referendum should be respected for a reasonable period of time (say 10 years.)

too long, lots changes in 10 years. the reslt of a referendum must and should be instantly challengeable by another referendum (or via other democratic means)

[Zanza]

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is very about the EU and European institutions when you read his other articles.

[Zanza]

I wonder what Cameron will do when faced with the realities of actually having to govern the UK. If he actually tries to destroy ten years of institutional reform in the EU, he will be a pariah among European politicians.

[Tamas]

Treaty of Versailles were subject to a referendum.

"Dear Hungarian voter, would you like to be fucked in the ass with a burning hot crowbar? Twice? Mark your choice"

[Agelastus]

the result of a referendum should be respected for a reasonable period of time (say 10 years.)

too long, lots changes in 10 years. the reslt of a referendum must and should be instantly challengeable by another referendum (or via other democratic means)

An attitude which begs the question of why hold a formal referendum? If you're just going to treat it as a temporary blip, then why have you bothered with all the expense of setting one up in the first place? You might just as well have taken the result of an opinion poll from that day and declared it the result and saved yourself the money.

You'd fit in at the European Commission just fine.

[Agelastus]

I wonder what Cameron will do when faced with the realities of actually having to govern the UK. If he actually tries to destroy ten years of institutional reform in the EU, he will be a pariah among European politicians.

Since he's left himself a giant and explicit "out" that lets him avoid holding the referendum he has promised, I suspect he will back down.

On the other hand, if he does back out of a referendum, it will certainly lose the Tories more of their traditional supporters. Given even with the unpopularity of Brown the Tories are only on 36%, not in the 40s as history would have you expect, I don't see how this can be a good thing for long term party survival. Moreover, after all these years of promising a referendum, if one is not held I don't see how the Tories can avoid being perceived as liars in the way Labour is seen at the moment.

Squeezed on the left by the Liberals, on the right by UKIP, with the odium most UK politicians are held in to contend with, one has to wonder just which way Cameron will jump when the moment of truth is reached.

[Agelastus]

That actually sounds like a fair assessment based on the posters from earlier in the thread. In Sweden at least the no-side in these things never let's the truth (or even something close to it) come in the way of their campaigns.

And the "yes" side automatically tell the truth?

No, they tell their own interpretation of the known facts, which is not the same thing.

For example, a poster earlier in this thread parroted the line that the EU has prevented the European nations from going to war with each other since WWII. A partial truth, at best, given that almost all nations in the EU spent the first 2/3 of that period as members of NATO or the Warsaw Pact, and the remaining 1/3 of that period as members of NATO.

Nations in military alliances tend not to go to war with each other, obviously enough. And the two blocs thankfully avoided the terminal, final confrontation.

And NATO predates the EU, of course.

[Martinus]

Nations in military alliances tend not to go to war with each other, obviously enough.

I guess Greeks and Turks would disagree.

[Agelastus]

Nations in military alliances tend not to go to war with each other, obviously enough.

I guess Greeks and Turks would disagree.

There's always exceptions to any rule.

Besides, as the two sides have been on the brink but have never actually stepped over the line and declared war on each other, one could argue that NATO has had a restraining effect (although, given when most of the worst crises were, one could make an equally good claim for the Warsaw Pact exercising the restraining effect.)

[Sahib]

I don't really need to tell you whether or not I agree with this or not, do I?

Of course. You're a rabid europhobe. And so is that wanker Evans-Pritchard