P.ie leads the news again

[digoutday]

From todays "independent"

http://www.independent.ie/national-n...e-1425974.html

Poor David....lol, they still seem a bit sore from the No vote and get a little dig in over Dave's post that the site is a fake.

[constitutionus]

lol.

also shows a shocking lack of ability to follow up a story (i know , in the INDO, who'd a thunk it ) by seeing that he takes back what he said when its made apparent its on the level 11 posts down on the same page !

i swear some of these old news media types just arent that quick. maybe one day they'll cop on that message boards are organic works in progress wherein people interact. not unquestioned ptlolemics like they trot out.

[cyberianpan]

lol.

also shows a shocking lack of ability to follow up a story (i know , in the INDO, who'd a thunk it ) by seeing that he takes back what he said when its made apparent its on the level 11 posts down on the same page !

Yes but point is that he was fooled initially, add this to the Tribune story and Dave's wider/public reputation is looking a bit bad.

cYp

[constitutionus]

so where half of us.

mainly because the site couldnt even spell the word "dail" right !

TBH i dont think any right thinking person gives a toss what the media's being saying about anyone to do with the NO camp as its painfully obvious theyre suffering from a chronic case of sour grapes/ bias.

they got the referendum result, and worse the mood and trust of the people ,wrong. and far more worse for them have no idea how to get it right next time as if memory serves NONE of em have called a referendum right since maastricht .

this is just pissantry. watch this channel for more of this sort of stuff down the line when liz 2 gets rolling.

end of the day, the tribune/times/sindo polls consistantly got it wrong and OUR poll was only out by 5% of the actual referendum result.

that says more to me about daves (and to be more accurate other longterm posters) credibiltiy to me than some anonymous hacks whingefest.

[EGaffney]

end of the day, the tribune/times/sindo polls consistantly got it wrong and OUR poll was only out by 5% of the actual referendum result.

Proof of this assertion, please? It's unfounded lies like that, plus the tolerance of border-line racism, that make this site as bad as it is.

[constitutionus]

end of the day, the tribune/times/sindo polls consistantly got it wrong and OUR poll was only out by 5% of the actual referendum result.

Proof of this assertion, please? It's unfounded lies like that, plus the tolerance of border-line racism, that make this site as bad as it is.

go to the lisbon treaty section, got to page three, and click on the "how will you vote in lisbon treaty" thread.

polls STILLthere with the final figure of yes 36 : no 58, undecided 5%

and its been along that lines for the guts of 4 to 5 MONTHS before the referendum. people actaully complained at the time the it was unrepresentative and proved there was an imbalance of no voters on the site.

EVERY newspaper poll got it wrong consistantly predicting a landslide YES vote bar ONE times one less than two weeks before the voting day.

any more smart arse comments?

by the way, retract the word LIE you smearing git, ive been wrong before but ive never lied on this site.

[EGaffney]

end of the day, the tribune/times/sindo polls consistantly got it wrong and OUR poll was only out by 5% of the actual referendum result.

Proof of this assertion, please? It's unfounded lies like that, plus the tolerance of border-line racism, that make this site as bad as it is.

go to the lisbon treaty section, got to page three, and click on the "how will you vote in lisbon treaty" thread.

polls STILLthere with the final figure of yes 36 : no 58, undecided 5%

and its been along that lines for the guts of 4 to 5 MONTHS before the referendum. people actaully complained at the time the it was unrepresentative and proved there was an imbalance of no voters on the site.

EVERY newspaper poll got it wrong bar ONE times one less than two weeks before the voting day.

any more smart arse comments?

by the way, retract the word LIE you smearing git.

This isn't a parliament. Do you have any evidence that the polls published by newspapers were wrong at the time they were taken? Will you retract that statement?

[wysiwyg]

end of the day, the tribune/times/sindo polls consistantly got it wrong and OUR poll was only out by 5% of the actual referendum result.

Proof of this assertion, please? It's unfounded lies like that, plus the tolerance of border-line racism, that make this site as bad as it is.

go to the lisbon treaty section, got to page three, and click on the "how will you vote in lisbon treaty" thread.

polls STILLthere with the final figure of yes 36 : no 58, undecided 5%

and its been along that lines for the guts of 4 to 5 MONTHS before the referendum. people actaully complained at the time the it was unrepresentative and proved there was an imbalance of no voters on the site.

EVERY newspaper poll got it wrong bar ONE times one less than two weeks before the voting day.

any more smart arse comments?

by the way, retract the word LIE you smearing git.

This isn't a parliament. Do you have any evidence that the polls published by newspapers were wrong at the time they were taken? Will you retract that statement?

The point Constitutionus is making is that the debate on P.ie much more closely reflected the actual mood ofthe electorate than any debate being held in the mainstream press. And he is correct, it did.

The P.ie debate ran the whole gamut of feelings from rationally and irrationally for the Treaty, to rationally and irrationally against the Treaty, and much better reflected reasons why people eventually did decide to vote No.. from sovereignty, to immigration, to closure of hospital services in Roscommon.

[constitutionus]

what was the result you fecking muppet!

do you even READ the daily newspapers? NONE of them consistantly called a NO result! the fecking proof is published in print!

mother of god.

and i dont fecking care if this isnt "pariliment" YOU called me a liar. take that back .the proof is on the fecking site and up on various newspapers sites too you gob************************e. our poll was a consistant no since circa feburary in a poll that started in december. NONE of the papers reflected that

[EGaffney]

what was the result you fecking muppet!

do you even READ the daily newspapers? NONE of them consistantly called a NO result! the fecking proof is published in print!

mother of god.

and i dont fecking care if this isnt "pariliment" YOU called me a liar. take that back and the proof is on the fecking site and up on various newspapers sites too you gob************************e.

I will say that either you are a liar, or you are ignorant of how opinion polling works, if that's OK with you. Do you honestly think that not a single person in the world ever changes their opinion on anything over the course of the campaign? Can you prove that all the polls were wrong when they were taken? If not, I advise you to cease the profanity, learn about opinion polling and come back when you do.